1993-02-09February 9, 1993
MINUT~ - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - FEBRUARY 9, L993
The City Council of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in
regular session on Tuesday, February 9, 1993, in the Council
Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City.
Those present were: Mayor Skip Johnson, Councilmembers Andrea
Ahrens, Liz Jensen, and Ken Smith. Councilmember Phyllis Jessen
was absent and excused. Also present were: City Manager Edward J.
Shukle, Jr., City Clerk Fran Clark, City Attorney Curt Pearson,
City Planner Mark Koegler, City Engineer John Cameron, Building
Official Jon Sutherland, Park Director Jim Fackler, Sewer & Water
& Street Supt. Greg Skinner, Fire Chief Don Bryce, Downtown Visions
Planner Bruce Chamberlain, and the following interested citizens:
Joe Fleischhacker, Jeffrey Winter, Chris Jensen, Adan Graffunder,
Peter Graffunder, Raymond Jones, Vanny Palm, Julie Jensen, Mark &
Julie Lilledahl, Shelly Dorion, Don Heesen, Ron DeVinney, Stan
Drahos, Fred Guttormson, Jerry Longpre, Judy Bryce, Dave & Gloria
Briggs, Jim Bedell, John Gabos, Vince Forystek, Shirley Hatcher,
Ruth Ann Weber, Lucy Steer, Mrs. Moy, Don Noack, Michael Durell,
Ruben Hartman, Glenn Melena, Peter Meyer, Jim Brunzell, Brad
Biermann, Todd Rask, John Edewaard, Tom Casey, Kevin Sipprell, Tim
Palm, Liz & Randy Engelhart, Frank Weiland, Mark Brewer, Dave
Laube, Bob Longnecker, Mark & Julie Lilledahl.
The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance,
especially the Weeblo Cub Scout Pack #285, Dens 9 & 10. The Mayor
asked that they lead the Pledge of Allegiance.
1.0 MINUTES
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Ahrens to approve the
Minutes of the January 26, 1993, Regular Meeting, as
submitted. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion
carried.
1.1 PRESENTATION Ow CERTIFICATES OF RECOGNITION
The Mayor presented Certificates of Recognition to Randy Engelhart,
Tim Palm and Kevin Sipprell, for their efforts in saving the life
of a snowmobiler who went through the ice on Lake Minnetonka in
December.
1.2 PUBLIC HEARING: CASE ~92-072: CONSIDER A REQUEST TO VACATE
A PORTION OF WINDSOR ROAD ABUTTING 3233 TUXEDO BLVD., MARK &
JULIE LILLEDAHL
The Building Official explained the request. He further explained
that the City Engineer recommended only vacating the right-of-way
adjacent to Lots 16 and 17, and retaining utility and drainage
37
February 9, 1993
easements.
vote.
The Planning Commission recommended denial on a 5-2
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
The following persons spoke against the vacation: Ruben Hartman
and Glenn Melena. Don Heezen spoke in favor of the vacation.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
The Council discussed the vacation and whether it was in the public
interest to vacate this street.
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Johnson to deny the request
of Mark & Julle Lillidahl, for the vacation of Windsor Road
abutting Lots 16 & 17, Blook 13, Whipple. The vote was
unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.3
CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION RE= TEAL POINTE DEVELOPMENT,
BLOCKS 10, 11m 15 & 16m NHIPPLE~ PID ~25-117-24 12 0225~ 0118,
0119, 0120, PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA &
STREET DESIGN VARIANCES
The Mayor stated that there was another possibility that a
neighborhood organization would be formed to attempt to purchase
this property and maintain it as a park° He then asked if there
was someone present representing the neighborhood.
The Mayor asked that this discussion to limited to the possibility
of acquiring the property as a park, etc.
Tom Casey stated the neighbors have not raised the funds to
purchase the property. He stated they are in the process of
forming a nonprofit corporation, called the Westonka Conservation
Society and a lot of their efforts have been toward organizing that
and they haven't raised the money to do it.
Mr. Casey stated that he has included in the packet a proposed
resolution that he would like the Council to adopt tonight. In
essence the resolution is asking that the City say that the
property is worth saving and the City will continue to explore the
use of City funds. This would help their fund raising efforts.
Mr. Casey stated he is willing to spend the time to organize the
corporation and there are people willing to sit on the board of
directors. He stated at this time he has no idea how much money
could be raised.
The Council had no comment on the proposed resolution at this time.
38
February 9, 1993
The Mayor stated that by passing the proposed preliminary plat
resolution doesn't preclude anytime that Mr. Casey or the neighbors
have talked about as far a trying to keep the property in the state
it is in. Those possibilities still exist but the City is faced
with a time frame constraint by law. The city has an application
for a PDA and a preliminary plat for the same and the City has 120
days from the date of application to act on this. Otherwise it
passes on its own. The Mayor then asked if the date of the
application has been established?~ The Planner responded that the
very earliest date can be fixed at the end of October 1992 and that
accounts for the 2 week delay when Mr. Weber voluntarily withdrew,
so that would be 120 days beyond the end of October. Around March
1, 1993, would be the deadline.
The Planner asked to make .a few comments on the proposed
resolution:
Page 464, Item #1 references Exhibit A. The City has
been supplied with a more up-to-date Exhibit A and
propose to substitute that for the one that is in the
packet. It shows the correct street alignments and
Outlot lettering, etc.
Propose to'add the following items:
17. Approval of Title by the City Attorney.
18.
The Developer is to sign a Development Contract and
furnish to the City a performance bond in an amount 125%
of the cost of the improvements to cover grading,
drainage, utility and street construction as per plans
approved by the City Engineer.
The Planner also brought up the Park Dedication requirement. When
the Park Commission reviewed this, they recommended park dedication
cash in lieu of land in the amount of $500 per lot which is the
minimum under the ordinance. 'At that time, they did not have any
idea what the value of the property was. Since that time there
have been several figures on value of the property, all in excess
of $200,000. If this is true, that park dedication fee would run
around $2,200 per lot in lieu of $500 per lot. If the Council
wants to modify the park dedication amount they will have to modify
Item #6 to reflect any change.
The Planner then stated if the Council moves forward with the plat,
then on Page 473-C, there is a proposed resolution which is a
statement of findings of fact for the purpose of documenting the
EAW.
39
40
February 9, 1993
The Council discussed the Park Dedication fee. Councilmember
Ahrens stated when this came before the Park Commission there was
no value to tie it to. She stated the commission. was more
interested in getting cash in lieu of land.
The Council asked that the Park Commission really study any future
development that may come before them when dealing with the Park
Dedication Fee.
The City Attorney suggested one other item be added to the proposed
resolution as follows:
19.
A comprehensive search shall be performed to identify any
existing wells on the property. A licensed well driller
shall properly abandon any unused wells in the plat.
Such abandonment shall be reviewed and approved by the
City Engineer.
The following persons spoke with regard to the proposed
subdivision:
TOM CASEY - commented that the values he submitted were from
the developer and the park dedication fee should be increased.
He stated he feels that fee Should be 10% of the market value.
He submitted another letter dated February 5, 1992, from the
Minnesota Historical Society. He stated they feel there is a
high potential for Indian burial grounds and they recommend an
on-site study.
He also submitted another letter dated February 8, 1993, from
a person who has an M.A. in archeology, who recommends that
the State Historic Preservation Office be contacted so that
they can insure that archeological sites are located and
protected. This person's estimate of the cost of an on-site
survey is $500.00.
He stated that they would like a more detailed response to
their letter of January 26, 1993.
He also asked that there be another hearing on whether or not
the conditions in the preliminary plat resolution have been
met.
BRAD BIERMANN, 5106 Windsor Road - stated that the retaining
walls are a big issue to him because they are in front of his
home.
JIM BRUNSELL, 5111 Windsor Road - stated he is in support of
purchasing the property and would like to see a referendum to
40
4!
February 9, 1993
let the voters decide. .He stated he would live with whatever
decision the voters choose.
Glenn Melena - stated as far as the Park Dedication Fees go,
Mr. Weber is Setting the price and he is setting a high price
and he should have to stand by the price that he has set.
The Mayor stated that he was at the meeting last week and Mr. Weber
was pushed into defending some kind of price. Mr. Weber stated
that was not the asking price.
Discussion on the Park Dedication Fees.
Smith moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #93-20
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MOUND GRANTING PRELIMINARY PLAT
~PPROVALt APPROVAL OF A PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT AREA, AND LOT AND STREET
DESIGN VARIANCES FOR TEAL POINTE WITH THE
ADDITION OF 17, 18 & 19 & THE CHANGE IN
EXHIBIT A
The Council discussed the Indian artifacts and possible need
to do more investigation. They stated they were under the
impression that there was more on this in the EAW than there
is. The Planner suggested that #3 in the resolution could be
amended as follows: "The Developer shall supply an
archeological on-site survey of the site prepared by a firm or
individual with credentials approved by the Minnesota
Historical Society or State Archaeologist's office." Mr.
Weber stated that while it is true that the EAW only requires
checking a box, the State Archaeologist's Office or whoever is
handling that action will.receive the EAW and make the same
comments as they would if we asked them directly. If they
feel a survey is required they will recommend that and that
would be part of the response from the State with the EAW. He
stated he wants to respond to the EAW to the letter of the law
and the Council will get those findings in return. The
Planner stated he that if the Council wants to make sure that
the issue of .Indian Mounds is covered, that it is reasonable
to include a provision that says an on-site survey should be
performed.
The Council discussed #3 in the resolution. They decided to
let the State make the decision on whether an on-site survey
is necessary. Mr. Weber stated that he believes that the
City reviews the results of the EAW from the State as well as
public input and decides whether their is any potential
significant environmental impact and can take further action
41
42
February 9, 1993
based on those findings. The Planner stated that is done so
that if the Council finds certain items are incomplete and
need further investigation, they could then require an on-site
survey.
The Planner stated that this project does not even come close
to meeting the EAW threshold, so basically the State would say
the project does not need an EAW. So, consequently, how the
City handles the Indiah Mound issue is up to the City after
they receive the EAW.
The Council asked the Planner how long the EAW process will
take. The Planner stated there is a finite time line that is
defined by the rules. He will get back to the Council on
this.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.4 Johnson moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #93-21
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MOUND DETEI~INING THE REQUIREMENT
FOR THE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) FOR THE
PROPOSED TEAL POINTE SUBDIVISION PURSUANT
TO M.S. 116D.04
The Mayor read the proposed resolution.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
The Mayor explained that the Council has been asked to adopt a
resolution in support of preserving Teal Pointe. He then read the
proposed resolution. After discussion the Council decided to move
#1 and #2 up and make them Whereas'. They also changed #3 to read
as follows:
"The City of Mound will continue to explore its ability to
....~ ~..~^ ~A facilitate the purchase of Teal Pointe from the
developer to preserve as natural green space."
Smith asked if this binds the Council to anything.
Attorney stated he did not think so, that as it
resolution is rather innocuous.
The City
stands the
1.5 Johnson moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #93-22
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF PRESERVING TEAL
POINTE AS'REVISED
42
43
February 9, 1993
The vote was 3 in favor with Smith voting nay. Motion carried.
The Council made it clear that they are not contributing City funds
to this at this time, but they are willing to continue to
facilitate.
1.6
CASE ~93-001: JOHN GABOS, 4687 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE, LOT 19 &
NWLY 1/2 OF 18t BLOCK it DEVON~ PID ~30-117-23 22 0009,
VARIANCE TO ADD A STAIRWAY AND DECK ON TOP OF AN EXISTING NON-
CONFORMING BOATHOUSE'
The Building official explained that the applicant is requesting
this to improve the safety of the current boathouse. He has had a
problem with children climbing on the roof. The Planning
Commission reviewed the request and on a motion for approval the
vote was 5-3 against the proposal. The Building Official reviewed
the Planning Commission Minutes with their comments and
suggestions. Councilmember Jensen, Planning Commission Liaison,
stated that she voted against approval because it is not the
minimum variance.
Mr. Gabos was present and stated the request is specifically based
on a safety concern. Children from the neighborhood play on top of
the boathouse and he is afraid someone will fall off. Mr. Gabos
stated the boathouse was built in 1982 or 1984 and had permits from
the City. He also state~ that he feels his proposal meets the
criteria in Section 325 for variances and also is in line with the
city of Mound Mission Statement. He then reviewed Section 325.
Mr. Gabos stated that the Building Official told him that his
proposal would not extend or diminish the life of the structure.
He read the definition of the boathouse in the Code.
The city Attorney stated that the boathouse was not built in 1982
or 1984. It was repaired with permits during those years because
of a lawsuit with the previous owner because of damage caused by a
leaking storm sewer.
Mr. Gabos contended that he has 2 surveys, one from 1979 when the
boathouse was 24' x 16', and a current one which shows the
boathouse at 25' x 17.6'.
The Council discussed what a minimum variance is and what other
alternatives would be to make the boathouse safe.
Mayor Johnson stated he dOes not feel this is a minimum variance or
is it the only alternative. He fails to see how adding a stairway,
railing and decking would not create an attractive nuisance for all
the children in the neighborhood to be on it. He stated he could
see the Building Official's recommendation for a guardrail being
installed on the north side of the boathouse to keep people off.
43
44
February 9, 1993
Councilmember Smith stated a railing is to keep people from falling
off a structure. The decking would be flush to the roof and he did
not see that it increases a nonconforming use. This .would stop
anyone from falling through the roof.
Councilmember Jensen stated the boathouse is an existing
nonconforming structure and by adding what has been requested will
add to the use of the nonconforming structure. She felt that a
minimum variance required to alleviate the hardship would be
something to keep people from using the top of the structure.
Then you would not have to worry about falling off the other end
because they would not have gotten on it in the first place. That
would be the minimum variance that would alleviate the safety
situation. If, indeed, the concern is that great for the safety,
then the boathouse could be removed because it is a nonconforming
structure.
Councilmember Ahrens stated that there is a safety issue here and
at the Planning Commission Meeting there were all kinds of
suggestions to alleviate the problem, ie. boathouse torn down,
could be re-landscaped so that there wasn't access to the roof of
the structure. She stated that there is watermain just behind the
boathouse which would prohibit Mr. Gabos from excavating behind it
to make it inaccessible to children. She stated that she does not
believe what is being requested increases the life~ of the
boathouse. The proposal doesn't increase hardcover and it solves
a safety problem that is pleasing to the eye. She stated she is
concerned about looking at solving safety problems without any
regard to how it makes the neighborhood look.
Councilmember Jensen suggested that aesthetically he could put up
a guardrail to prevent people from getting on top the roof and it
doesn't have to go'totally around the structure and it doesn't have
to include decking to be attractive.
Councilmember Ahrens stated she feels that the railing would serve
as a climbing aid to get onto the roof, therefore the railing
almost needs to be around the entire perimeter.
Greg Knutson, 4701 Island View Drive - neighbor to Mr. Gabos. He
stated he is the one who brought up the safety factor last year
because of the children. He stated a railing is an absolute must
and he couldn't see just a partial railing because kids could fall
off the edges that do not have railing. From the aesthetic
standpoint, he would like to see some decking on it so that it does
not look like the project is half done and was never finished.
HOTION made by Johnson, seconded by Jensen to direct Staff to
prepare a resolution of denial based on the request not being
the minimum variance, that there are other alternatives.
44
February 9, 1993
Mayor Johnson stated that he would not have a problem with a
railing all the way around the structure to keep people off of
the building. He stated he failed to see how all of the items
requested are needed to alleviate a safety issue.
The vote was 2 in favor with Ahrens and Smith voting nay.
Motion fails.
MOTION made by Johnson, seconded by Ahrens to continue this
item until the March 9, 199.3, Regular Meeting (when all five
Councilmembers are present and the applicant can return), with
direction to the Building Official to work with the applicant
for alternatives to consider to resolve the safety issue as it
relates to the boathouse. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Motion carried.
COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM cITIZENS PRESENT
There were none.
1.7 1992 DEPARTMENT HEAD ANNUAL REPORTS
The following Department Heads presented their annual reports to
the City Council: Park Director Jim Fackler; Sewer, Water & Street
Supt. Greg Skinner; and Fire Chief Don Bryce.
1.8 DISCUSSION: MOUND ENVIRONMENTAL & APPEARANCE MODEL
Bruce Chamberlain, Consultant to the EDC, presented the Mound
Environmental & Appearance Model to the Council. This is trying to
put forth a design vision for downtown Mound. The EDC with input
from everyone has worked to fine tune it. The way the wording has
changed was to soften the ways things were said. Mr. Chamberlain
asked if the Council had any changes they would like to make.
The Council complimented the Economic Development Commission and
stated they are very excited about the Model. The consensus was to
proceed.
1.9 DISCUSSION: PETITION FOR'NO PARKING SIGNS FROM RESIDENTS ON
FAIRVIEW LANE - WEST SIDE OF STREET
The City Manager explained that a petition has been received with
this request. The Police 'have looked at the situation and
recommends that "No Parking" signs be installed on the West side of
Fairview Lane from County Road 15 to Bartlett Blvd.
Smith moved and Johnson seconded the following resolution:
45
February 9, 1993
RESOLUTION #93-23
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE "NO PARKINGt! ON THE
WEST SIDE OF FAIRVIEW L~NE FROM COUNTY
ROAD 15 SOUTH TO BARTLETT BLVD.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.10 DISCUSSION~ PETITION FOR STOP SIGN AT MAYWOOD AND FAIRVIEW
LANE FROM RESIDENTS OF FAIRVIEW LANE
The City Manager explained that a petition has been received
requesting stop signs at Maywood Road and Fairview Lane. The
Police Chief looked into the State manual as far as what is
required by warrants and based upon what has been proposed, this
area does not meet the State warrants. This information was given
to Mr. Longnecker, but he still feels that based on the number of
children in the area and a lot of speeding cars cutting between
Bartlett Blvd. and County Road 15, there needs to be stop signs to
slow the traffic down. The following persons agreed with Mr.
Longnecker: Dave Laube and David Briggs.
Smith moved and Ahrens seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #93-24
RESOLUTION TO INSTALL STOP SIGNS ON
MAYWOOD ROAD AT FAIRVIEW LANE AND ON
FAIRVIEW LANE AT MAYWOOD ROAD
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.11 DISCUSSION= MID BLOCK CROSSWALKS
The City Manager explained that since the fatal accident in
December there have been several discussions on the mid-block
crosswalks 'in Mound. The Council met with Hennepin County shortly
after the accident to try to decide how to keep this type of thing
from happening again. There are 9 crosswalks at uncontrolled areas
along County Road 15 and County Road 110 in less than one square
mile. The last fatality was in 1984 at the 2020 Commerce
crosswalk.
The City Manager then reviewed the Police Chief's report dated
December 29, 1992. There were seventeen crosswalk related
accidents since January 1989. Twelve were rear-end accidents when
one driver was already stopped for a pedestrian in the crosswalk.
Five accidents involved pedestrians being.struck; three of these
involved semaphore controlled crosswalks. Fourteen accidents took
place during daylight hours, with three at night. The Police Dept.
wrote 155 crosswalk violations during the period from 1989 through
1992. The Police Chief reported that he does not see lighting as
the issue. There are many distractions when traffic is heavy that
cause visibility problems. The crosswalks have been discussed many
46
47
February 9, 1993
times with the business people in the community. An issue for
consideration is that many peOPle.perceive crosswalks as an "alley
of safety". The have a false sense of security when using a
crosswalk. People need to be better educated about pedestrian
safety.
The city Manager reported that from a'public safety perspective,
(for the safety of drivers and pedestrians) he and the Police Chief
recommend the removal of the following four mid-block crosswalks:
1. The one in front of the House of Moy Restaurant;
2. The one in front of the Post Office;
3. The one south on County Road 110 by the Pennywise Shop;
and
4. The one north on County Road 110 by the Library.
If that is not acceptable to the Council, you could consider
combining the crosswalks on County Road 15 by removing the one at
the House of Moy and the one at the Post Office and installing one
closer to the bus shelter area. Another suggestion would be to
move the crosswalk by the Post office further to the east at
Belmont. These ideas were presented to the Retail and Professional
Council last week with about 30 people in attendance. The majority
of these people at this meeting agreed with the recommendation to
remove the mid-block crosswalks. Three Councilmembers were in
attendance.
The Council asked if there was anyone in attendance who wished to
speak.
Mrs. Moy, owner of House of Moy, stated she does not want to
see the crosswalk at the House of Moy removed. Her reasons
were as follows:
- more dangerous without crosswalk;
- more people could be killed;
- they have over 1000 customers per week using the
parking lot across the street and need this crosswalk;
- in 22 years there has only been 1 fatality;
- a lot of senior citizens and handicapped who need the
crosswalk. ~
Don Noack, Reed and Pond representing Mrs. Moy, urged the
Council to keep this crosswalk at the House of Moy. Because
of the parking lot there would probably be more accidents if
the crosswalk were removed. He stated he thinks the City is
obliged to help people using the parking lot across the street
to get across the street safely. He suggested making the
House of Moy crosswalk more visible, by additional markings
along County Road 110 advising of crosswalks ahead. Removing
this crosswalk is not'practical or prudent.
47
February 9, 1993
Mike Durell, suggested staggering the traffic entering onto
County Road 15 which could be done by the stop lights; placing
signs 100' in front 'of the crosswalk. Thought the Council
should take another look at this crosswalk before removing it.
He felt the Police should do a better job of enforcing
pedestrian safety by ticketing drivers who are not observing
crosswalk laws. It would not be convenient for people to park
in the lot and walk to the stop light, cross and then go to
the House of Moy.
Lucy Steer, used to have a business on County Road 15, and
felt the speed was too fast on County Road 15.
The Council discussed the mid-block crosswalks and the problems
associated with them. The Council stated that inattentive drivers
and inattentive pedestrian~ are the problem and they are trying to
minimize chances of an accident. The Council agreed that the
crosswalks are poorly laid out, but they were put where they are to
placate the businesses sometime in the past. They also agreed that
the crosswalks were never placed for pedestrian safety. The
Council voiced concern about people feeling a false sense of
security in crosswalks. The Council stated that they will continue
to observe what is happening on County Road 15 and are aware that
one possibility would be to install a crosswalk closer to the bus
shelter where there is a natural break in vehicular traffic because
of the roads there. The Council suggested that people could use
the parking lot behind the House of Moy.
MOTION made by &hrens, seconded Smith to accept the
recommendation of the Police Chief to remove the following 4
mid-block crosswalks:
1. The one on County Road 15 in front of the House of
Restaurant;
The one on County Road 15 in front of the Post Office;
3. The one south on County Road 110 by the Pennywise Shop;
and
4. The one north on County Road 110 by the Library.
The City Manager advised that this would be done as soon as
possible.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
1.12 SET DATE FOR LOCAL BOARD OF REVIEW
MOTION made by Johnson, seconded by Jensen to set May 11,
1993, at ?:00 P.M. for the Local Board of Review. The vote
was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
48
49
February 9, 1993
1.13 APPROVAL OF LICENSE RENEWALS'
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Jensen to authorize the
issuance of the followlng llcenses contingent upon all
required forms, insurance, etc., being provided:
CIGARETTE LICENSES
A1 & Alma,s
Brickley,s
John,s Variety & Pets
Meyer's Service
PDQ Food Store %0292
SuperAmerica #4194
VFW Post %5113
American Legion Post %398
Headliner,s Bar & Grill
Jubilee Foods
Mound Municipal Liquor
R & R Bait
Thrifty Drug
GARBAGE HAULER LICENSES
Blackowiak
#estonka Sanitation
The vote was unanimously in favor.
Randy's Sanitation
#oodlake Sanitation
Motion carried.
1.14 PAYMENT OF BILLS
MOTION made by Smith, seconded by Johnson to authorize the
payment of bills as presented on the pre-list in the amount of
$39,264.30, when funds are available. A roll call vote was
unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS
A. January 1993 Department Head Reports.
B. January 1993 LMCD Representative's Report.
C. LMCD Mailings.
De
Preliminary 1992 Financial Report as prepared by Gino
Businaro, Finance Director.
E. Park Commission Minutes of January 14, 1993.
F. Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 1993.
Ge
REMINDER: 1993 NLC Congressional-City Conference March 6-9,
Washington, D. C. Please let Fram know as soon as possible if
you plan to attend. The deadline for registration is February
12.
He
NEWS RELEASE from theGovernment Finance Officers Association
re: City of Mound has again received the Certificate of
Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for 1991.
We thank John Norman, former Finance Director for all of his
49
50
February 9, 1993'
hard work to obtain this award again for the City.
Letter dated February 4, 1993, from Jim Larson, City
prosecuting Attorney, re: settlement of City of Mound v. Dean
Hanus. This was the~ criminal case and Mr. Hanus pleaded
guilty to the second count and was fined $700. The civil case
will be heard sometime this fall. The criminal case against
Ms. Munson will begin on March 2, 1993.
Je
LMC Legislative Conference, Thursday, March 18, 1993, St. Paul
Radisson Hotel. The deadline for advance registration is
March 11, 1993. Please let Fran know if you are planning to
attend.
CROSSWALKS
The Council discussed asking the County to put a no turn on red at
the south corner of Commerce onto Shoreline Drive.
MOTION made by Johnson, seconded by Smith to request that
Hennepin County install a ,,No Turn on Red" sign at the traffic
signal on Commerce & Shoreline for traffic turning right onto
Shoreline Drive from Commerce Blvd. The vote was unanimously
in favor. Motion carried.
MOTION made by &hrens, seconded by Jensen to adjourn at ~1:45
P.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Edwa~rd J. ~ukle;'~r. i City Manager
50
BILLS ....... February 9, 1993
BATCH
3014 $39,264.30
Total bills $39,264.30