1984-05-22MOUND, MINNESOTA
AGENDA
MOUND CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
7:30 P.M., TUESDAY, MAY 22, 1984
COUNCIL ~HAMBERS
1. Minutes from May 8 and May 15 are to be
carried over until the June 12, 1984 regular meeting
2.PUBLIC HEARING
bills
regarding delinquent utility
pg. 1329
3.PUBLIC HEARING Continuation of matter of
vacation of utility easements on lots 1,2,3,4,
block 1of Rustic Place
pg. 1330-1332
4.PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS:
A. CASE ~ 84-324: Nicholas Espiritu 1638 Eagle
Lane, Lots 13, 14, 15
Block 2, Woodland Point
Request: Front Yard Variance pg. 1333-1340
Q~S¢ #84-326: John and Joyce Kossieck
4760 Island View Drive
lot 5 and west 18 feet of
lot 4, block 8, Devon
Request: Front Yard Variance pg. 1341-1351
CASE ~ 84-327: Westonka Auto Body
4839 Shoreline Boulevard
lots 5,18, 19 and part of
lots 15, 16, and 17,Block
1, Shirley Hills Unit A
Request: Sign Permit pg. 1352-1358
CASE ~84-~30: Skip and Myrt Blank
(Skip's Outlet) 2341
Commerce Boulevard
Auditor Subdivision 167
Request : Sign Permit
pg. 1359-1364
Set Date for Public Hearing on Proposed
Vacation of Canary Lane from Woodland Road
south to Jennings Road (suggested date of
June 12, 1984)
pg. 1365
Set Date for Public Hearing to Amend Section
23.604 of the Mound Zoning Code
(suggested date of June 12, 1984) pg. 1366
Comments and Suggestions from Citizens
Present
Request to Amend City Code Chapter 16, Section
16.08 by Approving the Installation of a Stop
Sign at the Corner of Deerwood and Halsted
Lane (Deerwood Lane Corner) pg.1367-1368
Approval of a Parade Permit for Blue Water
Daze Festival-June 9, 1984
pg. 1369-1372
10.
Approval of Transient Merchant's license
for Mound Retail Merchants Association
June 8,9,10, 1984
pg. 1373
11.
12.
lB
Request of the Minnetonka Bass Club to hold
Annual Fishing Contest-Mound Bay Park June
9, 1984 5:30 A.M.-2:30 P.M.
pg. 1374
~eDorts:
Water and Sewer Quarterly Report pg.1375-1379
Liquor Store Report pg.1380-1383
'~~to enter into a Lend/Lease Agreement
with the state'of Minnesota Department of
Public Safety for the Use of the New
"Intoxilizer 5000 Unit" pg.1384-1387
14.
Approval of Agreement to to allow Dow-Sat
Communication to Install and Use and
Antenna on the water Tower on Fairfield
Road at a lease rate of $15/month ($180/year)pg.1388-1389
15.
Request to Approve the Construction of a new
home at 1709 Canary Lane While the Residents
remain in the Existing house.
pg. 1390-1391
16.
Quotations for a New Pick-up Truck for Park
Department Use (Budgeted in the 1984 Capital
Budget Outlay)
pg.1392-1394
17.
Quotation for a New Tanker Truck (Budgeted
in the 1984 Budget from the Streets and
Sewer Fund)
pg.1395-1397
18.
Adoption of LMCD Code by Reference
(discussion Item)
pg.1398
19. Payment of Bills pg.1399
20.
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS
A. Minutes- Planning Commission
B. Agenda-Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District
C. AMM Legislative Bulletin
D. Notes from League of
Minnesota Cities
pg. 1 400-1403
pg. 1 404
pg. 1405-1411
pg.1412
F.
G.
H.
I.
L.
M.
N.
Metropolitan Council "Review"
LMCD Press Release
Minnesota Safety Council Note
City of Orono Letter
pg. 1413-1414
pg.1415
pg.1416
pg.1417
Notes from Hennepin County Department of
Transportation in Regard to Black Lake
Bridge
Metropolitan Council Announcement
Re: Regional Transit Board
Memo on Industrial Revenue Bonds
Legion Post 398 Gambling Report
Minnetonka Newsletter
Twin Cities Labor Market Information
pg.1418-1420
pg.1421-1423
pg.1424-1445
pg.1446
pg.1447-1450
pg.1451-1454
11 016 1552 21
11 025 1604 21
11 028 1584 O1
11 031 1617 21
11 052 5001 11
11 055 5051 ;91
11 067 1920 41
11 070 4625 O1
11 082 1779 31
11 085 '4987 21
11 088 2098 41
11 088 5849 71
11 100 2085 41
11 112 5917 O1
11 112 59188i
11 115 2143 91
11 169 6,256 2!
11 175 5444 2t
11 193 2131 11
11 199 2149 O1
11 229 5598 01
5-17-84
$ 70.48
117.12
78.40
58.06
200 62
169 lO
66 28
116 40
111 56
116.58.
97.20
107.88
107.84
119.19
95.65
73.76
/,
Pg. ! 329
11 016 1552 21
11 025 1604 21
11 028 1584 O1
11 031 1617 21
11 052 5001 11
11 055 5051 91
11 067 1920 41
11 070 4625 O1
11 082 1779 31
11 085~4987 21
11 088 2098 41
-11 088 5849 71
11 100 2085 41
11 112 5917 01
11 112 591881
11 115 2143 91
11 169 6266 21
11 175 5444 21
11 193 2131 11
11 199 2149 01
11 229 5598 01-
$ 70.48
117.12
78.4O
58.06
112.94
99.62
271.84
200.62
169.10
66.28
116.40
111.56
116.58
97.20
107.88
i07.84
119.19
'95.'65
73.76
94.67
112.18
5-17-84
Pg. 1329
CITY OF MOUND.
Mound, Minnesota
NOTICE OF PUBEIC.HEARING.ON.PROPOSED VACATION
OF EASEMENTS - LOTS 2, 3 AND 4, BLOCK 1, RUSTIC
PLACE
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of Mound will
meet a~ the City Hall, 5341Maywood.Road,..Mound, Minnesota, at
7:30 p..m. on Tuesday, May 8, 1984, to consider the proposed Vacation
of Easements as follows:
Vacating the utility and drainage easements which lie 7 feet on each side
of the lot lines common to lots 2 and 3 and Common to lots 3 and 4 and also
vacating the utility and.drainage easement across the northwesterly part of
Lots l, 2 and 3, Block l, RUSTIC PLACE, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which lies
northwesterly of.the following described line:
Beginning at a point o6 the'~ortheasterly line of said Lot 3 distant 55.00
feet southeasterly from the northeasterly corner of said Lot 3; thence
southwesterly to a point on the west line of said Lot 1 distant 68.40 feet
'south of the northwest corner of said Lot l,
Except'those parts of ~aid above dbscribed vacated easements'which lie
within the l0 foot utility and drainage easement along the northerly
right-of-way of County R6ad No. 110 and along the southwesterly line of
said Lot 2 and the northeasterly line of said Lot 1 and except from said '~
vacation, those parts of said easements which lie within the northwesterly
7 feet of said 'Lots 2, 3 and 4, Block'l'and except the westerly 7 feet and. ~'
the northwesterly 30 feet of said Lot 1.
Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the above
will be heard at this meeting.
Francene C. Clark, City Clerk
Pg. 1330
RESOLUTION NO. 84-
RESOLUTION VACATING CERTAIN UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENTS ON LOTS 1, 2, 3 AND 4,
BLOCK 1, RUSTIC PLACE
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.851 provides that the City Council may
by resolution vacate any street, alley, public grounds, public way, or public ease-
ment, or any part thereof, when it appears in the interest of the public to do so,
and
WHEREAS, the City of Mound has claimed an utility and drainage easement over
parts of the following described land:
Lots i, 2, 3, and 4, Block 1, RUSTIC PLACE.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 8, 1984, as required by law, and
continued on May 22, 1984, and
WHEREAS, it has been determined that good area planning requires that portions
of this easement be vacated on the condition that a new easement be granted on
Lot 3, Block 1, Rustic Place,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND,
MINNESOTA:
1.) Hereby vacates and/or retains the following described utility and drainage
easements on Lots l, 2, 3, and 4, Block 1, RUSTIC PLACE.
Vacating the utility and drainage easements which lie 7 feet on each side of the
lot lines common to Lots 2 and 3 and common to Lots 3 and 4 and also vacating
the utility and drainage easement across the northwesterly part of Lots 1, 2 and
3, Block 1, RUSTIC PLACE, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which lies northwesterly
of the following described line:
Beginning at a point on the northeasterly line of said Lot 3 distant 55.00
feet southeasterly from the northeasterly corner of said Lot 3; thence
southwesterly to a point on the west line of said Lot 1 distant 68.40 feet
south of the northwest corner of said Lot 1,
Except those parts of said above described vacated easements which lie within
the 10 foot utility and drainage easement along the northerly right-of-way of
County Road No. llO and along the southwesterly line of said Lot 2 and the
northeasterly line of said Lot 1 and except from said vacation, those parts of
said easements which lie within the northwesterly 7 feet of said Lots 2, 3 and
4, Block 1 and except the westerly 7 feet and the northwesterly 30 feet of said
Lot 1.
2.) This resolution of vacation shall not be recorded until a new easement
over Lot 3, Block l, RUSTIC PLACE, has been prepared, executed and recorded.
The easement is described as follows:
A 14 foot easement for utility and drainage purposes over, under and across
Lot 3, Block 1, RUSTIC PLACE, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Said easement being
7 feet on each side of a line described as beginning at a point on the south-
easterly line of said Lot 3, a distance of 41.00 feet southwesterly of the
most easterly corner of said Lot 3; thence northwesterly to a point on the
northwesterly line of said Lot 3 distant 41.00 feet southwesterly from the most
northerly corner of Lot 3.
3.) A certified copy of this resolution shall be prepared by the City Clerk and
shall be a notice of completion of the proceedings and shall be recorded in the
office of the County Recorder and/or the Registrar of Titles as set forth in M.S.A.
5571 AUDITOR'S ROAD
State of Mbhesota ]
County of Hennepin] '
TOWHOMITMAY~NCERN: "' '~ .' '~1 tho~ ~l of end ~vl de~ ~=
~ ~'~Tu'"'Y'~iYa, I~,t0COn'J~"Ih'p'O~,~,' .u hw,, ,,y lin, o{ ,,~ ~t 2.~ t~ ~ ~
Iollowlng deec~ I1~: .. . -' .t
JAMES D. BERRETH. being duly Iwo~n, o~10,IIh l~},1 hi II Ind during Ill limel he~ll mtet a<l hi.I J:~n
the publis~r of I~ ~ ~wn W ~l ~k~ I~ hw lull k~wl~ge Of the f~s herein IllJ~ I1
news~ Ii · I~ news~.
,indpu~liih~ltheflininthlEnglishllngk~ge. onc~l~We~cofm'' / i
to end lnclucling
&tx:~ef ghiJklm~opqr il u:x~_ .~ '
Pg. 1332
CASE NO. 84-324
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
Planning Commission Agenda of May 14, 1~84:
Board of Appeals
Case No. 84-324
Location: i638 Eagle Lane
Legal Desc.: Lots 13, 14' & 15, Block 11,.
Woodland Point
Request: 24 foot front yard variance
Zoning District: R-3
Applicant
Nicholas Espiritu
1638 Eagle Lane
Mound, MN.
Phone: 474-8830/472-3243
The applicant is requesting to place a detached accessory structure within 6 feet
of the unimproged dennings Road platted street right-of-way with the doors facing
Eagle Lane. The setback to Eagle Lane (west) property line would be in line with
the existing house at 25 feet. The Lot 13 Was recently purchased and wi~ll be com-
bined with the Lots 14 and 15 that the present.structure is on.
The Zoning Ordinance for the R-3 Zoning District requires 30 feet front yard set-
back - Section 23.604.5(3) except the lot depth from Eagle Lane being 61-80 feet,
a 24 foot setback is allowed for a lot of record. Section 23.408(5) states,
"Lots which abut more than one street shall provide the required front yards along
every street, except for lots of record based on lot width (40-50 feet = 10 feet,
51-80 feet = 20 feet, 81 feet or more = 30 feet). Lot Line Front is defined as
"That boundary of a lot which abuts an existing or dedicated public street, and in
the case of a corner lot it shall be the 6hortest dimension on a public street.
If the dimensions of a corner lot are equal, the front line shall be designed by
the owner and filed with the City Council."
By purchasing the new Lot 13, the applicant has changed his front lot line from
Eagle Lane to Jennin'gs Road as the narrowest side being the front of the lot; prior
to purchasing more property, the dimensions were 80 feet by 80 feet.
Now, the setbacks for accessory structures Section 23.407(5)b. states "All accessory
.structures shall meet the same front yard setbacks as the principal structure".
Comments:
The applicant would like the Planning commission to consider the Jennings
ROad right-of-way as an easement which will not be improved and allow a
setback as it were a side yard. A side yard for an accessory building
may be 6 feet and a side yard for the principal structure would be 10
feet. ~
Recommend: Staff recommends a front yard setback of l0 feet instead of the requested
6 foot setback from Jennings Road. The applicant would have the alternate
to file for a street vacation of Jennings Road.
The abutting neighbors have been notified.
Jan Bertrand
Building Official
JB/ms Pg. 1333
=ITY MOUND.
CITY OF MOUND
APPLICATION~TO PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
(Please type the following information)
'eet Address of Property. 1638 Eagle Lane
Legal Des~ripti.on of Property: lot ~- IS,
Addition ~vk)oc~ J--an4 Point
'0wner=s Name ~tcHoLAS ~5 P'IglTO
Fee Paid
Date Filed
Aadress IC~38 ~'Ar-.TLg- LN
$5O'. O0
5-2-84
Block
PID No. 1'3-1l'7",,~z.{- .lb1. oIq~-
Day Phone No.VJ//'-{-7'4 8830
Applicant (if other than owner):
Name
Day Phone No.
Address
Type of Request:
(~. Variance ( ) Condltlbnal Use Permit
( ) Zoning Interpretation & Review
( ) Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D.
( ) Amendment
( ) Sign Permit
( )*Other
*If other, specify:
Present Zoning District .... -~
sting. Use(s) of Property ~ '~. ~f~-,Z
.Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, or conditional use permit or
.other zoning procedure for this property? hJo 'If so, 'list date(s) of
list' date(s) of application, action taken and provide Resolution No.(s)
Copies .of previous resolutions shall accompany present request.
I certify that all of the above statements .and the statements containe~ in any required
papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. ! consent to the entry in
or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized Official of the City
of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such
notices as may be required by.law. ~ '
Signature of Appl,cant .]~.~~~~~ ~¢, ~/~ ' '. i ' Date 5-1-84
Planning Commission Recommendation:
Date 5-14-84
Action:
Resolution No.
Date
Request for Zoni.ng Variance Procedure (2)
Case # 84-324
D. Location of: Signs, easements, underground utilities, etc.
E. Indicate North compass direction
.F. Any additional information as may reasonably be required by the City Staff
and applicable Sections of the Zoning Ordinance.
Ill. Request for a Zoning Variance
A. All.information below, a site plan, as described in Part II, and general
application must be provided before a hearing will be scheduled.
B. Does the present use or. the prop~rtyconform to all use regulations for
the zone district in ~hich it is located? Yes (Y~,) No 6 )'
If "no", specify each non-conforming.use:
Do the existingstructures comply with all area height and bulk regulations
for the zone district in which it is.located? Yes ('~)No ' ( )
If "no", specify each non-conforming use:
Which unique physical characteri.stics ~f the subject property prevent its
reasonable use for any.of the.uses.permitted in that zoning district?
( ) .Too narrow (.) Topography' ( ) Soil'
(~)' Too~small .- ( ) Drainage.~ .' ~ ) Sub-surface
( ) Too 'shallow ( ) Shape ( ) Other: Specify:
E. Was the hardship described above created by the action of anyone having.
property interests in the land after 'the Zoning Ordinance was adopted?
Yes ( ) No (,"~,) If yes, explain:
F. Was the hardship created by any other man-made change, such as the reloca-
tion of a road? Yes ( ) No ('~-~) If yes, explain:
Are the conditions of hardship for which:you request a variance peculiar
only to the property described in this petition? Yes ('f--)- No ( )
If no, how many other properties are similarly affected?
(~~ What is the "minimum" modification (variance) from the area-bulk regulations
that will .permit you to make reasonable use of your land? (Specify, using .
maps, site plans with dimensiops and w~i, tt,ep exp, lanat]~n. Attach, additiopal~
sheets, if necessary.) ~~ ~O~2,,/~.~x~A~~ ~-4~ ~
I. Will granting of the variance be materially detrimental to property in the
same zone, or to the enforcement of this ordinance2
* the dog kennel and will not enable the use and room of the yard.
LEC~L
DESCRI PTI OR
Lot Blk.
C NO
Addition
8'4-324
SITE AREA
~q. Ft. AREA OF SITE OCCUPIED BY BUILDINAS
INSTRUCTION~ TO APPLICANT
.Sq. Ft.
This form need not be used ~4~en plot plans drawn to scale of not less than
1"-20' are filed with permit application. (Each building site must have a
separate plot plan.)
For new buildings provide the following information: Elevation of existing
& adjoining yard grades, location of proposed consturction and existing improve-
ments~ show buildin.q, site, and setback dimensions. Show easements, ~inish .....
contours or drainage, first floor elevation, street elevation and sewer
service elevation. Show location of water, sewer, gas and electrical service
lines. Show location of survey pins with elevations. Specify the use of -
each butldn~ and major portion thereof. To be completed by.a registered
land surveyor.
INDICATE NORTH IN CIRCLE
GRAPH SQUARES ARE 5' X 5' OR 1"=20°
~ certify thai the proposed construction will conform lo the dim.nslons and uses shown above and that no c.hanges will be made without
iob~a;nin~ approval. ' ·
Pg. 1337
~rnon. T. Hoppe
Inance. Di'vi's~on.
· 6.Goverhment Center
300 South. 6th Street
Mpls, Mn. 55487
CASE NO. 84-324
/
Dear 51r:.
i hereby mal~e request for a (separate
descr ~ bed land:
)
combined) assessment on the following
· -~ ~/oxx-~ · ,~-
~o7-
I~o
For
Tax Yea r
District ~
Signature of Fee .Owne~r
Ngme-of Taxpaye. r
Taxpayers Address
Pg. 1338
ro, ~
Pg. 1339
RESOLUTION NO. 84-
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
CASE #84-324
RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION TO APPKOVE A 20 FOOT FRONT
YARD VARIANCE FOR LOTS 13,14, & 15,
BLOCK 11, WOODLAND POINT, PID #13-117-24-12-0194&0195
WHEREAS, the owner, Mr. Nicholas Espiritu, of the property described
as Lots 13,14, and 15, Block 11, Woodland Point, PID #13-117-24-12-0194 and 0195
has applied for a setback variance to allow the construction of a detached
accessory building within ~eet of the south (Jennings Road) dedicated right-
of-way, and ~
WHEREAS, the Zoning Ordinance requi~es a setback on corner lots to be
30 feet in the R-3 zoning district with one side yard for a lot of record at
20 foot minimum, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed his requested variance
and does recommend a 10 foot setback to Jennings Road due to topography and
the unimproved dedicated right-of-way to be retained for drainage and a walkway
access~
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MOUND, MN:
That the City Council does hereby approve the variance of 20 feet
to allow an accessory building to be placed in line with the existing house
from Eagle Lane (24 foot minimum) and 10 feet from the platted and unimproved
Jennings Road upon the condition that the building be used for the storage
of private passenger vehicles of the family residents.at 1638 Eagle Lane.
~$E NO, ~4-326
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
Planning Commission Agenda'of May 14, 1984:
Board of Appeals Applicant
Case No. 84-326 John & Joyce Kossieck
Location: 4760 Island View Drive 2168 Centerview Lane
Legal Desc.: Lot 5 & W. 18.feet of Lot 4, Mound, MN. 55364
Block 8, Devon Phone: 828-6434
Request: 6 Foot Front Yard Variance
Zoning Dist.: R-2
The applicant ls requesting to make structural modifications to an existing
block carport to convert it to an enclosed parking garage. A variance (Resolu-
tion #.71-134 was granted in 1971 to construct the.carport within 14 feet to
19 feet of the front 'property line. Since that time, Mr' Luff, the present
owner, has purchased another 18 feet of. Lot 4. The present parcel is 58 fe~t
by 105 feet plus or minus (6,O62.16 square feet).
The Zoning Code requires a front yard setback of 20 feet for ~he R-2 Zoning
District. See attached survey dated March 19, 1981, site and landscape plan
and Resoluti'on 71-134.
Comments:
The site has a steep slope of approximately 12 feet in 40 feet (30%)
from the street to the front of the house. The East side of the
yard was terraced to allow better visibiJity'to the street as a
person, drives out o~the carport; A large vehicle could not park
in front of the proposed garage unless it was parked parallel to the
street.
Recommend: Staff would recommend granting the 6 foot variance upon the condition
that structural improvements are made to the existing carport to
allow the carport to be enclosed due to the topography of the site.
The abutting neighbors have been notified. This wiJl be on the City Council
Agenda for May 22, 1984.
Case'No. '84-326 6 Foot Front Y'ard Variance -'4760 Island View Drive
Lot 5 and W. 18 feet of Lot 4, Block 8, Devon .
John and Joyce Kossieck were present.
The Building Official explained that in 1971, the o~ner at that time, requested
'a variance for a carport within 14 feet of the street front and to do some
terracing for visibility. Kossieck is purchasing the property'and is requesting
to do some structural repairs to the carport which are to put in frost footings
and allow e~closure of carport (open west wail and install garage door). Deck
is on tOP of carport. He has also purchased additional land to make lot con-
forming.
The City Manager arrived from another meeting at 8:20 P.M.
Vargo moved and Meyer seconded a motion to recommend approval of the six foot
front yaEd variance as requested. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Refer to City Council May 22, 1984.
Pa. 1 ~41
CITY OF MOUND
Date Filed
APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING COEKISSION
(Please type t. he following information)
Address of Property
Legal Description of Property: Lot ~ 'Block
Case~No. 84-326
]=ee' Paid ~
e
Addition
Owner's Name
Address -
Applicant (if other [han owner):
Address
Day Phone No. ,~ ~_~-(O~C~
5. Type of Request:
(/~) Variance ( ) Conditional Use Permit
( ) Zoning Interpretation &'Review
( ) Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D.
( ) Amendment
( ) Sign Permit
( )*Other
*If other, specify:
6', Present Zoning District ~.--..~, ....
~ isting Use(s) of Property ~Ox~C ,~_O~-' /C~~.~ ,°
8. Has an application ever' been made for zoning, var. i~an~ce~ or 6onditional use permit or
.other zoning procedure for this property? ~~ If so, list date(s) of
list date(s)'of appli'cation, action taken and p~ovide R'esol'ution No.(s)
-Copies of previous res°lUt~o&s shall comp ny present request.
I certify that all'of the above statements and the statements contained in any required
papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in
or upon the premises described in thi~ application by any authorized official of the City
of.Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and r~moving such
notices as may be required by law.
Signature of Applicant%~~.~O~ Date ~l~--'J~(ix,
Planning Commission Recommendation:
Date
,cil Action:
Resolution No.
Date
84-326
Request for Zoni.ng Variance Procedure (2) Case #
D. Location of: Signs, easements, underground utilities, etc.
E. Indicate North compass direction
F. Any additional information as may reasonably be required by the City Staff
and applicable Sections of the Zoning Ordinance.
Ill. Request for a Zoning Variance
A. All.information below, a site plan, as described in Part Il, and general
application must be provided before a hearing will be scheduled.
Does the present use of. the property'conform to all use regulations for
the zone district in which it is located? Yes (~) No (' )
If "no", specify each n'on-conforming.use:
Do the existing structures comply with all area height and bulk regulations
for the zone district in which it is.located? Yes (~) No ( )
If '~no", specify each non-conforming use:
D. Which unique physical characteristics ~f the subject property prevent its
reasonable use for any of the uses permitted in that zoning district?
( ) .Too narrow ( ) Topography ( ) Soil
( ) Too small ( ) Drainage~ ( ) Sub-surface
( ) Too shallow ( ). Shape -. (~) Other: Specify:
E. .Was the hardship described above created by the action of anyon~ having
property interests in the land after the Zoning Ordinance was adopted?
Yes ( ) No (~) If yes, explain:
F. Was the hardship created by any other man-made change, such as the reloca-
tion of a road? Yes ( ) No (~) If yes, explain:
G. Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a variance peculiar
only to the property described in this petition? Yes ( )- No (~$~.)
If no, how many other properties are similarly affected?~~. k'~l~O~_~.k~
H. What is the "minimum" modification '(variance) from the area-bulk regulations
that will permit you to make reasonable use of your land? (Specify, using
maps, site. plans with dimensions and written explanation. Attach additional
sheets, if necessary.)
I. Will granting of the variance be materially detrimental to property in the
same zone, or to the enforcement of this ordinance?
Pg. 1343
CASE NO. 84-326
Certi "¢:,,I-~ 09 Survey
...... IZo oo
I hcreo-., =~ ~,"" ,,.o. f,$ :% and corrnat reoras6n%4~t~or, of
a a'~v~';; of the t~m~aries or bots 3~ ts' e:nd 5: 2'Ln(:k 8: 5~von, and
tl~,~ location cf al! exictin[' ~,iiidinys tho)-eon. I~ does not om'port
~ shot or}leD i]nF:'ovem~nts qr ~ncromchn~ents except a concrete road.
Scale: 1" = 30'
~t~ : 3-19-S1
o : !rod :'2rker
.Proposed descriptions:
~rdon k. Co~fi?~
'Lur,d Eurve'yor and Pla~cr
bnng Lake, Minnesota
Lot5 ~nd the Vest 18 feet of Lot 4, Block 8, ~von.
Lot 3, and Lot 4 exceat the West 18 feet of said Lot 4, Block 8, Devon.
Pg. 1344
CASE NO. 84-326
'Sd
/
/
/
/
rm
xl.
'.
RESOLUTION NO. 71-134
RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE
(L.ot ~5, Block 8, Devon)
CAS'E NO. 84~326
WHEREAS, the owner of Lot 5, Block 8, Devon wishes to place a car port
on his lot and because of the te=rainandna~owness of the
lot making it impossible Go have a 20-foot approach, he has.
made application for a variance of six feet, and
WHEREAS, the Pla~uing'Commission has recommended that a variance be
made,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY TEE VILLAGE COUNCIL 0F MOUND, MOUND,
· .MINNES 0TA ~
That a v~riance of not more than six feet be granted providing
the banks on either side of the ca:~oxt be g'~aded to p:~ovide-..,
for traffic safety._ ..,.-..' ~. ~.'.
Adopted. by the CoUncil this llth day of Nay, ·1971.
?~ f.'.,...," f'~, 't.-,, .:,"~k.~'
,.~. , i.. .. , · . /~ ,.,.!
Pg. 1347
2760
Island View Drive
CASE NO. 84- 326
Pq.
9~-~8 'ON 3SW
3KE. LA
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
CASE #84-326
RESOLUTION N0.84-
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A (6) FOOT FRONT YARD VARIANCE
FOR LOT 5 & WEST 18 FEET OF LOT 4, BLOCK 8, DEVON
PID #30-117-23 22 0084
WHEREAS, the applicant, John & Joyce Kossieck, for the property
described as Lot 5 and the West 18 feet of Lot 4, Block 8, Devon, PID#
30-117-23 22 0084, 4760 Island View Drive, have applied for a variance to
allow the existing carport to be enclosed for'an accessory building garage, and
WHEREAS, the carport was constructed under a variance, Resolution
71-134, to allow it to be built within 14 to 19 feet from the front property line, and
WHEREAS, an accessory building in the R-2 zoning district requires
a 20 foot front yard setback, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and does
recommend approval due to the topography of the lot and to afford the new
purchaser reasonable use of the property.
NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Mound, Minnesota, does hereby approve the 6 foot front yard variance as
requested to enclose the existing carport upon the condition that structural
repairs are made to the existing walls and asphalt floor at 4760 Island View
Drive, on Lot 5 and the West 18 feet of Lot 4, Block 8, Devon.
Pa. l~ql
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
CASE NO. 84-327
Planning Comm~sslon Agenda of May 14, 1984:
Board oF Appeals
Case No. 54-327
Location: 4839 Shoreline Boulevard
Legal Desc.: Lots 5, 18, 19 and part of
Lots 15, 16 and 17, Block 1
Shirley Hills Unit A
Request: Sign Permit over 9 square feet
in area
Zoning Dist.: B-2
Applicant
Westonka Auto Body
Brad Patterson
4839 Shoreline Boulevard
Mound, MN. 55364
Phone: 472-3436
The applicant's existing signage is (1) 4 X 8 foot wall mounted sign, (1)
3 X 9 foot wall mounted sign and a 3.5 foot by 3 foot wail'mounted sign
equalling 69.5 square feet. He is requesting to replace the existing 3.5
by 3 foot sign with a 4 X 8 foot wall mounted sign. (No description was
given for the new sign) The total signage equalling 91.~ square feet. He
is also requesting a temporary 4 by 8 foot sign to be placed off of Bartlett
Boulevard on Lot 5 during the detour of County Road 125 til September 1,
1984.
The sign code draft, Section 6.06, allows signage only on street frontage.
Therefore, the sign now on the east side of the building is non-conforming (4 X 8')
and will not be considered at this time. If the sign is to be rebuilt,
altered, or relocated, it would have to comply with the new sign ordinance
provisions. The building has a wall area of 405 square feet; at 15%, this
equals an allowable area of 60.~ square feet of signage for the street front-
age to Shoreline. The requested n'ew signage is 59.0 square feet.
The portable sign being requested is to allow advertising of a year around
business service during the detour on Bartlett Boulevard. The sign code
draft, Section 5.09, does not allow temporary signs of this nature except
under the provisions of Section 5.10 (quasi-public functions).
Recommend:
Staff recommends approval of the requested wall mounted sign upon
the condition that when the present wall mounted (East side) 4 X
8 foot sign is to have lettering altered, the sign relocated or
rebuilt, it must comply with the new sign ordinance provisions.
Staff recommends denial of the temporary portable 4 by 8 foot
sign as it will not be advertising a seasonal service nor provide
a quasi-public function advertising.
The abutting property owners have been notified.
Council Agenda..May 22, 1984.
This will be on the City
Jan Bertrand
Building Official
JB/ms
Pg. 1352
Planning Commission Minutes
May 14, 1984
CASE NO. 84-327
Case No. 84-327 Sign Permit over 9 square feet in area - 4839 Shoreline Blvd.
Lots 5, 18, 19 and part of Lots 15, 16 and 17, Block 1, Shirley Hills Unit A
Brad Patterson, owner of Westonka Auto Body, was present.
The Building Official explained that she used the new sign draft for her recom-
mendation. Applicant has a nonconforming sign on the east wall and the total
signage is presently 60 square feet on the Shoreline frontage. Under the new
draft,.the allowable is 15 percent of wall area or' about 60 square feet. This
includes total building wall area. Applicant is requesting to replace a 3.5
foot by 3 foot wall mounted sign with a 4 by 8'foot illuminated sign. Not
considering the nonconforming sign on east side of the'building, total new
signage would be 59.0 square feet.
Applicant is also requesting a portable 4 X 8 foot sign to allow advertising
of his business during, the detour on Bartlett Boulevard.
Michael moved and Jensen seconded a motion for approval of the Ball mounted
sign requested. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Discussed the portable sign and the definition for seasonal sign.. Dave Klein
questioned not allowing portable signs in the City. Thinks portable signs most
effective means of advertising. ~
Vargo moved and Michael seconded a motion to approve the portable sign as
requested for a 60 day period of time. The vote was Weiland, Meyer and
Byrnes against. Vargo, Michael and Jensen in favor of allowing. Tied vote.
Meyer would rather see a legal sign on the back of business facing Bartlett;
Weiland rather see a permanent sign. Byrnes voted nay for the same reasons.
Refer to City Council Agenda of May 22, 1984.
Pg. 1353
CITY OF MOUND
.~o.'--° Fee'Paid
Date Filed
APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ·ZONING COMMISSION
(Please type the following information)
~.reet Address of Property.
Legal DesCription of Property: Lot
Address
Applicant (if other ~han owner)
Address
5.' Type of Request:
Day Phone No. ~/'7,~-~//,}>~
( ) Variance ( ) Conditional Use Permit
( ) Zoning Interpretation & Review
( ) Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D.
( ) Amendment
~ Sign Permit~ .
( )*Other
*If other,.specify:
Present Zoning District "~-~
sting Use(s)of'Property '
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, or conditional use permit or
.other zoning procedure for this property? j/~' If sb, list date(s) of
list date(s) of application, action taken~nd provide Resolution No.(s)
Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request.
I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any required¢.
papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in
or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City
no tJ ce s as may be requJ re.~~i.~/~_~//~~ .~' ~~/,
Planning Commission Recommendation:
Date
ncil Action:
R~sol ut ion No.
Date
~/82
--::,q Pq. 1354
SIGN LOCATION
APPLICATION FOR SIGN PERMIT
CITY OF MOUND
Street' Number City
~ ?¥ -3-z 7
LOT
PLAT
Zip
. . re ,'.
/~'e/f,,.~//d'-/Y ~.7g'P~-, BLOCK 001 ADDITiON ,' ¢ A.
PARCEL P I D ~
ZONING
PLEASE DESCRIBE REQUEST ~ . , , / / .
AND REASON FOR REQUEST ;t('~z.f'~'~-/" Z'2.~..~"I~/~S/~ 't-O
' ' / / / / .'
' , . ,. ~- . , , , Z'
S~GN SIZEU -- ' ,I I ..z TYPE OF SIGN:
BEING REQUESTED y ~ WALL MOUNT
LENGTH Of TIME SIGN TO BE ERECTED:
PERMANENT ~'~'
iEMPORARY
(Temporary sign not to be for period
in excess of two months)
PYLON
FREE STANDING
PORTABLE
OTHER
Does.it confo'rm to al~ setback and other requirements relating to the Zoning Ordinance?
Is sign for a community organization and does it meet all the standards(Ord. 440)?'
If additional information is attached, please 'submit 8½" X 11" maximum sized drawings..
Recommendation:
Approved:
City Manager
Pg. 1355
i;
)?
)re line occord, lo
.,"record plat.
PO. 1357
RESOLUTION NO.84-
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
CASE NO. 84-327
RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A ~IGN VARIANCE FOR
BRAD PATTERSON, WESTONKA AUTO BODY
PID# 13-117-24-44 0015
WHEREAS, Westonka Auto Body, 4839 Shoreline Blvd. has request a sign
variance to allow a 4 by 8 foot wall mounted sign to replace an existing
3.5 by 3 foot sign and to place a portable sign behind the property off of
Bartlett Blvd. during the construction at the Black Lake Bridge, and
WHEREAS, the wall mounted sign will be mounted on the Shoreline
frontage and will be 4 by 8 foot as shown on Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, said sign would identify the location of Westonka
Auto Body, at 4839 Shoreline Blvd. described as Lots 5, 18, 19 and part
of Lots 15, 16, and 17, Block 1, Shirley Hills Unit A, PID #13-117-24-44
0015
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and does
recommend the 4 by 8 foot wall mounted sign but has no recommendation to the
City Council for the portable sign.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the
City of Mound, Minnesota does hereby approve the wall mounted 4 by 8 foot
sign to replace the existing 3.5 by 3 foot sign as per Exhibit A but does
not approve the4 by 8 foot portable sign requested to be placed on Lot 5
facing the Bartlett Blvd. during the detour of Black Lake Bridge for the
property described as Lot 5, 18, 19 and part of Lots 15, 16, and 17, Block 1,
Shirley Hills Unit A, 4839 Shoreline Blvd.
Pg. 1358
D{ / c~ 7'?'D-.~ ;i{ CiTY OF MOUND
LJ L~_~.~ ~.~..~ o.__.~....~ ~PPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MOLJND ype fol]owin9 information)
'
Street Address of Property ~~ ~c;,~i~r-,: ~/)
2. Legal Description of Property: Lot M & B
Addition Aud, Subd. 167
PID No.
Fee' Pa i d ~'"d ·
Date Filed' ~.//
'Block
14-117-24 44 0004
3. Owner's' Name ~u,~, A~oe..? '~ 4' /.3 .~ah~..,~ ,,-r
I -
Address ~"~'~o c, ,'~., ~%
4. Applicant (if other than owner): ~h,ps
Day Phone No.
5. Type of Request: ( ) Variance
Day Phone No. ~'?/-~3
( ) Conditional Use Permit ( ) Amendment
( ) Zon'ing Interpretation &~eview (t~) Sign Permit
( ) Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D. ( )*Other
*If other, specify:
Present Zoning District
Existing Use(s) of Property
Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, or conditional use permit or
.other zoning procedur, e for this property? if so, list date(s) of
list date(s)'of application, action taken and provide Resolution No.(s)
· Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request.
I certify that all'of the above statements and the statements contained in any required
papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in
or upon the premises described in thi's application by any.authorized official of the City
of.Mound for the purpose of inspecting,~or of pos.ting, maintaining and removing such
notices as may be required by law.
Signature of Applicant "~l?~y ~/~t /~.:,/~ Date ~/~
Planning Commission Recommendation:
Date
mci1 Action:
Resolution No.
Date
4182 p~
APPLICATION .FOR SIGN PERMIT
'" CITY OF MOUND
NAME O.F 'APPLICAtlT.
ADDRESS
Street' Number
PHONE NO.
City
Zip
SIGN LOCATION ~m'+ ~c~
LOT BLOCK
PLAT PARCEL
ADDITION
PID #
ZONING
PLEASE DESCRIBE REQUEST
AND REASON FOR REQUEST
SIG'N SIZE
BEING REQUESTED
LENGTH OF TIME SIGN TO BE ERECTED:
PERMANENT
TYPE OF SIGN:
WALL MOUNT
PYLON
FREE STANDING
~ORTABLE
(Temporary sign not to be for period
in excess of two months)
OTHER
Does. it confo'rm to all' setback and other requirements relating to the Zoning Ordinance?
Is sign for a community organization and does it meet all the standards(Ord. 440)?'
If additional information is.attached, please 'submit 8½" X ll" maximum Sized drawings.·
Recommendation:
Approved:
City Manager
Planning Commission Minutes
May 14, 1984
CASE NO. 84-330
Case No. 84-330 Sign Permit o~er 9 square feet - 2345 Commerce Boulevard
Metes & Bounds Description, Auditor's Subdivision 167 - PID 14-117-24 44 0004
Myrt Blank and Skip Blank were present.
The Building Inspector explained this was a late request; applicants are planning
to be in building by June 1st. She computed the wall area (14' X 25') of this
particular tenant's space and wall area would allow at 15%, 52½ square feet.
The request is for a 32 square foot sign. Sign would have 6½ inch raised wood
letters (red) on piece of plywood with a white background. The'li. ghting is an
existing flood light. Also plan to put a small sign on back of building. It
was explained that this sign could not be painted on the door or building per
the new sign draft. They were.agreeable to put up a separate small sign on
door under 9 square feet in size.
Jensen moved and Vargo seconded, a motion to approve the reque§t. .The vote
was unanimously in favor.
Refer to Ci.ty Council for agenda of May 22, 1984.
Pg. 1363
RESOLUTION NO. 84-
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
CASE #84-33O
RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A SIGN VARIANCE FOR
SKIP & MYRT BLANK
PID #14-117-24 44 0004
WHEREAS, Skip's Outlet Store, 2345 Commerce Blvd. has requested a
sign variance to allow a 4 by 8 foot wall mounted sign and a sign at the
rear entry of the building, and
WHEREAS, the wall mounted sign will be mounted on the Commerce Blvd.
frontage and will be 4 by 8 foot as shown on Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, said sign would identify the location of Skip's Outlet
Store, at 2345 Commerce Blvd. described as Lot M & B, Auditor's Subdivision 167,
PID #14-117-24 44 0004; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and does
recommend the 4 by 8 foot wall mounted sign with the rear entry sign to be attached to and
no larger than 9 sq. ft. on the door.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound
Minnesota does hereby approve the wall mounted 4 by 8 foot sign to have exterior
Shielded lighting on the Commerce Blvd. frontage as per Exhibit A and the
rear sign is to be surface mounted at the rear entry no larger in size than 9 Sq. Ft.
for the property'described as Lots M & B, Auditor's Subdivision 167, 2345 Commerce
Blvd., PID #14-117-24 44 0004.
Pq. 1364
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON
PROPOSED VACATION OF CANARY
LANE FROM WOODLAND ROAD SOUTH
TO JENNINGS ROAD
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN t~at the Mound City Council will hold
a public hearing at the City Hall, 5341Mayw°od Road, Mound, Minne-
sota at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, the 12th day of June, 1984, to con-
sider the vacatlon of the following described portion of street:
Canary Lane from Woodland Road South to Jennings Road
Such persong as desire to be heard with reference to the above
will be heard at this meeting.
Francene C. Cl~rk, City Clerk
Pg. 1365
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
NOTICE OF HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENT
TO SECTION 23.604.4 OF THE MOUND ZONING
CODE ORDINANCES
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Tuesday, June 12,1984, at
7:30 P.M. at the City Hall, 5341Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota,
the Mound City Council will hold a hearing on the proposal
to amend Section 23.604.4, Mound Code of Ordinances, entitled
"Zoning" by adding the following statement to the list of per-
mitted accessory uses in the R-l, R-2, R-3 and R-4 districts.
Swimming pools which are operated for the enjoyment and
convenience of the residents of the principal use and
their guests.
All persons ~ppearing at said hearing will be given an
opportunity to be heard.
Francene C. Clark, City Clerk
Pg. 1366
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
To: City Council
From: City Manager~/Jl~
Enclosed is a "complaint" report from Bill H~dson regarding some
traffic concerns in the Woodcrest Subdivision.
The Chief's recommendations include installing a Stop sign at the
corner of Deerwood and Halsted Lane. We will need to ammend the city
code Chapter 16, section 16.08 by resolution to do this.
The other items we can do without council action i.e.
- talk to owners about cleaning up his lot.
- installing Children at Play signs.
- controlling speeding in the neighborhood.
Pg. 1367
OFFICE MEMO
TO:
SUBJECT:
Jon er
Will Chief of Police
Com~ Mr. Scott Rosengren
DATE 5~¥ 11,
19S4
I spoke with~.~. Rosengrenwho resides at 2775 Halstead Lane, ph: 472-3076. ~k.
Rosengren had several concerns which are as follows:
1. The lack of a stop sign at the intersection of Deenvood and Halstead
Lane.
2..The vacant lot directly across the street where numerous trees have been
cut down, delimbed, and left.
3. Speeders in the area.
4. Request for "Slow Children Playing" signs.
In reference to ~@. Rosengren's first concern, I do agree with bP. Rosengren that
there should be a stop sign located at the intersection of Deerwood and Halstead
Lane which would halt traffic coming onto Halstead Lane from Dee~ood. I say this
because the intersection of Halstead Lane and. Deerwood is somewhat of a blind
intersection coming from the north on Halstead Lane.
~r. Rosengren's second concern as to the vacant lot directly across the street, I
also agree with. Mr. Rosengren stated that the kids in the neigl~orhood are
playing in and mnongst the feld trees and he is concerned that someone is going
to get hurt in addition to it being very unsightly for the neighborhood. I have
been unable at this time, but will in the immediate future, attempt to make
contact with the owner of the property and advise him to clean the area up.
As to Mr. Rosengren's third concernwith the speeders, I asked him if he had any-
one in particiular in mind and he described two particular automobiles to me, both
of which I am familiar with. I informed Mr. Rosengren that I will speak with the
owners and drivers of the vehicles as to the way they are being driven in and
around the immediate area.
~. Rosengren's last concern requesting a "Slow Children Playing" sign, I also
agree with. As I stated above, in the particular area where Mr. Rosengren lives,
has two definite curves in the road with grade and does present a problem as far
as visibility is concerned. There are numerous children in the immediate area
also. I would recommend, as I informed bP. Rosengren, that two "Slow ~ildren
Playing" signs be placed in the following area:
1. Approximately 20 feet north of the drivmvay of 2790 Halstead Lane for
northbound traffic.
2. Directly across the street from 2750 Halstead Lane for southbound
traffic.
I believe in doing the above will satisfy Mr. Rosengren as to his concerns.
Po. 1368
we tonka
BLUE WATER DAZE FESTIVAL
P.O. Box 66
Mound, MN 55364
May 1, 1984
Mound City Hall
Mound, MN 5536~
To whom it may concern
The route for the 1984 Blue Water Daze Parade will be as follows
Line-up for the parade will be basically in the same areas as it was last
year using the fields and parking areas of Shirley Hills School and Mt.
Olive Church as necessary, the city streets of Whilshire Blvd. and Lakewood,
and adding Maywood, E~st of Wllshire.
The parade route, at the request of the Mound merchants, has been altered
this year. The paz-~de will preceed North along Wilshire and East on Maywood
(through the assembly area) to Fairview Lane, North on Fairview Ln. to
County Road #15 (Shoreline Dr. ), and West on Co. Rd. #15 to Commerce Blvd,
South on Commerce Blvd. to Mound Bay Park area to 6isassemble.
Based on the experiences of last year, we will route the paarade larg.e~m
vehicles into the area &n. the Highlands through Highland Blvd, and let them
break up in those side streets. Since there was little problem in dis-
banding last year, we don't expect much this year. There will be, as last
year, supervision for the disbanding. This will also allow the opening of
the streets in the area as soon after the parade as possible.
The city streets will only be closed as needed for the parade activities.
We are recruiting the services of the Mound POlice Reserves, St. Boni/Trista~'
R~serves, Hennepin County Sheriff's Emergency Squad and any other traffic
control as necessary to facilitate a safe and efficient operation.
A copy of the route information and particlars has been sent to the Hennepin
County Transportation Department.
Sincere!~, /
PERMIT HOLDER Westonka Blue C~ter i~ze C/O ..
larry Connolly, Jr,
ADDRESS Post Office Box 66 - Mound! M~ ~3 ,~..
EPHONE $ 472-2933
PERMIT FOR X~F~X~ l~de
PURPOSE ~X~gt~X Westonka Blue Water D~ze I>ar~de
CITY OF MOUND PERMIT
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
.ON. June 9, '1984
FEE DEPOSIT.
CONDITIONS OF PERMIT
KEY $.
DRAM SHOP INSURANC~
THE UNDERSIGNED AGREES TO OBSERVE ALL CITY ORDINANCES AND STATE LAWS AND IS
ORRESPONSIBLE DATES ABOVE. FOR ANY. DAMAGE DONE.~_/~/_~_./.~/ID T~ ABOVE~~~~..PUBLIC FACILITY FOR. t THE DATE
~22;1~N A TO RE
CC: ADM larry Connolly,
POLICE .
MAINT. Notes Please waive all fees - In~ce %~oughthe Wes~
Chamber of Comme=ce.
PE~RMIT HOLDER Westonka ~Blue Water Daze c/o
Larr~ Connolly, Jr.
.ADDRESS Post Office Box 66 - Momnd, M~ 55364
CITY OF MOUND PERMIT
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
TELEPHONE # 472-2933
PERMIT FOR THE USE OF Mound Bay Park and Depot Butldin~ ',ONJu~ue 8:9~ 1~; 1984
Westonka Blue Water Daze Events
PURPOSE OF VISIT
FEE XXXXXXXXXX DEPOSIT XXXXXXXXXXXX KEY $~ DRAM SHOP INSURANCE XXXXXXXXXXX×XXX
CONDITIONS OF PERMIT.
THE UNDERSIGNED AGREES TO OBSERVE ALL CiTY ORDINANCES AND STATE LAWS AND iS
RESPONSIBLE FOR
DATES ABOVE.
CC: ADM
POLICE
MAINT.
N~ Y FOR THE DATE
ANY DAMAGE DO ABO~UBLIC
,~N-ATU-RE OF APPLI~/~NT~ .
larry Connoll~, Jr.
Note~ Pl~se waive ~1 .fees - ~s~ce t~o~h the Westoi~ ~z~r of Co~ce
CITY OF MOUND
License Application
(Print or type only)
Date of Application: April 1, 1984
Original: Renewal:
Applicant Name: Larry
(First)
Applicant Date of Birth: 02/15/49
Home .&dress: 2910 Hazelwood Lane
Home Telephone No.: 4?2-2933
Place of Employment:
Company Name: Westonk~ Blue Water I~ze
Company Address: Post Office Box 56
Company Officials: 1.
connolly, Jr.
(Nid~le) (Last)
DFivers Lic. No.' a-540-488-676-121
'(~iddle)
City:
City: Mound MN
Social Security No.: 468 - 58
Work Telephone No.:
· Company Telephone No.:
Mound,
Laurence P. ~onnolly,' Jr'
(First) OvLiddl'e)
GeorMe $%evens
(First)
Frank Hancuch (First)
(Last)
(Last)
.Type of License Requested:
for June 8,9 & 10' 1984 ;
Zip :. 55364
- 4801
~i:~ z. ip: 5536~
02-15-49
(Date of Bi. rth)
(Date 'of Birr!.'
(Middle) (Last)' (Date of Birth)
P~rade License f~r.6/9/84 ;' Mound Bay Park and Deport u~eage License
Blue Water Daze Festival is sponsored by .the Mound Retail .Council
Notes Please Waive all fees - Insu~ancethrough the Westonka Chamber of Commerce
Department'Approval/Denial(Submit memo if denied)
Police Department ..
Street Department
Building Inspector
Park & Recreation Dept.
Water/Sewer Department
Fire Department
Administrative.
Pg. 1371
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minne sots
5.
6.
7.
TRANSIENT MERCHANT, HAWKERS, PEDDLWRS
AND SOLICITORS LICENSE
DATE OF BIRTH
APPLICANT Laurence Paul__.
~i-r's~ '. Middle same st Name
NAMES OF PERSONS ASSOCIATED WITH
IN BUSII~ESS ]~ound Retail ~exc~t's Assn. .....
~o. Day Year
TYPE OF BUSINESS CommunitY Festival-.W_~s. tonk~ Blue Water Dase Festival
PLACE BUSINESS IS TO BE CARRIED ON Mound, MN__
LENGTH OF TIME FOR WHICH LICENSE IS DESIRED June 8, 9 & 10, 1984
'DESCRIPTION OF THINGS TO BE SOLD Food Items and Beverage (non-alcholic)
BUSINESS ADDRESS OF APPLICANT Post ~ffice Box 66 - Mound, MN 55364
PLACES OF RESIDENC~ 0F T~ APPLICANT PLEASE INCLUDE PRESENT PHONE NUMBER.
FOR LAST (~) YEARS ~.
Nov 1983 to Present
2910 Hazelwood Lane - Mound, MN 55364
Sept. 1978 to Nov, 1983 i969 Lakeside Lane - Mound, MN 55364
9. ~. (Give names and addresses
Westonk~ (Mound) Mohawk Jaycess
Mound Girl Scouts
Mound Boy Scouts
Incl.ude Phone Number
Westonka Blue Water Daze Festival will be provid~ng free refreshments
to some of the parade participants after the pax~de
(you will be updated if the list is added to)
Please waive all fees for this community event
Thank you
April, 20, 1984
Mr. John Elam
City Manager
5341-Maywood Rd.
Mound, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Elam:
The Minnetonka Bass Club has for the last several
years, hosted, a fishing tournament at the Surfside,
on Cooks Bay.
The contest is a catch & release with full sanction of
the Minnesota DNR.
The date is June 9, 1984 from 5:30 to 2:30 PM.
All necessary permits have been obtained.
I would respectifully request the councils authorization
in the form of a short note from you.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (H) 935-8558
(W) 938-8885.
Thanking you in advance for your kind assistance.
~ Y~ur s tr~
arl L. J~nson
Earl Johnson
13401-Maywood Lane
Mtka. Minn. 55343
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
DATE:
TO:
FROH:
RE:
April 30, 1984
Jon Elam
Sharon
~ater & Sewer Quarterly Reports
Attached are the first quarter reports for the ¥1ater Fund and the Sewer
Fund.
¥1ater Fund
As of t~arch 31, 1984, the ~later Fund had an operating loss of $7,417.
This, of course, is due to Tonka's departure. I don't think that this
should be a major concern at this point since water usage should go up
in the summer and will generate more revenue. (Unless, of course, it's
a rainy year.) ¥1e did, however, budget a $42,126 loss for 1984.
The non-operating loss of $6,876 will be off-set by interest earnings
posted at the end of the year.
Sewer Fund
As of March 31, 1984, the Sewer Fund had an operating loss of $29,682.
Revenues are up significantly over budget because we raised rates after
adopting the budget. Ue figured we would have $459,685 in revenues with
the rate increase. One-fourth of this is 114,921. Thus, we would be
about $2000 below our targeted revenues - which is pretty close. With
the rate increase, we still projected a net loss of $98,390. Again, we
are close to projections.
Pg. 1375
ASSETS
CITY OF MOUND, MIIINESOTA
WATER FUND
BALANCE SHEET
AS OF HARCH 31, 1984
Current Assets
Cash
Accounts receivable - billed
- unbilled
Inventory
Due from other funds-interdepartment
labor
Restricted Assets
Cash
Special assessments
Special assessments
Special assessments
receivable-current
receivable-delinquent
receivable-deferred
Fixed assets less accumulated depreciation
Total Assets
$ 74,874
88,755
31,875
6,477
4,045
206,026
2,062
5,'745
2,429
10,129
$ 20,365
$1,734,150
$1,960,541
LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY
Current liabilities
Accounts payable
Accrued interest
on bonds
Long-Term liabilities
Benefits payable
Bonds payable
Total Liabilities
Fund equity
Contributed assets
Retained earnings
Total Fund Equity
Total Liabilities and
Fund Equity
27,731
6,237
$ 33,968
$ 4,227
251,000
$ 255,227
$ 289,195
$ 1,450
1,669,896
$1,671,346
$1,960,541
CITY OF MOUND, MINHESOTA
WATER FU,~t D
STATEMENT OF REVEHUES OVER EXPEHSES
AS OF HARCtt 31, 1984
Operating Revenues
Water sales
Sale of meters and outside readers
Penalties
Charges for services
Sprinkler charges
Total Operating Revenues
Operating Expenses Personal services
Supplies and repair materials
Professional services
Communications
Transportation
Printing and legal publication
Insurance
Utilities
Repair and maintenance
Logis
Other contractual services
Depreciation
Miscellaneous
Total operating expenses
Operating income (loss)
'Non-Operating Revenues (expenses)
Taxes, penalties and interest
Water connection fee
Interest on assessments
Interest on debt
Paying agent fee
Hiscellaneous ~
Total non-operating revenue
Net Income (loss)
Retained earnings - January 1
Add back depreciation on continued assets
Retained earnings - Harch 31,
1984
BUDGET
$ 250,000
$ 100,055
33,151
5,450
2,525
200
100
10,540
44,255
33,050
5,520
5,OOO
36,180
67O
276,696
26,696)
(15,745)
( 11o)
S(15,855)
$(42,551)
IST qUARTER
BUDGET
62,500
ACTUAL
25,014
8,288
1,362
631
5O
25
2,635
11,064
8,262
1,380
1,250
9,045
168
$ 69,174
$(6,674)
(3,936)
( 28)
$ (3,964)
$(10,638)
54,779
1,920
2,040
1,731
89
$ 60,559
25,276
8,215
5,349
688
0
38
2,548
6,23O
8,302
1,195
6O8
9)520
7
$ 67,976
$( 7,417)
$ 35
5oo
1,213
( 8,797)
( 107)
28O
$( 6,876)
$( 14,293)
$1,684,139
5O
$1,669,896
Pn 1~77
CITY OF MOUND, MIrINES0TA
SEWER FUND
BALA~ICE SHEET
AS OF MARCH 31, 1984
ASSETS
Current Assets
Cash
Accounts receivable - ~tWCC
Accounts receivable - customers
Fixed Assets Less accumulated depreciation
Total Assets
$ 320,090
499,864
62,445
882,399
3,O27,O91
3,909,490
LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY
Current Liabilities
Accounts payable - SAC
Accounts payable .- insurance
Accounts payable - MWCC
Accounts payable - other
Due to other fund - interdepartment labor
Long-Term Liabilities Benefits payable
Total Liabilities
Fund Equity
Contributed assets
Retained earnings
Total Fund Equity
Total Liabilities And Fund Equity
$ 421
2,555
9,995
99
5,981
19,051
11,405
30,456
3,625
3,875,409
3,879,O34
3,909,490
CITY OF MOLIHD, MINNESOTA
SEWER FUND
STATEMENT OF REVENUES OVER EXPENSES
AS OF MARCH 31, 1984
1984
BUDGET
1st Quarter
Budget
Actual
Operating Revenues
Sewer sales - billed
Sewer sales - unbilled
Penalties
Total Operating Revenues
S
$ 358,O36
89,509
48,448
62,445
2,O4O
5 112,933
Operating Expenses Personal services
Supplies and repair materials
Professional services
Communications
Printing - legal publications
Insurance
Utilities
Repair - Haintenance
Logis
Disposal charges
Hiscellaneous
Depreciation
Other contractual services
64,360
9.864
3,250
1,775
25O
6,210
27,575
10,7OO
5,520
402,307
35O
52,840
17,OOO*
5
16,090
2,466
812
444
63
l, 553
6,894
2,675
1,380
1 OO, 577
87
13,210
4,250
14,080
1,O14
86
688
2,555
6,050
3,309
864
1OO,577
102
13,29o
O
Total Operating Expenses
Operating income (loss)
5 602,001
5(243,965)
5 15o,5ol
S(60,992)
5 142,615
5(29,682)
Non-operating Revenue
Taxes
Permits
Connection Charges
Interest from HWCC
Miscellaneous
104
75
5OO
3,857
27
Total non-operating revenue
Net income (loss)
5 3o,0oo
$(213,965)
5 7,5oo
5(53,492)
$ 4,563
$(25,119)
Retained earnings - January
3,900,403
Add back depreciation on contributed
assets
Retained earnings - March 31
125
53,875,409
* Lift station renovation to be capitalized.
CITY of
MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
DATE: May 1, 1984
TO: Jon
FROH: Sharon
RE: Liquor 1st Quarter Report
I honestly don't know what else I can tell you at this point about the reduction
in gross profit that you don't already know. As I said, the gross profit for
this quarterly report is an estimate - based totally on prior year performance.
If this is at all accurate, though, you can see it decreased 2.91% from last
year.
On Harch 19, 1984, I tried to see what kind of mark-ups ~els was using. I looked
specifically at liquor - trying to determine where exactly or if a cut in mark-ups
of a few high-volume items could make the difference in gross profit. The most
I could attribute to this was a couple thousand dollars, and since I don't know
what Nels was selling thege items for in 1983, I can't even say this for sure.
In other words, there are no records that allow me to give you a specific reason
for the reduction in gross profit. I have suggested to t~els that, maybe, these
records could be kept though (even without a computer.) He keeps manual inventory
records that could incorporate selling prices without too much additional time.
I guess I still think that Hound will need to change its approach somewhat.
need to buy in larger quantities, get better prices, and then sell at better prices.
But we'll need to advertise that we are doing this. It needs to be a complete
turn--about in the reputation of our store.
¥!hat we'll need our new manager to explore for us, is how much quantity, thus space,
this will take. Haybe Hound could never support the quantity necessary to sell at
warehouse prices. This is something someone familiar with discounts available and
what size lots are necessary to take advantage of these prices would be.
On the June 30, 1984 report, what I will do will be to break down the gross profit
by liquor, wine and beer. ¥1e started keeping records on this in 1983 so we can do
this. For what it is worth, I broke this down for 1983. This is before discount
is given on wine and beer which only amounted to $2131 in 1983. This info will be
more useful when used as a comparison in June.
1983 LIQUOR
Sales
Cost Goods Sold
Gross Profit
% Gross Profit to Sales
Wine Liquor Beer Hix & Misc.
105,866.OO $ 246,526.13 $ 328,691.60 $ 15,506.99
81,800.85 195,394.61 254,093.55 15,357.07
24,065.15 51,131.52 74,598.05 ( 149.92)
22.73% 20.74% 22.69%
CITY Of HOUND, HINNESOTA
.LIQUOR FUND
COHPARATIVE BALAHCE SHEET
March.31, 1984, 1983, 1982
ASSETS
Current Assets
Cash
Petty cash
Accounts receivable
Due from other funds
Inventory
Property and Equipment
Less: Accumulated depreciation
Total Assets
1984
$ 42,938
925
0
0
89,580
133,443
59,224
(50,526)
8,698
142,141
LIABILITIES AND RETAINED EARHIHGS
1983
$ 105,665
925
0
O
97,218
$ 203,808
$ 57,509
(49,005)
$ 8,504
$ 212,312
'~;]982
$ 180,004
925
5,375
3,88O
'74,37O
$i_264,554
$ 57,509
(46,365)
$ 11,144
$ 275,698
Liabilities
Accrued salaries
Accrued benefits
Accounts payable
Retained earnings
Total liabilities and
retained earnings
$ 0
10,643
6,667
$ 17,310
$ 124,831
$ 142~,141
$ 1,101
11,857
2,887
$ 15,845
$ 196,467
$ 212,312
2,683
o, 288
3,209
$ 16,180
$ 259,518
$ 275,698
Pg. 1381
CITY OF MOUND, ~.~INNE'SOTA
LIQUOR FUND
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSE AND CHANGES IN KETAINED EAKNINGS
QUARTERS ENDED MARCH 1984, ]983, and 1982
Quarter Ended
~tarch 31, 1984
Quarter Ended
March 31, 1983
Quarter Ended
March 31, 1982
Sales
Li.quor
Wine
Beer
Misc.
Total Sales
$ 51,856 $ 50,031
21,472 22,798
73,328 $ 72,829
66,550~' 61,919
2,551 2,004
142,429 $ 136,752
80,353
62,566
2,899
Cost of Good Sold
Gross Profit
Percent of Gross Profit to Sales
$ 110,526(1) $ 102,152(2)
$ 31,903 $ 34,600
22.39% 25.30%
107,177(3)
38,641
26.50%
Operating Expenses
Operating Income
29,544 $ 31~244
2,359 $ 3,356
$ 32,417
$ 6,224'
Other Revenue (expense)
Commi.ssions
Check processing fees
Cash over (short)
Refunds
Other
$ 65 $ 50
45 71
(11) .17
(253) (548)
(9)
62
(43)
(1,209)
Total other expenses
$ (1 54). $ (419)
$ , 56)
Net Income Before Tranfers
$ '.2,20~ $ 2,937
$ 5,068
Transfer to other funds
Net Income (loss)
After Transfers
Retained Earnings January 1
Retained Earnings t~arch 31
$ 2,205 $ 2,937
$ 122,626 $ 193,530
$ 124,831 $ 196,467
$ 5,068
$ 254~450
$ 259,518
(2)
(3)
This is an estimated number based on the December 31, 1983 Percentage of
Gross Profit to Sales.
This is an estimated number based on the December 31, 1982 Percentage of
Gross Profit to Sales.
This is an estimated number based on the December 31, 1981 Percentage of
Gross Profit to Sales.
CITY OF t~0UND, HINtlESOTA
LIQUOR FUtlD
COt~PARATIVE STATEt~ENT OF OPERATING
QUARTER ERODED MARCH 31 , 1984, 1983,
EXPENSES
AND 1982
Operating Expenses Salaries
Office supplies
Copy machine
General operating supplies
Audit and financial
Postage
Telephone
Use of personal auto
Printing
Publications
Vlorkers compensation
General liability insurance
Utilities
Equipment repair
Bui]ding repair
Land and Landscape
Building rent
Central equipment rent
Other contractual
Janitorial
Depreciation
Write-.off NSF checks
tliscellaneous
1984 Quarter Quarter
Budget Ended Ended
March 31, 1984 -ttarch 31, 1983
$ 94,607 $ 21,288
426 71
600 7
2,600 257'
2,000 86
150 14
1,450 395
120 44
3OO 0
0 59
1,135 173
17,000 2,OOO
6,670 1,516
5OO 8O
I,O00 0
100 15
11,350 2,124
3,8OO 599
400 89
1,600 3~1
1,500 359
3oo o
710 27
$ 21,899
0
21
144
190
2
219
5
273
75
2O7
2,364
1,6O4
0
o
2,190
97.2 ·
89
403
366
0
3O
Quarter
Ended
-March 31, 1982
$ 18,522
0
84
402
599
67
159
17
144
o
227
6,942
1,089
135
57
o
2)241
574
0
4oo
758
0
0
Total Operating Expenses $ 148,318 $ 29,544 $ 3l,'244 $ 32,417.
SUBJECT:
INTEROFFICE
Jon Elam, City ~nager
William Hudson, Acting Chief of Police
Intoxilyzer
MEMO
DATE May l0
19
The State of Minnesota, Department of Public Safety, will be replacing
all of our old Smith and Wesson 900-A Breathalyzers with a new Intoxi-
lyzer 5000. A majority of our officers have already been retrained on
the new Intoxilyzer and we expect delivery in June of 1984.
Prior to delivery, a resolution is needed from the City council. This
resolution is in reference to a lend/lease agreement for the Intoxilyzer
5000. Information from the State of Minnesota regarding the lend/lease
agreement is attached.
Po. 1384
BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSION
1246 UNIVERSITY AVENUE
ST, PAUL, MINNESOTA 55104~,197
TELEPHONE: 296-2662
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF' PUBI..IC SAFETY
Enclosed you will find five copies of the agreement for the lend-lease of an
Intoxilyzer 5000, copies of a sample resolution, and if applicable forms and
information relating to old Breathalyzer equipment. This agreement is the
mechanism through which we will be able to place a new infrared breath testing
instrument and simulator with your law enforcement agency.
These instruments have been purchased with money from a federal highway and
traffic safety grant and from a State of Minnesota Legislative appropriation
of matching funds. We are distributing the testing instruments in a manner
similar to the program under which we have in the past distributed preliminary
breath test instruments.
To complete this paperwork, your county board or city council will first
need to pass a resolution similar to the sample resolution provided. Once
this is done the remainder of the agreement can be completed. Instructions
on the sample resolution and agreement are also enclosed.
It is our hope that you will find this approach to providing breath testing
equipment agreeable. If you have questions about the paperwork or the
equipment, please contact our Breath Testing Section at 612-296-7940. We
are prepared to assist you in any manner necessary to complete the process.
Sincerely,
Lowell C. Van Berkom
Forensic Laboratory Director
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Pg. 1385
AGREEMENT FOR THE LOAN OF INTOXILYZER 5000 EVIDENTIAL BREAIH ALCOHOL TEST
INSTRUMENTS
THIS AGREEMENT, MADE AND ENTERED INTO by and between the State of Minnesota,
Department of Public Safety (hereinafter referred to as "DPS") and the local
government unit(s) designated as "Recipient" on page 3 of this agreement (here-
inafter referred to as "Recipient").
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS DPS has received grants and or appropriations of money for the
purchase of Intoxilyzer 5000 breath test instruments, and breath alcohol
simulators; and
WHEREAS DPS desires to provide a mechanism through which local law enforce-
ment agencies may use these breath test instruments to assist them in the de-
tection of drivers who are in violation of Minnesota laws relating to traffic
and highway safety, or for other law enforcement applictions,
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED BY AND BETWEEN the parties hereto as follows:
I. DPS' Responsibilities.
A. DPS shall make available to Recipient an Intoxilyzer 5000 evidential
breath test instrument and a breath alcohol simulator specified on page 3 of
this agreement.' Recipient will use and have possession of these instruments;
but DPS shall retain title and legal ownership of the instruments.
B. Any and all re~airs shall be made by or at the direction of DPS. If
funding is available, DPS will pay for the cost of maintenance and repair or
replacement due to normal wear and tear resulting frOm routine, proper use of
the instruments.
C. DPS will maintain all necessary state and federal inventory control
records on these instruments.
II. Recipient's Responsibilities.
A. Recipient shal! u~e the instruments specified on page 3 of this agree-
ment to assist in enforcing Minnesota laws and local ordinances and for other
law enforcement applications.
B. Recipient shall keep and maintain the instruments in proper operating
condition. Recipient shall supply all disposable components for the instru-
ments at Recipient's expense.
C. Recipient will be responsible for the cost of repairing or replacing
instruments which, in the opinion of the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, have
been damaged due to abuse, misuse or other cause outside the scope of normal
wear and tear in routine proper L,se. Recipient will also be responsible for
the costs of maintenance and repair resulting from normal wear and tear in
rootine proper use of these instruments if funding for such maintenance and
repair is not made available to DPS.
D. The instruments shall be made available for use by any breath test
operator certified by the State of'Minnesota.
-1-
E. Recipient shall not permit the instruments to be operated or tampered
with by individuals who are not trained in their operation and certified by DPS
as Intoxilyzer 5000 operators.
F. Recipient shall make the instruments available to authorized personnel
when required for inventory or inspection purposes.
G. Recipient shall cede to DPS the Breathalyzer 900 and 900A instruments
described on page 3 of this agreement, which DPS may dispose of through trade,
sale, or other means, it being agreed that any proceeds of such disposition
shall be retained by the State of Minnesota.
III. Term of Agreement.
This Agreement shall take effect on the date of final approval by the
Commissioner of Finance and remain in effect until terminated by either of
the parties as provided in section IV.
IV. Termination.
This agreement may be terminated by either DPS or Recipient with or without
cause upon sixty (60) days written notice to the other party. In the event of
such termination, Recipient shall return the instruments to the Bureau of
Criminal Apprehension Laboratory within thirty (30) days after the termination
of this Agreement. If Recipient fails to return the instruments within this
time period, Recipient may be assessed the cost of the instruments.
V. Assignment.
Recipient shall neither assign nor transfer any rights or obligations under
this Agreement without the prior written consent of DPS.
VI. Liability.
Recipient agrees to indemnify and save and hold the State of Minnesota, its
agents, and its employees harmless from any and all claims arising from the use
of the Intoxilyzer 5000 'Instrument or from the performance of this Agreement by
Recipient or Recipient's agents or employees.
VII. Relationship of Parties.
Neither Recipient nor Recipient's agents or employees are to be considered
to be agents of DPS or to be engaged in any joint venture or enterprise with
DPS, and nothing herein shall be construed to create such a relationship.
-2-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto, intending to be bound hereby, have
caused this Agreement to be duly executed.
RECIPIENT: City
for Installation at
INTOXILYZER 5000
Serial Number
State asset number
MARK II A SIMULATOR
Serial number
State asset number
OF Mound
Nound PD
64-0261
529699
M-008232
529884
Description of Equipment ceded to the
State of Minnesota:
Breathalyzer 900A S/N 381811
RECIPIENT:
By:
Title:
Date:
By:
Title:
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSION LABORATORY.
Recommended for Approval:
Title:
Date:
Lowell C. Van Berkom
Forensic Laboratory Director
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
By:
Title:
Date:
Approved as to Form and Execution:
ATTORNEY GENERAL:
By:
Date:
COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION:
By:
Authorized Signature
Date:
APPROVED
COMMISSIONER OF FINANCE:
By:
Date: Date:
A certified copy of the resolution must be attached authorizing the City of
Mound to enter into this Agreement and authorizing the
and to execute this
Agreement.
-3-
Pg. 138~
Dow-Sat of Minnesota, Inc.
2381 Wilshire
Mound, MN 55364
(612) 472-6394
May 11, 1984
Mr. Jon Elam
City Manager
City of Mound
5341Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota
55364
Dear Jon:
First, let me apologize for not getting this letter to you two
weeks ago.
With your initial permission, we attached a channel 4 & 5 antenna
to the city water tower located two blocks east of our office.
Our purpose in doing this was to attempt to get a clearer picture
on these two channels. At our own tower location, we have had
continual problems with electrical interference in our low-band
channels.
The problems with channel 5 was getting significantly worse, so
I decided to try to get a better signal by attaching to the city's
water tower. The reception has improved considerably, so we would
like to work with the City on leasing space for our antenna on the
water tower. We discussed the figure of $15.00 per month as a
fair lease rate, which is fine with us.
By using the &ity's water tower, I believe we can stay away from
our 40 foot extension to our existing tower that we had planned.
Jon, you will be getting a letter from our corporate insurance com-
pany, Johnson & Higgins, regarding our coverage on the water tower
antenna.
On another note, we have started construction on the Lake Minnetonka
project. Our crews started with the Minnetrista/Shorewood Island
extension. From there, we will mo~e to the West of Mound along County
Road 110, and then North on County Road 110 in Minnetrista. From
there, we will extend into Spring Park, West Crystal Bay, and Minne-
tonka Beach.
Pg. 13~6
Page 2
Two additiona! headends are planned, one in Long Lake, which
will serve, Long Lake, Orono, Wayzata, and part of Medina.
Should Maple Plain make the correct decision, and choose Dow-Sat,
we would serve them from Long Lake also.
Our other headend site is in Excelsior, and will serve that entire
region, including Chanhassen and Victoria.
Mound will be interconnected to the entire system, so we will see
some exciting interconnect possibilities available.
Thank you for your cooperation. It is a pleasure to work here.
Sincerely,
Stuart V. Gibson
Director of Engineering
SVG:cj
Pg. 1390
· ,.-,--.---,,--- .......... Pq. 1391
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
TO:
FROH:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Jon Elam, City Manager
Chris Bollis, Park Director
May 16, 1984
Quotations on new truck
Attached are the quotes I obtained for the purchase of a
new truck for the Park Department.
The truck is a Chevy-S-lO equipped as shown. Thurk Bros.
Chevrolet at St. Bonifacius supplied us with the lower
price. I recommend that we purchase the truck from them.
Chris Bollis
CB/ms
Pg. 1392
Ecrm', ~ ST. 'BONIFACI~, MN 55375
, NO. . DATE
BUSINESS
Ci~, ~ATE & ZIP PHONE~
YEAR
implied, Including ~ny Implied wsrranty of ~erchantebility or fitnes~ for ·
~lcul~r ~urpose, ~nd we neither assume nor sutho¢izs any other person ~ ~ ..... "'
The Manufecturer'~ Warranty Is not affected by this disclsimer of Warran-
~ The only. Dealer ~arranty o0 this vehicle, is the Limited Warranty ,... . . . .
which is Issued wit~ and made a part ot tnls order Torm, - * '" .. '
Y~R MAKE OF ~/O ~ ' .........
SERIES ' ' TYPE "
SER, NO. TYPE ,
I CERTIFY THE ODOMETER READING ON MY ABOVE TRADE READ5
MILE[ T~E ODOMETER HAS ~ HAS NOT ~ EXCEEDED
BA~NCE OWED TO
ADDRESS =-:,-: -: . ,: : · ' ' ' Cash Price of Vehicle & Accessories: .'-' : . $
USED TRADE.IN ALLOWANCE :: : $ ';"
' STATE AND LOCAL TAXES ,..'; c. :,:': .... '.
BA~NCE OWED ON TRADE-IN
'" License, License Transfer. '
NETALLOWANCE ON USED TRADE-IN $
Title, R~istration Fee
DEPOSIT OR CREDIT BALANCE i .... TOTAL PRICE OF UNIT ,,·
CASH WITH ORDER I$
,., ~ IT.ANS~ERRED FROM L~FT~ $
TOTAL CREDIT '¢.ANSr[. T0 me.TCO~U~N) $ ~'...- ~' TOTAL CREDIT ~ .. COLUMN ...... ~ ,~/ .
MEMO.' UNPAID CASH BALANCE DUE ON DELWERY $";
Purchaser agrees that this Order includes ell of the terms and conditions on both the face and reverse side hereof, that this Order cancels and supers~es
any prior agreement and es of the date hereof comprls~ the complete and exclusive ~atement of the terms of the agr~ment relating to the subi~t
metter~ cover~ hereby, and that
THIS ORDER SHALL NOT BECOME BINDING UNTIL ACCEPTED BY DEALER OR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.
Purchaser by his execution of this Order ecknowledg~ that he he~ read its terms and conditions and has received a true copy of th;~ Order.
PURCHASER'S SIGNAleR / ~ ~ ~ ' ~- -~
- (DEALER) - (NAME AND TITLE)
"THANK YOU - WE APPRECIATE YOUR BUSINESS
DUPLICATE ,:: ~/:',,L ORDER FO~ A r,.~OTO;~ VFH' ' c
Pg. 1393
ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS .... ..: ... ~,
1. As used in this Order, the terms {a} "Seller" shah mean the authorized Dealer to whom this Order is addressed ~nd Who shall
become a party hereto by its accept~n~ hereof, (b) "Purchaser" shall mean the pa~y executing this Order as such on the face hereof,
(c) "Msnufacturer" shaJl ~eag tt!e Company. that manufactured the vehicle or chassis, it being understood by Purchaser and Seller
. ,.~l~ri[- ~ tn no_ resFect.~ the agent of Manufacturer. , that Seller and Purchaser.,. are. t~e sole p~r~es to.~th~s-Order, , . and~ that. reference. -.,
~anuf~[~[ h.e~e~.¢.~s~.or.~be p~pos~ of exp~ammggener,ll~ce~,~n contractual re~at~onsh~p~xmtmg De~0n Selt~ and Man~,ac,ure,
,~lth'res ecttor, ewmotor~hices - - ,"- - ~,' , '*' ' '. '~ "-' - ...... ~
-2,-'- Manuf~ctu?~r'has reseT~.t~e ~ht to chah~-th~:pri~:td:.Dea]erTof ne~ motor vehicles without nob~._In , · . ......
to Dealer of new motor ventc[es of the s~r~es arid booy t~ order~ hereunder ~s changed by Manufacturer pr~or to dehvery of the new
..,~or vehicle etd.red h~reunder ~o Purch,..er, O,~,er rese~eo.~th~ [~g.., to'change 1he casff dehv~red' ph~:of ~uch
.... Pfrbh~r-~cfio}d~n~lg.'If ~-~h'd~Hv~'~d p'~ic~ is ihcr~ by D~hier, Purchaser ~ay;.'if dissatisfied therewith; canal ~is'dr~j
3. If the ~sed motor vehic~e.y,'hJ¢3, ha~.Ge~_tra~ed l'~ 9~.a. Pa~'~f the consideration fd~ the motor vehicle 6reered hereun~e¢
to be delivered to De~ier untie de.livery ~o rurch~ser of stroh ~oto~ehicle, the used motor vehicle sh~l' Be reappraise~' ~t ~-~i~-e-:~d'~.
ei towar~ce therefor shown on the from'c~ this Order;-Purqh~ser may,-if.di~¢at;sf[ed tHerewit?t cancel this eider.;
ever, that such rieht to cancel is, exe~ c~50d pr'io~ to.the d~,{V~ ry'o~ th~ ~o~;~h~C~e-o.rdered ~e~eun~.;.o. th~ Purc~s~E
4, Purchaser sgrces to d~{~vgr ;~ D~d~r s~sf~ctcr~ ev{de~ of title to any used motor vehic{e traded in as a part of the consid ....
e~don for th~ motor vshide c~d0red he)eun~r ~r the time 7~ ~elivery. 6f s~h us0d ~Sotor vehicle ~o Dealer. Phrch~se~-warrants
such used mozor vehicle to be his property free.~nd clear of sll liens and encumbrances except as otherwise noted herein, ' ' - :~'..,,:'"-
-' 5. Unless this OrOershsH have Been canfielted b~'Pur~haser under an~ in accordance with t~e provisions of paragraph'2 or 3
Dealer ~hall have the.rieht, upon failure or refusal of Purchaser to accept d~l[veeY 6f'tfie motor vehicle orde'~ed'~reund~ an.d't~complg~.~
with tl~e terms of this Order, to retain as liquid~tcd damages ahy cash,deposit made by Purchaser ...... : ... ,. .: :[: ~..
Manufsctumr has reset'ed the right to change the des[gn..~f any new motor ~hicle; chassis, a~ssories or-p3rts t~reof at
~ without notice and without bSiig~'n~e m~e';th~;.~ame c[ any. s rnilar_cba~$e_.Vpo~, any.~otgr~h~Je,.c~i~,~p~essories or
parts thereof previously purchased by or'sh.p.p~d "to Deal~; or being manufactured or sold in-:ac~rdance with Dealer~sZ~f~r~
any s~mi~ar change, in eny- motor vehicle,"cha~sis; acc~ssorie~ or pa~s thereof co~ered by this Order ei~h~ before or subseq~z~od~-F.-
livery thereof ~c Purchaser7-......;__ .' -2.-. :. ' .... · '.._ :-:. z.' ,-. .
' . ' '-. : _ ... ,'r-:,. ?.3- :Z;.', ~ ~ ~-~l ~'~:--,: ~,
7. Dealer shall n:~t be liable for failure to deliveror de~ay in delivering the motor vehicle cover~d by this Order Where'-such''fa~'r~'
cr delay is due, in whole or in pert, to any cause beyond the control or-wi~h~u{"th¢~lt or h'e'gllgenbe'0CDeater. :~---: ..... ::;' T;'. ....
"- ~ ~n~ ~ri~ for the motor vehicte specified on the face of this Order includes reimbursement for Federal Excise taxes,
chaser assumes and agrees to pay, unlesS.prohibited by law, any such'sales, use or occupational-taxes imposed on or applicable~othe-
t~ans~bt~oh
by
this
Order,
regardless
of
which
-~ ~:' . ,-_
9. ~e Purchaser, before'hr ~ the time df deli,(~rv d,f the motor vehicle covered bv this Order wiJl execute such other forms.of
5g,'eemont or documents as may be required by the ~erms a~d conditions'of payment indicated on the front of this Order; ..........
. ,-:.
10. DEALER SHALL NoT BE LIABLE' FOR ANY INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES TO PROPERTy; iN-
CLUDINg BUT NOT LIMITED TO DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF USE, LOSS OF TIME, LOSS OF FROFIT OR INCOMS, OR ANY
PO~C-H-~SE
CONTRACT
Stock #.
Date
(First)' ~ J /' ,", -..~
(First) ~ '~:'
PHONE: 47~-5444
-,. City:.. -
(Middle)
State::.~ " ' County:
Buyer Name: (Last)
Co-Buyer Name: (Last)
· !, ; - .?.
Address . , ,, .- ~? .r,y, , '
, t ,, ~," :-rr ~.
Nome Phone::'~' / / ' "/ ",-' ( ~ "Bus. Phone
Buyer D.L. #
Buyer DOB:, Co-Buyer DOB: . '"
Co-Buyer D.L. #
Buyers Insurance Co.
PLEASE ENTER MY ORDER FOR:
Policy #
New [] Used ~ Demo [] as follows:
ILIEN HOLDER NAME:
I. IEN HOLDER ADDRESS:
YEAR ' ' ' IMAKE": IM°DEL II BODY ~ ~TRANSMISSION ICOLOR JlNTERIOR
ION OR AaOUT
BASE PRICE OF VEHICLE INCLUDING FREIGHT $ VEHICLE PRICE $
FACTORY INSTALLED OPTIONS DEALER INSTALLED OPTIONS
TRADE-IN DATA
Year
Serial Number,
Lic. No.
Color
Mileage Now
Lien-holder Name
Lien-holder Address
Pay-Off Now $.
Estimated Re-Con· S
Make, .' Model.
Title Number.
_State Expires
Body · Transmission
Estimate Mileage @ Delivery
Estimate Pay-Off @ Delivery $.
Body S.
Mech·
The front and back of thi~ CONTRACT comprise the enlire CONTRACT affecting this purchase. The
DEALER wdi not recognize any verbal agreement, or any other agreement or understanding of any nature. I
certify that no cred*t has been extended to me for the purct~ase of this motor VEHICLE except as appears in
writing on t~e face ot this CONTRACT.
The terms of this CONTRACT were agreed upon and the CONTRACT si~nedin this dealership on the date
noted al top of lhis form. II YOU are arranging credit for ME, this CONTRACT is not valid until a credil
d;sclosure is made as d'-'~crlbed in Regulation Z and I have accepled Ihe credit extended.
TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE
Trade-In Or Discount (-)
TOTAL TAXABLE SALE
Sales Tax
License Fee & Exp. Date ( )
Title Fees
Lien Registration Fee
Document Administration Fee
SUB-TOTAL $
Cash Down Payment
Cash on Delivery:
Total Down Payment
Plus Pay-Off (+)
AMOUNT DUE ON DELIVERY $
IMPORTANT: I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS MAY BE A BINDIHG
CONTRACT AND I MAY LOSE ANY DEPOSITS IF I DO NOT
PERFORM ACCORDING TO ITS TERMS.'
DEALER'S DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTY
Any warranties on the VEHICLE sold are those of the manufacturer. As between
YOU (the DEALER1 and ME (the BUYER) the VEHICLE is being sold "AS IS.*' I am
taking the enfi~e risk as to the quality and peHormance of the VEH!CLI:
understand that YOU expressly disclaim all warranties, either express or ~mpI
including any imphed warranty of merchantability or fdness 10r a paft:cu
purpose and Ihat YOU neither assume nor authorize any other person to assur',~
fo~ YOU any I~abilny m connechon with the sale of the VEHICLE. YOUR 0isc~aime? m
no way affects the to:ms 0l the manufacturer's warrant),, if any. I recehed tbs
iM0rmah0n belore the sale
I HAVE ALSO READ PARAGRAPHS 10 and 11 ON THE BACK OF THIS CONTRACT.
~uyer s SIgqature
X Bate Pg. 139~
ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
1. Definitions: As used in this CONTRACT: "1", "ME", or "MY" means the buyer and co-buyer. "YOU" or "YOUR" means the
seller or dealer, "VEHICLE" means the car, truck, or other VEHICLE described on the front of this CONTRACT including all the
options listed. "Manufacturer" means the company which makes the VEHICLE. "Trade-In" means the car, truck, motorcycle or
other VEHICLE which I trade to YOU in partial payment I0r the vehicte.-
urpose: By signing the CONTRACT, I agree to buy the VEHICLE from YOU. By accepting this CONTRACT, YOU agree to
the VEHICLE to ME if the VEHICLE is in YOUR inventory. If the VEHICLE is not in YOUR inventory, YOU agree to order the
IICLE from the manufacturer, and after receiving the VEHICLE from the manufacturer, to deliver the VEHICLE to ME.
3. Price Changes by the Manufacturer: I understand that the VEHICLE price stated on the other side of this CONTRACT is
based on the current prices the manufacturer charges YOU, and that at any'time before YOU receive the VEHICLE from the
manufacturer, the manufacturer has the right to raise the price it charges to YOU. I also understand'that if the manufacturer does
raise the price, YOU may raise the price to ME by the same amount, and that if YOU do raise YOUR price, I may cancel the
CONTRACT and get back any downpayment I have made. If YOU have not already sold the Trade-In (See Paragraph 4), I may
have the Trade-In back by paying YOU the reasonable cost of storage and any repair work or reconditioning YOU may have
done.
4. Trade-In: I understand that if I am using a Trade-In to partially pay for the VEHICLE, I may deliver the Trade-in to YOU either
when I sign this CONTRACT or when the VEHICLE is ready for ME to pick up. If I do.not deliver the Trade-In to YOU when I sign
this CONTRACT, I agree that at the time I deliver the Trade-In, YOU may reinspect the Trade-In and lower the allowance stated
on the front of this CONTRACT. If YOU do lower the allowance, I may cancel this CONTRACT and get back my cash
downpayment, .
I also understand that if I deliver the Trade-In when I sign this CONTRACT, YOU may sell the Trade-In at any time and at any
price YOU think proper. If I use paragraph 3 to cancel this CONTRACT and YOU have already sold the Trade-In, YOU will pay
ME the price YOU received for the Trade-In minus 15% commission, minus any money YOU spent repairing, storing, insuring,
or advertising the Trade-In.
5. Trade-In -- MY Responsibilities: At the time I deliver the Trade-In to YOU, I agree to guarantee that I own the Trade-In free
and clear and to furnish proper proof of ownership, inc~udin9 the Certificate of Title or other evidence of ownership.
6. MY Refusal to Take Delivery: ,.Unless this CONTRACT is non-binding because YOU are arranging credit for ME, or unless I
'e cancelled this CONTRACT pursuant to paragraphs 3 and 4, I understand that YOU may retain the cash downpayment I
given YOU as an offset to YOUR damages if I refuse to complete MY purchase. I also understand that I may be responsible
for any other damages which YOU may incur as a result of MY failure to perform my obligations under the terms Of this
CONTRACT. If I have delivered the .Trade-In to YOU at the time I signed this CONTRACT, YOU may retain the Trade-In and sell it
to reimburse YOURSELF for the expenses of repairing, storing, or reconditioning the Trade-In and for other expenses or losses
YOU may incur as a result of MY failure to perform MY obligations under this CONTRACT.
7. Design Changes by the Manufacturer: I Understand that the manufacturer has the r!ghtto change the design of theVEHICLE,
its chassis, its parts or accessories at any time without notice to YOU or to ME. In the event of a change in design, YOU have no
duty to ME except to deliver the VEHICLE as made by the manufacturer.
8. Delays in Delivery: I understand that YOU are not responsible for delays in delivery caused by the manufacturer, or by
accidents, fires, or other causes beyond YOUR control. I also understand that YOU do not control the manufacturer and are not
part of the manufacturer and do not work for the manufacturer.
9. Taxes: I understand that the price of the VEHICLE includes Federal Taxes, but not State Sales or Excise Taxes or any other
tax or governmental fee. I also understand that I must pay YOU the proper amount of any sales or excise tax or other
governmental fee which applies to this sale.
10. New VEHICLE Disclaimer of Warranties: I understand that it I am buying a new VEHICLE, the VEHICLE will come with a
manufacturer's warranty which is a promise from the manufacturer directly to ME and that YOU expressly disclaim any and all
warranties, express or implied, including any implied warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. I also
understand that YOU make no guarantees of any kind about the VEHICLE's condition or performance and that once I take
delivery, I have complete responsibility and all the risk for any problems with the VEHICLE.
11. Used VEHICLE Disclaimer of Warranties: I understand that if I am purchasing a used VEHICLE, YOU expressly disclaim any
warranties, express or implied, including any implied warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. I also
~derstand that YOU make no guarantees of any kind about the VEHICLE's condition or performance and that once I take
~ivery, I have complete responsibility and all the risk for any problems with the VEHICLE.
12. Dealer Warranty or Service Contract: I understand that if YOU offer a limited warranty on a used VEHICLE or I purchase an
extended service contract on a new or used VEHICLE, YOU may not disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or
fitness for a particular purpose and the disclaimer on the front side of this ORDER will not apply.
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 5536,
(612) 472-1155
May 17, 1984
TO: Jon Elam
FROM: Greg Skinner
SUBJECT: Tanker
The Public Works Department has two quotations for a used 2,500 gal. water
tanker. At the present time all departments are sharing a 1,000 gal. tanker
which is causing delays in work that could be done in other areas at the time.
This will be explained in greater detail at the Council meeting on May 22.
The two quotations are as followed:
Engle Fabrication, Inc. proposes a 2,500 gal. stainless tank with
a 10 year warrenty, painted, pump mounted, plumbing and a
1974 Ford single axle cab and chassis for $13,748.OO
Applied Concepts, Inc. proposes a 2,500 gal stainless steel tank,
1973 Ford single axle.Tank to be mounted on truck and painted
for $14,798.OO
Both quotations include removing pump from the City's 1,O00 tanker, mounting
and plumbing for new tank. ~ .... ----
We are in the process of getting a quotation for a P.T.o. unit with pump to
replace the pump on the City's 1,OOO tanker. The reason for this will be
explained at the Council meeting on May 22.
Respectfully,
Greg Skinner
Water & Sewer Supt.
GS/jc'n
Pq. 139~
SAUK CrNT~rl;
ENGLE FABRICATION, INC.,,
~ (~m e ..
kddress
SOUTN HIGHWAY 71
SAUK CENTRE. MN 563'78
Office Phone #(612) 352-675? or .
(612) 352-6553
..... '"Billing []
Order []
~;" /.'
.4.
Quotation
:/
~'oo8 ~'at Chsmi~at Induetriee.
Norb Beste- Sales Re~resentative
Home Phone t(6J2) 352-6896
~. !Ah' /'.:~ , /
Date //.'""".
Terms
Phone
,.p,o.i.,:~, REMARKS' " Labor Material:
I I
right
skirt
. n ~, ' "' ./.".../';,'ks'" ....
left skirt " -~ ~?-~/>/: 5~;:,'-' .;.;;x./,'~, ~ '4~4~-~ {I'~ ~ ~ "~ I ~W,d -'" -
right cot~lk -' i " I
!
I
left cot~lk ,? Z/ ':z~,,~ /~(j?~ ,d-.,'.~' ,~ ' I ~'~., j
right rear ponel / ~ ' -I
iz..: .... . ..
right light box } ' ... I I - -
left light box I I
"'I~i ~ ' ·
left~t panel '-- 5 ¥¥/~'0~. ~- I' I ...
4 ' ' , · , .....
left ladder'~,~ I .~.~ f; 'fCfL:'I-~Hi-
rlght step ~ .... :.~,,~ !
leftstepi~,' ~ I ~0~. oo I I
I'
outside
jacket
~ ~ t
I q'p o o"
rea? outside head 5,o j I I
~ronf outside hea '
I ~ ._
deck pl. ate t I I
I l
manhole cover J I t __
I !
dust cover
'gaskets I I
insulation I I
I I
cradle & subfm, I 1
cradle insulaHo I I
I 1
clean prime& pc I !
inside liner I I
I I
inside front hec .! !
I I
inside rear hea,
tank outlet tub~ I
I I
outlet tube bra
I I
[lights & wlrln[ I I
I
I !
k jacket bolts I ~ I , I]G~
,~ ~,./
~,~/ CONCEPTS, INC.
Specialized Metal Fabricating
MICK ENC;LE, President
South Highway 71 Office (612) $52-2132
Sauk Centre. MN ,$6378 Home {612) :352-2173
STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT
AMOUNT ENCLOSED $
~AI'E DES'CRIPTION ' CHARGES I CREDII'S BALANCE~'~
All delinquent accounts will be subiect to Legal, Collection or any
expenses incurred by th[s office to collect the debt. A finance charge
of' 1.5% per month (S1.00 minimum) will be made for all accounts thot
are 30 days old. Annual percentage rate is 18%.
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
To.: City Council
From: City Manager
Re: Adoption of LMCD code by reference.
When researching a property on Enchanted Road (Three Points) that
has installed six docks in front of it I discovered we really don't have
a mechanism to control this.
The neighbors are complaining because a number of these slips have
either been rented out or will be and parking problems are occurring,
etc.
LMCD requirements say you can have only one dock per 50 feet of
lakeshore. The owner lives in St. Paul and have 100 feet of lakeshore.
I've stayed clear of these private lakeshore issues referring
them to LMCD for prosecution, but they have referred it back to the
city as actually a city question because it is affecting city residents.
Thus if we are going to deal with-these kinds of questions then
we need to adopt the LMCD code ~y reference.
Is there agreement that we should do this?
Enclosed is a memo from Jan outlining more specifically our
enforcement problem.
Po. 1~9~
BILLS ....... MAY 22, 1984
Allstar Electric
Abdo, Abdo & Eick
Air Pneutronic Co
Anchor Paper
Holly Bostrom
Jan Bertrand
Borchert Ingersoll
Burl ington Northern
Blackowiak & Son
Bryan Rock Products
Contel
Conway Fire & Safety
Consol idated Micrograhpics
Copy Dupllcating Prod
Coast to Coast
John Ewa ld
Jon Elam
First Bank Mpls
Flexible Pipe Tool
Genuine Parts
G 1 enwood Ing 1 ewood
General Communications
Heiman Fi re Equip
Wm Hudson
Eugene Hickok & Assoc
Instrumentation Services
Thomas Jacobs
Kool Kube Ice
Lyman Lumber
LOGIS
The Laker
MN Dept of Public Safety
City of Minnetrista
Martins Navarre 66
Mpls Oxygen Co.
Mpls Star & Trib
McCombs Knutson
Mi nnegasco
N.C.E.
NW Bell Telephone
N.S.P.
Popham, Haik Schnobrich
Barry Palm
Brad Roy
Nels Schernau
Specialty Screening
Stevens Well Drilling
Sterne Electric
Tri State Pump
Village Chevrolet
Van Doren, Hazard, Stallings
I ,649.52
14.40
326.34
15O.OO
16.39
9O.77
533.33
56.OO
78.38
1,410.90
27.82
53.96
15.00
86.24
3.65
8.25
4.OO
8O. OO
76.07
48.90
1,9OO.O0
1,113.40
3.45
1,O19.74
141.18
63.75
72.00
42.47
2,287.53
247.30
4o.oo
50.o0
55.OO
21.OO
61.10
3,734.OO
1,158.O6
109.37
270.05
4,795.93
2,116.05
16.45
116.93
7.59
202.50
502.20
588.39
9,903.OO
63.OO
569.50
Wurst, Pearson,Hamilton
Water Products
Unitog
Xerox ~
Donald Bryce
Ron Burns--dock refund
Fran Clark
Robert Cheney
Director Property Tax
Joe Gibson
Griggs Cooper
Johnson Bros. Liq.
Robert Johnson
David Kurvers dock refund
Roger Keil " '~
MN Green Industry Expo 84
MN Re¢ & Park
City of Mound
Mound Fire Dept
Ed Phillips
Quality Wine
P.D.Q. gasoline
Dell Rudolph
State Treasurer
Wurst, Pearson
TOTAL BILLS
2,165.00
10.79
286.O9
1,110.O4
1OO.OO
77.OO
488.5O
367.00
27,611.47
30.00
2,475.69
3,873.25
192.16
75.OO
75.OO
15.oo
108.OO
39.18
7,978.40
2,623.13
2,642.64
1,483.31
248.80
15.OO
6,108.00
96,495.18
HINUTES OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNIN~ C0MMi$510N M~ETIN~
May 14, 1984
__Present were: Chairman Frank Weiland; Commissioners Robert Byrnes, Liz Jensen,
(ll/illiam Meyer, Geoff Michael and Michael Vargo; City Manager Jori Elam arrived from
another meeting at 8:20 P.M.; Building Official Jan Bertrand and Secretary Marjorie
Stutsman. Commissioner Thomas Reese was absent.and excused; also absent was Commis-
sioner George Kinzer. Council Representative Pinky Charon was also absent.
Also present were the following interested persons: Nicholas Espiritu, Don Reese,
Brent Blonigan, Start Lessin, Greg Kohl, Joanne Fillbrandt, A1Hofstadter, John and
Joyce Kossieck, Brad Patterson, Dave Klein, Fred Kellogg, Myrtle Blank and Skip
Blank.
MINUTES
The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of April 23,.1984 were presented for
consideration. Jensen moved and'Byrnes seconded a motion to approve the minutes.as
presented. The vote.was unanimously in favor.
BOARD OF APPEALS
l. Case No. 84-'323 Conditional Use Permit for publishing/printing shop at 5581
Shoreline Boulevard, Metes & Bounds Description--part of Lot 8, Aud. Subd..170
e
No one was present regarding this Case; later in the meeting, the City Manager
advised that Mr. Jagodzinski was withdrawing his application as he has been
evicted and will be locating somewhere else in Mound.
Case No. 84-324 24 Fb~t F~ont Yard Variance for Garage at 1638 Eagle Lane
Lots 13, 14 and 15, Block ll, Woodland Point
Nicholas Espiritu was present.
The Building Off. i¢ial explained the request is to build a garage on what by the
Zoning Code definition is a corner lot in the'R-3 District at Eagle. Lane and
Jennings Road. The requirement is for two 30 foot street front setbacks.
Espiritu purchased Lot 13 to add to'Lots 14 and 15.; The.narrowest side of land
is designated front yard. The front yard setback on present home. was reduced
to,24 feet.' When he purchased Lo~ 13,.it made his lot width 80 feet and lot
depth 120 feet. The applicant is requesting to place the .accessory building 6
feet from the Jennings Road property .line. Mr. Espiritu would'have the option
to file for:a Vacation of the unimproved Jennlngs Road.
TEe Planning Commission discussed the request including the possible vacation
of Jennings Road. Byrnes stated he hates to see the roadway given away; would
take away walkway for people on Finch going down to the Lake. Several'persons
present did not think Jennings was needed to be.opened. The City Engineer has
recommended retaining a drainage easement, if vacated.
Byrnes mo~ed and Michael seconded a motion to give Mr. Espiritu a 10 foot
setback-as recommended by the Staff from Jennings Road. The vote was Jensen
and Meyer against and all the others voted in favor. Motion carried. The
reason given for the nay votes was that a walkway through there was not fo'
seen and the extra 4 feet would not make that much difference, but would
able applicant to have more room.
Several neighbors present were concerned that the proposed garage ~'
for automobile body work; t~ey are concerned about pollution from p~
they have noticed. The Building Official advised that the Zoning Oro
Co.
Pl'annincj Commission Minutes
May 14, 1984 - Page 2
not allow automobile body work in residential districts except on your own
Vehicle. Refer to City Council May 22, 1984.
Case No. 84-325 Vacation of Canary Lane from Woodland Road to Jennings Road
Greg Kohl of 5149 Woodland Road represented the applicant, Kenneth Weber.
Also present were Joane Fillbrandt and A1Hofstadler.
The Building Official explained the request is to vacate Canary Lane south from
Woodland Road to the Lake approximately 175 feet to Lot 7 of Block 8 and to Lot
18 of Block 9, Woodland Point. The Engineer is recommending the vacation south
to Jennlngs Road retaining a ten foot drainage easement, five feet on either
side of centerline of Canary. Mr. Hofstadler has Lots 23 and 24 of Block 9; his
drive comes off Canary Lane. The dotted line.on the ½ Section Map is edge of
wetlands and then there is about 60 feet of marshy area to open water. Owner-
ship of land abutting Canary Lane was discussed and accessibility to. lake down
this lane. Kohl stated that no vehicle could get down there. Purpose of request
is to be able to landscape and blend it into recently purchased land on which
Weber plans tobuild a home. Hofstadler said he had no objection to the vacation,
but he has filled about 20 feet of Canary going back 40 feet. He would like
the portion he has filled and would like light pole moved as getting into his
garage is difficult. Chairman advised, if vacation approved, he would get half
of Canary (15 feet) and would have to negotiate with the other owner for the
additional footage. Kohl owns Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, Block 8. Weber owns Lots 3,
4, 19, 20, 21 and 22 of~Block 3.
Byrnes moved and Michael seconded a motion to recommend the vacation of Canary
Lane from Woodland.Road to Jennings Road. The vote was unanimously in favor.
City Council to be asked to set 'Public Hearing for June 12, 1984.
Case No. '84-326 6 Foot Front Yard Variance - 4760 Island View Drive
Lot 5 and W. 18 feet of Lot 4, Block 8, Devon
John and Joyce Kossieck were present.
The Building Official explained that in 1971, the oWner at that time, requested
a variance for a carport within 14 feet of the street front and to do some
terracing for visibility. Kossieck is purchasing the property and is requesting
to do some structural repairs to the carport which are to put in frost footings
and allow enclosure of carport (open west wall and install garage door). Deck
is on top'of carport. He has also purchased additional land to make lot con-
forming.
The City Manager arrived from another meeting at 8:20 P.M.
Vargo moved and Meyer seconded a motion to recommend approval of the six foot
front yard variance as requested. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Refer to city Council May 22, 1984.
Case No. 84-327 Sign Permit over 9 square feet in area - 4839 Shoreline Blvd.
· Lots 5, 18, 19 and part of Lots 15, 16 and 17, Block 1, Shirley Hills Unit A
Brad Patterson, owner of Westonka Auto Body, was present.
The Building Official explained that she used the new sign draft for her recom-
mendation. Applicant has a nonconforming sign on the east wall and the total
signage is presently 60 square feet on the Shoreline frontage. Under the new
Planning Commission Minutes
May 14, 1984 - Page 3
draft, the allowable is 15 percent of wall area or about 60 square feet. This
includes total building wall area. Applicant is requesting to replace a 3.5
foot by 3 foot wall mounted sign with a 4 by 8'foot illuminated sign. Not
considering the nonconforming sign on east side of the building, total new
signage would be 59.0 square feet.
Applicant is also requesting a portable 4 X 8 foot sign to allow advertising
of his business during the detour on Bartlett Boulevard.
Michael moved and densen seconded a motion for approval of the Wall mounted
sign requested. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Discussed the portable sign and the definition for seasonal sign. Dave Klein
questioned not allowing portable signs in the City. Thinks portable signs most
effective means of advertising.
Vargo moved and Michael seconded a motion to approve the portable sign as
requested for a 60 day period of time. The vote was Weiland, Meyer and
Byrnes against. Vargo, Michael and Jensen in favor of allowing. Tied vote.
Meyer would rather see a legal sign on the back of business facing Bartlett;
Weiland rather see a permanent sign. Byrnes voted nay for the same reasons.
Refer to City Council Agenda of May 22, 1984,
Case No.'s 84-328 and 84-329 Lot-split subdivision and Lot Width Variance
for 3005 Brighton Boul.evard - Lots 2, 3, 34 and 35, Block 15, Arden
Fred Kellogg represented James W. Rafferty.
The Building Official explained that actually these are 4 separate tax parcels
of land right now. Mr. Rafferty is requesting to subdivide the land as follows:
1st parcel - he would add N. ½ of 3 and N. ½ of 35 with Lot 2 and 2nd parcel -
add S. ½ of 3 and S. ½ of 35 with Lot 34 (8,000 square feet each parcel). Mini-
mum lot area requirement is 6,000 square feet with 40 feet minimum width fronting
on an improved Public right-of-way. She explained with this proposal, the width
of the lots fronting on the public right-of-way would be one at 60 feet and the
other at 20 feet. As the Zoning Ordinance stands, except for the O.H.M., she
would not have an established setback off of the back lots. ~There are homes
that have a setback off of the paved portion of Brighton Commons to the South,
but these lots do not abut a public right-of-way. The existing structure on
Lot 2 has 2 nonconformfng setbacks. Discussed if lots sold as platted, property
line could be moved to give Lot 2 and 35 enough sideyard so existing structure
would only have a front yard nonconformancy.
The City Manager stated they are asking for a major variance and brought up that ·
under L.M.C.D. standards, they are not even eligible for a dock---have to have
25 feet or more on lakeshore (commons or private lakeshore). He feels it would
be setting a precedent to allow this manipulation of square footage and setbacks.
Request and options were discussed. If 4 feet of Lot 3 were put with Lot 2,
-structure would only have front yard setback nonconformancy and the other parcel
would be within 10% of the required 40 feet street frontage.
Jensen moved and Byrnes seconded a motion to recommend denial of the request.
The vote was unanimously in fa'vor.
Mr. Kellogg will discuss this with Mr. Rafferty and let Staff know whether they
will change their request before forwarding it to the City Council.
Planning Commission Minutes
May 14, 1 84 - Page 4
Case No. 84-330 Sign Permit o~er 9 square feet - 2345 Commerce Boulevard
Metes ~ Bounds Description, Auditor's Subdivision 167 - PID 14-117-24 44 0004
Myrt Blank and Skip Blank were present.
The Building Inspector explained this was a late request; applicants are planning
to be in building by June 1st. She computed the wall area (14' X 25') of this
particular tenant's space and wall area would allow at 15~, 52½ square feet.
The request is for a 32 square foot sign. Sign would have 6½ inch raised wood
letters (red) on piece of plywood with a white background. The'ILghting is an
existing flood light. Also plan to put a small sign on back of building. It
was explained that this sign could not be painted on the door or building per
the new sign draft. They were agreeable to put up a separate small sign on
door under 9 square feet in size.
Jensen moved and Vargo seconded, a motion to approve the request. The vote
was unanimously in favor.
Refer to Ci~ty Council for agenda of May 22, 1984.
Jensen asked if the Black Lake Bridge project has been delayed. The City Manager
related the details of ~he postponement of work on the bridge and how long is a
point of continuing negotiations.
Commission attendance was discussed briefly.
The City Manager brought t-he Commission up-to-date on a few items including:
Placement of Lakewinds signs and that Planner Kirk Corson would be through for the
City at the end of June and is trying to complete the comprehensive plan draft.
ADJOURNMENT ·
Byrnes moved and Jensen seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 p.m.
in favor, so meeting adjourned.
All
Frank Weiland, Chairman
Attest:
.......... ~=:~ City
7:30 p.m.
April 1~, 1984.
~. ~pproval or amendment o~ ~a¥ 37. 1984, agenda.
4. Hearin~ o! pez~tt applicationa.
A. 83-08 Robert so,itt - dredSlnq for adeTaate
Bay, La~e
· . 83-63 Derrick L~nd Company - grading &nd d~&inage
p]~ for '~anches~e~ P~ace Addition", a 104 ~ic ~o~ouse
develo~en~, City o[ ~e~o~a, Sec. 16~, Sussex Cov~ Road.
~. 84-~1 Tom G~een - resurface existing packing
v~ch lsphalC aC ~ree~ouse ~acer~ ~d Boccleshop, C~c~ cf
D. 84-4T ~lck D~e~ch, c/o ~a~za~a Chlld~ens Shop -
qrad~n9 ~d d~a~nage plan ~d floodplain develo~en~ for
re~aL1 shoppln~ develo~en~, Ci~ of ~ayza~a, Sec. 6DAD, Sou~h
of Lake S~ee~ ~d eas~ of ~leason Creek.
Z. 84-50 ~C, Inc. - 9radinq and dra~naqe ~1~ ind a
sou~hves~ of Daniels S~ree~ and 5ha~q~ess~ Avenue.
so~h of Shau~ess~ ~venue'.
G. 84-54 Xober~ Schlies~e - rip,ap ~O fee~ of
In~e~lachen ~a~el, La~e ~e~o~a.
H. 84-~ Ronald 6. Olson - ~rap 1~.~ fee~
no~h of Clay Claire D~Lve on Uppe~ ~ake, Lake ~e~o~a.
I. 8~-S6 Xober~ ~el~ed - ~i~rap 150 fee~ of
15C~, sou~eas~ o~ H~n~=on Po~n~ Road and Lafayette Road.
~. 8&-57 J~es Sch~l~z - ri~rap 103 ~ee~ of
~. 8t-58 J~es S~enson - cons~ruc~ s~eel
L. 84-59 ~e~ S, ~allace - rip, ap 2~0 fee~ of
~all, C~y of 6reen~ood. Sec. 2~D~C, no~h shore of S~. ~lbans
Bay a~ ~eeKs Road.
souKheas~ end of Shad~ood
N. 84-~1 Gayle's ~ar~n8 Co~p. - rip,ap shoreline
fo~ erosion control, C~ of ~e~onk4, Sec. 8CC, nc~h of
_ Highway 1Gl on the Sou~hea~ shore of Wayzata Bay.
O. 84-64 Claire Thorw~ck - zi~rap 100 feet of.
R. 84-65 ~ere~ G. Ctlley - ri~rap 105.6 fee~ of
&ho=aline for erosion con~rol, Ci=y of Victor/a, Sec.
north of Smi~hto~ Terrace on ~m~th=o~ Bay.
S. 84-66 W~lll~ J. Fra~ - rt~=ap 170 fee~ of
T. 84-67 Clark Co,ell - ri~rap 50 feet of
U. 84-68 Ton7 Christi arisen - floodplain development
for a single-family residence, City of Wayzata, Sec. 6DCA,
Shady Lane at Gleason Creek and Wayzata Bay.
· - L
Pg. 1404
BULLETIN
metr. oj:)o!!t,.an
mun apa mee
May 11, 1984
TO:
FROM:
RE:
AMM ~ember Cities
T. Irving, President
Summary of Legislative Acts
The 1984 Legislative Session was unusually short in time but not in volume.
The following is a synopsis of some of the important legislation passed having
impact on cities and other items that were part of the AMM program.
The Legislative Act Summaries contained herein are:
1. Local Government Aids (LAWS 1984, Chap. 502).
2. Metropolitan Transit (LAWS 1984, Chap. 654).
3. Solid and Hazardous Waste (LAWS 1984, Chap. 644).
4. Pensions (LAWS 1984, Chap. 564).
5. Publication Requirements (LAWS 1984, Chap. 543).
6. Surface Water Management Amendments (LAWS 1984, Chap. 411).
7. Comparable Worth (LAWS 1984, Chap. 651).
8. MNDOT Project Payments (LAWS 1984, Chap. 416).
9. Cable Communications (No Chap.).
10. Contract Quote and Bid Range (LAWS 1984, Chap. 413).
11. Residency Requirements (LAWS 1984, Chap. 585).
12. Aggregate Resource Study (.LAWS 1984, Chap. 605).
Should you have questions, please contact either Roger Peterson or Vern Peterson
at the AMM Office (227-5600).
This Bulletin is being sent to Mayors and Managers/Administrators.
153 ur~Jv¢'rsJt¥ ay'er}Lie east, st. paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 227-5600 Pa. lhflq
-2-
1. LOCAL GOVERNMENT AIDS (LAWS 1984, CHAP. 502)
Restoration of the 1984 LGA shortfall was contained within the 1984 Omnibus Tax Act.
will be paid in 1984 at the certified amount plus any reduction caused by
underfunding proration. If the additional payments cause a city to exceed its 1984
Levy Limitation, the 1985 Levy Limitation will be reduced by the excess amount. Future
year aid distributions will be based on the certified plus supplemental 1984 distribution
amount.
1985 LGA will be fully funded using the current formula of adjusted local revenue base
minus ten mills times the equalized assessed value. The maximum increase remains at
six percent, but a grandfather clause was initiated so that no city will receive less
than the 1984 certified plus supplemental aid. The sections of law dealing with
proration reduction for under funding were repealed.
For a city incorporated in 1974, or thereafter, and whose population at least doubled
between 1970 and 1979, an adjustment in LGA and levy base will be made. This appears
to affect only the city of Ramsey and possibly Andover.
A Legislative Study Conmlission of nine Senators appointed by the Committee on Committees
and nine Representatives appointed by the Speaker of the House was created to study
current funding and distribution of state aids to local units of government including
school districts. The Commission report of conclusions and recommendations for specific
changes in the present state aid formula is due January 15, 1985o
2. METROPOLITAN TRANSIT (.LAWS 1984, CHAP. 654)
new Regional Transit Board (RTB) will be created as of July 1, 1984 to replace the
policy function of the current Metropolitan Transit Commission (MTC) and to concentrate
Metropolitan Transit concerns into one agency. The new RTB Board will consist of
fourteen (14) members from the current Metropolitan Council Districts (7 and 9 are
combined, 24 is split between 13 and 16) appointed by the Metropolitan Council and a
Chairperson appointed by the Governor from a list of three names supplied by the Council.
The Council will hold hearings within each district an~ make a written report with
nominee recommendations.
The major goal of this reorganization is to separate policy from operations and remove
any apparent conflict between the MTC as a bus company contracting for services with a
direct competitor. The MTC will be headed by a three member commission, one from St. Paul,
one from Minneapolis, and one from the suburban area; all to be appointed by the RTB.
The MTC is internally reorganized into three divisions (administration, operations, and
planning) reporting to a single administrator and may utilize a management firm for
operations only to be competitively bid at least every two years. An annual audit must
be performed by a CPA or audit firm reporting to the three person commission. T.%e MTC
support staff complement will be reduced 21 full time positions by June 30, 1985.
The new RTB duties include; establishing a transit information program on up to date
schedules and service, levy property taxes, receive federal and state funds to distribute
per a detailed five year service and development program and a three year financial plan
for bapital and operating expenditures by service type and provider, establish local
planning and development program to ensure local participation, contract with transit
providers based on plan needs, ensure that no MTC employees are dismissed due to other
transit contracts, approve MTC service and operations plans and annual budget, approve
applications for federal transit funds, assume responsibility for special elderly and
handicapped service once an interim implementation plan is developed, and assume all
1
-3-
ridesharing program responsibilities after June 30, 1985. The RTB staff complement
cannot exceed 19 full-time positions until June 30, 2985. These will not necessarily
be the same persons reduced by that date from MTC staff. The RTB may not lease space
from a provider receiving financial assistance from the RTB. Although a local official
advisory committee is not specifically mandated, it seems that one is necessary to 'ensure
local participation' in implementation planning.
Optout is repealed as of July 1, 1984. However, any of the seventeen currently eligible
cities that have been approved or that submit a letter of intent to optout by July 1, 1984
may conti.uue in the optout program under the direction of the RTB.
Property tax feathering is mandated for taxes payable in 1986 with funding loss to be
replaced from the State general fund. Full service areas continue at the 2 mill rate, full
peak-hour and limited off-peak service areas will be taxed at 1.5 mills, and limited peak
service areas will pay 1.25 mills. Feathering for 19B5 taxes is pe.rm~ssive at the
discretion of the RTB.
The Metropolitan Council Transportation Policy Plan will be expanded to include policies
and standards to govern the levels of public expenditures for transit services and service
areas. It will also approve the RTB implementation plan and the RTB three year financial
plan.
3. SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE M;L'~AGEMENT (LAWS 1984, CHAP. 644)
A major amendment to the 2980 Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Act was adopted by the
Legislature. The most significant general impact of the legislation in both waste areas
is the emphasis on resource recovery and reduction. Numerous grants and loan authority i
provided for education, technical assistance, planning, and processing of resource recovery
facilities.
The Hazardous Waste disposal siting activity is basically put on hold for two years. In
that time the Waste Management Board is charged with detailed evaluation of the amount of
hazardous waste generated within the state, methods of reduction and recovery, and in
general a determination of the need for and type of disposal facilities. The Board is
granted the authority to reduce the four existing possible disposal sites by one or two if
there is technical data in hand t~ support that decision. Also, the Board is expressly
authorized to accept private volunteer candidate sites for determination of intrinsic
suitability. Levels of private operator financial responsibility and a state liability
trust fund are established.
Several major changes were made to the Solid Waste statues as well. The major and most
controversial was the establishment of a per cubic yard fee for waste material deposited
in a landfill facility. A Metropolitan county may levy 25 cents per cubic yard of waste
to be used for landfill abatement, closure and post closure care, and mitigation and
compensation for local risks and other adverse affects. Outstate counties have no fee
limit. A city or town containing a land disposal facility may impose a fee not to exceed
15 cents per cubic yard of waste to be used for mitigation and compensation for local risks,
costs, and other adverse affects. The state will impose a fee of 50 cents per cubic yard
of waste. Half of the state fee will be designated for the Metropolitan landfill abatement
fund to be used for planning assistance, grants and loans for resource recovery and market
development for reusable or recycleabie wasre, and Metropolitan Council technical assistance.
Also, up to 50 cents per household may be paid to any city for qualifying landfill abate~ ~
and resource recovery expenses. Half of ~he state fee will be designated for the
Metropolitan Landfill Contingency Action Fund to be used to monitor water supplies and pay
8
-4-
for closure and post closure expenses of landfills where owners are unable or
unwilling to comply or landfills that have been closed for over 20 years. The act
)rovides authority for a waste management district or county to establish Resource
~ecovery Facilities. It provides tax credits for pollution control equipment and
excludes equipment used for processing solid and hazardous waste at a resource recovery
facility from sales tax. Each county must establish an advisory committee to aid in
preparation and revision of waste management master plans. The act specifies the
criteria and requirements of the purchase of land for waste facilities. Studies concerning
organized collection and insurance feasibility are required. Ramsey and Washington
Counties are given certain powers to develop a resource recovery facility.
In a separate bill, the number of candidate sites to be designated for landfill facilities
in each Metropolitan County, except Hennepin and Ramsey, is reduced from four to three.
4. PENSIONS (LAWS 2984, CHAP. 564)
The Pension Equity Act of 1984 has attempted to establish a benefit package as near as
possible to the same in the three major public employee pension plans (MSRS, PERA, and
TRA). The Rule of 85 for unreduced pension retirement was adopted beginning immediately
and lasting through December 31, 1986 when it will return to the Rule of 90 unless
extended by the Legislature. An employee must be at least 55 years of age. Persons
withdrawing funds from a pension plan will now receive 5% interest on the entire amount
instead of 3.5% on amounts contributed after 3.5 years. Employees may retire with
reduced benefit at age 55 with at least lO years service or at any age less than 55 with
30 years service. A surviving spouse of an employee who had been eligible to retire will
be entitled to the same amount as if the employee had survived and elected a 100% joint and
survivor benefit. The 90 day waiting period for permanent disability or survivor
benefits was eliminated. MSRS Correctional and PERA/P. and F. employees will earn
retirement credit at the rate of 2.5% per year for the first 25 years instead of 20 years.
Maximum survivor benefits are increased from $700 to $1,000 monthly and minimum increased
from 30 to 50% of salary. An additional $1 million was added to the $6.5 million per
year police and fire state amortization aid. Actuarial assumptions and some contribution
rates were modified.
The e~uloyer contribution to the PERA coordinated plan is reduced from 5.5% to 4.25% as
of July 1, 1984. For cities and counties over 5000 population that are restricted by
levg !im_~ts, the levy limit base will be reduced by an amount equal to the amount
of the 1.25% of payroll that is currently within the levy limit base.
Finally, the 2% supplemental contribution made by employees during the first six months
of 1983 will be returned to all public employees.
5. PUBLICATION REQUIREMENTS (LAWS 1984, CHAP. 543)
A major revision to legal notice and publication statues was passed effective January i,
1985. Most of the revisions in the lengthy bill dealt with cleaning up outmoded require-
ments for primarily special item~ pertaining mostly to counties and schools. Prior to the
effective date a more detailed su~mry of legal notice provisions will be made. However,
for 1985 budget activities a few changes affecting cities need to be taken into
consideration.
-5-
Publication rates may (undoubtedly will) be increased to the lowest classified ad rate
or by 10% per year, whichever is less. The rate for which increases in 1985 and beyond
are based is the current rate charged in 1984.
Any statutory city of 1000 population or more within 30 days after every regular or
special meeting will be required to publish the official council proceedings, a summary,
or a condensed version of the official minutes which shall include action on motions,
resolutions, ordinances, and other official proceedings. As an alternative to
publication, the city may mail, at city expense, a copy of the proceedings to any
resident upon request.
Upon adoption of the city budget, a summary statement must be published in the official
newspaper containing information relating to anticipated revenues and expenditures. The
state auditor will prescribe a form designed so that comparisons can be ;~de between
the current year and budget year.
A note shall be included with all summary publications that the summarized document is
available for public inspection at a designated location within the city.
6. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT AMENDMENTS (LAWS 1984, CHAP. 421)
Dates for establishing a Watershed Management Organization (WMO) are changed from
December 31, 1983 to July 1, 1985 and the date by which a WMO plan is to be submitted
for review is extended one. year to December 31, 1986.
If all cities and towns within an existing Chapter 112 Watershed District concur and
form a joint powers agreement WMO, they may petition the Water Resources Board to
terminate the Watershed District established pursuant to Chapter 112. The petitioners
must show that they are willing and able to assume ownership of the districts assets
and the responsibility for managing and maintaining the districts projects and i~olement
the watershed plan. All previous projects indebtedness, benefits, levies, and assessments
must remain as they were and transfer to the new WMO.
Allows WMO establishment under certain conditions to include territory in a non
participating governmental unit with that units consent. Provides for a streamlined
method to modify boundaries between watersheds and allows participation under WMO statutes
for watersheds partially outside of the Metropolitan Area. The act is effective
immediately.
7. COMPARABLE WORTH (LAWS 2984, CHAP. 651)
The act requires all political subdivisions to use job evaluation systems to determine the
comparable work value of different positions and establish equitable compensation
relationships between these positions. In other words, the goal is to eliminate gender
as a factor in establishing compensation levels.
By October l, 1985 each city shall report to the Commissioner of Employee Relations on
its plan for implementation of its Job Evaluation System and the Availability of a report
containing the results of the Job Evaluation System to the exclusive representative of
ics employees. The report must include the title of each job class and as of July l,
2984, nu.T~er of incumbents, percent 'female, comparable work value of the class as
deter.~ined by the Job Evaluation.Syscem, the minimum and maximum salary, and a description
of tDe Job Evaluation Spstem.
-6-
The Commissioner of Employee Relations will report by January 1, 1986 to the
Legislature on the information gathered from all political subdivisions and list
those not complying.
Each political subdivision will develop or adopt an existing Job Evaluation System.
It will meet and confer with exclusive employee representatives during the selection
process. It will submit a report of the evaluation system results to the exclusive
representatives which identifies inequities in female dominated classes. The results
of the job evaluation system and subsequent reports are considered private data until
July 1, 1987.
It will not be an unfair labor practice to allocate a specified amount of funds to correct
inequitable compensation relationships. Neither the Commissioner of Human Rights nor
the State Courts can use or consider results of the Job Evaluation System in any action
alleging discrimination commenced before August 1, 1987. No cause of action arrises
before August 1, 1987 for failure to comply with requirements of this act.
The full text of the Comparable Worth Act can be found in the League of Minnesota Cities
1984 Legislature Bulletin No. 8 (Final) dated April 27, 1984.
8. MNDOT PROJECT PAYMENTS (LAWS 1984, CHAP. 416
Allows, through agreement with the CoMmissioner of Transportation, for payment of the
State's contractual obligations to counties, municipalities, or other governmental
agencies before commencing.work rat~er than after all work is completed. This act makes
the payment for Highway related projects the same whether MNDOT or the city is doing the
project and is effective August 1, 2984.
9. CABLE CO;~UNICATIONS
The AMM was successful in obtaining a delay in designation by the State Cable Board
of an agency to regulate and operate the Regional Channel'6. The delay was from
January 2, 1984 until July 2, 1984. The bill which would have designated the Metropolitan
Council as that agency was also defeated. Currently, various groups interested in
Regional Channel 6 and Cable Service Territory System Interconnection are working with the
Metropolitan Council technical staff and task force to develop a cooperative joint
application which would satisfactorily meet the objections of a single agency control or
domination by political agencies only.
lO. CONTR~.CT QUOTE AND BID P~%NGE (I_%WS 1984, CHAP. 423)
Language requiring.two quotes for contracts under $10,000 was changed to allow for 'two
quotes as far as practicable', therefore eliminating any question of legality when
making minor purchases.
ll. RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS (LAWS 2984, CHAP. 585)
This act prohibits residency requirements in outstate Minnesota as was done for ~e
Metropolitan Area several years ago. Unfortunately in drafting a floor action at the
last minute the following language was inserted: "A statutory or home rule charter
cit~ or county, excep~ if it is located in the seven county metropo!~tan area, may
-7-
impose a reasonable area or response time residency requirement if there is a
demonstrated, job related necessity."
The result of this insertion is that apparently not even job related response time
requirements can be imposed in the Metropolitan Area. It is believed that this was not
the intent of the action and the LMC and AMM will work on striking this prohibition in
1985. However, at this point it is not totally clear what the law is and therefore
any rules mag be subject to court action if challenged.
12. AGGREGATE RESOURCE STUDY (LAWS 1984, CHAP. 605)
The bill which would have required immediate additions to comprehensive plans for
aggregate resource pro~ection was significantly amended to provide for the Metropolitan
Council to establish a study committee with representatives from city, county, town and
the gravel industry to determine the need and advisability of aggregate preservation
and to recommend methods of protection by January 1, 1986.
league of minnesota oities
May 3, 1984
TO:
Mayors, Managers and Clerks
FROM:
Diane Loeffler, Legislative Representative
SUBJECT: Openings on State Boards and Commissions
The Secretary of State is seeking applications for positions on several boards that may
be of interest to city offi.cials. Applicants are being sought for the Investment Advisory
Council, the Minnesota-Wisconsin Boundary Area Commission, and the Ethical Practices
Board. The application deadline for all of the positions is May 29, 1984. Application
forms may be obtained from the Office of the Secretary of State, 180 State Office Building,
St. Paul, MN 55155-1299; phone (612) 296-2805. In addition, it is requested that members
notify the League of positions they are seeking so that we can track member interest
and offer support when appropriate. The following are brief descriptions of each of
the positions currently open.
THE INVESTMENT ADVISORY COUNCIL has I vacancy open immediately for a member with experience
in general investment matters. The council advises the Board of Investment on policy
atin9 to investments of state funds. Members are appointed by the Board of Investment.
~bers must file with the Ethical Practices Board and receive no compensation. For specific
information contact the Investment Advisory Council, Room 105 MEA Bldg., 55 Sherburne Ave.,
St. Paul 55155; (612) 296-3328.
THE MINNESOTA-WISCONSIN BOUNDARY AREA COMMISSION has 1 vacancy open immediately. Must
be a resident of Minnesota. The commission makes recommendations on the use, development
and protection of the corridor of the St. Croix and Mississippi rivers that forms the
interstate border of Minnesota and Wisconsin and assists the 2 states in their participation
in federal programs affecting the rivers. Members are appointed by the Governor. Terms
are staggered. Bi-monthly meetings; members are reimbursed for expenses. For specific
information contact the Minnesota-Wisconsin Boundary Area Commission, 619 2nd St., Hudson,
Wisconsin 54016; (612) 436-7131.
THE ETHICAL PRACTICES BOARD has 1 vacancy open immediately, for a member of the Democratic-
Farmer-Labor Party who has not been a public official, held any political party office
other than precinct delegate, or been elected to public office for which party designation
is required by statute in the three years preceding the date of appointment, for term
expiring in January, 1987. The board administers campaign finance disclosure and public
financing for state candidates; economic interest disclosure for state and metropolitan
public officials; lobbyist registration and reporting. Members are appointed by the
Governor and confirmed by the House and Senate; members serve staggered four-year terms;
must file with EPB. Monthly meetings; members receive $35 per diem plus expenses. For
specific information, contact the Ethical Practices Board, 41 State Office Building,
St. Paul 55155; (612) 296-5148.
:mk
Pg. 1412
'300 Metro Square Bldg., St. Paul, MN 55101
General Office T.elephone (612) 291-6359
REVIEW "-
'~*~ MR. JON ELA~
'~ ...... MANAG ER .~-. ~'~~ __.
A Metropolitan Council Bulletin for Communi~ Le~ C [ T Y 0 F F 0U~~.
For mor~ /~formation on items/n th/s publicat/on, c, 53 41 NAYW00~~~:~._'
Apni 27, 1984 ~oy,uuu to ~ver engin'~ ~ ~f ~dg~ ~r ~. 169.
........ unK~ps wi~ the No~
RE~NT COUNCIL ACTIONS (April 1~27} of a ~er Park Rese~e campgrou~was given $1~,~0.
· Heal~--~e Council said it w~d develop a regional health
Airpax--The Coundi approved Me~opolitan Air~o~s ~ay pa~ern~ ~er a ioint su'~eV done by ~e Council and
Commi~ion (MAC) plans to apply for $24.1 million in federal ~e Minneso~-Health ~eP'a~mem in 1981. ~e up~ated
~nds for development proie~ at the Minneapolis-St. Paul m~ey would again include questions on smoking, drinking,
International Airport. Local matching funds of $8 million will
come from the commission and the Minnesota Department of
Transportation. The projects include runway rehabilitation
and extension, a transportation center, and expansion of the
terminal. MAC will also apply for $1.7 million for runway and
taxiway extensions at the Anoka County-Blaine Airport. The
Council will further review the projects upon completion of
environmental assessments.
The Council also approved an application by the MAC to
the federal government for a grant to curb airport noise and
monitor {and use around the Minneapolis-St. Paul International
Airport. The commission is seeking funding to plan for noise
abatement modifications that may include prevention of
"incompatible" new developments in the airport vicinity. The
primary benefit of the project will be less noise for persons
living near the airport.
Transportation--The Council approved a request by Chaska
t'o 2opt-out" of MTC bus service. Chaska plans to replace that
service with a shuttle bus or van connection to a transfer point
in Chanhassen, a dial-a-ride local service, and a daily fixed
route service to major activity centers. Plymouth implemented
an independent transit service in 1983, and a Shakopee opt-
out plan was recently approved by the state commissioner of
transportation.
Norwest Center-The Council has submitted comments to
the city of Minneapolis on the environmental impact of the
proposed Nonvest Center, a 2.3 million square foot complex
downtown. The Council called for an evaluation of transporta-
tion characteristics and plans near the complex. An air quality
analysis depends on this trans0ertation data. The Council
suggested plans for handling recyclable materials, asked for
clarification on the use and disposal of groundwater and,
raised the consideration of telecommunications in the building
design.
Water Quality-The Council was named as a "joint permit-
tee" on permits issued by the Minnesota Pollution Control
agency (MPCA). The permits require the preparation of a plan
to eliminate sewage overflow 'to the Mississippi River from
sewers that contain both sewage and stormwater in St. Paul,
South St. Paul and Minneapolis.
The Council joined Orono in requesting that the MPCA
hold a public hearing on the Maple Plain sewage treatment
plant, tO consider whether the plant should be upgraded or
phased out. The Council is seeking an alternative that would
be environmentally beneficial to the water quality of Lake
Minnetonka.
Parks--The Council approved a $2 million development
grant for Lake Elmo Regional Park, to be used for roads and
parking, trails, and a swimming facility. In addition, S125,000
was approved for land acquisition. The Council approved
diet, and other health risk factors for Twin Cities residents.
PUBLIC HEARINGS, PUBLIC MEETINGS
Solid Waste--The Metropolitan Council will hold a public
meeting on Wednesday, May 23, 7r10 p.m., at Prairie View
Elementary School, 17225 Peterborg Rd., Eden Prairie (NOTE
LOCATION CHANGE), on a proposed expansion of the
Flying Cloud solid waste landfill in Eden Prairie. For a copy of
the draft environmental impact statement summary, pub. no.
12-84-054, call the Council at 291-8464. To speak at the
meeting, call 291-6447.
The Council set a public meeting for Thursday, May 31,
7-10 p.m., on a proposed 450 acre-foot expansion of the
Louisville solid waste landfill in Louisville Twp. at St. Mary's
School in Marystown. For a copy of the draft environmental
assessment worksheet, pub. no. 12-84-052, call the Counci'
291-6464. To speak at the meeting, call 291-6447.
GOVERNOR EXPECTS TO APPOINT SANDRA
GARDEBRING AS NEW COUNCIL CHAIR
Gov. Rud¥ Perpich said he plans to appoint Sandra
Gardebring, currently director of the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA), to chair the Metropolitan Council.
The appointment would take effect May 14.
Gardebring, 36, lives in Roseville and has headed the MPCA
twice, in 1977-78, and again since January 1983. Perpich
appointed her both times. A native of Bismarck, N.D., she is a
graduate of Luther College in Decorah,.I .o. wa, and .~e ...........
University of Minnesota Law School.
Gardebring is to succeed Council chair Gerald Isaacs, who
had submitted his resignation, effective May 1 or at the gover-
nor's convenience. Perpich said CHair-Designate Gardebring
would advise him on a number of new metropolitan appoint-
meats. They are: a new 15-member Regional Transit 8oard
recently created by the legislature; the Metropolitan Transit
Commission, to be reformed as a three-person body; and a
replacement for George Frisch, current chair of the Metro-
politan Waste Control Commission.
GOVERNOR NAMES RIETOW TO COUNCIL
Dottle Rietow, a St. Louis Park resident, has been named a
member of the Metropolitan Council by Gay. Rudy Perpich.
Rietow will represent Council District 11, which inctudes
St. Louis Park, Golden Valley, Robbinsdale and Edina. S~
employed as governmental relations direc;cr for Rogers
Cablesystems. She replaces Parr{cia Hasselmo, Golden Valley,
who resigned effective last January.
GLADYS BROOKS CHOSEN FIRST
REGIONAL CITIZEN OF THE YEAR
Gladvs Brooks, whose record of public involvement in the
Twin Cities Region spans more than 40 years, has been chosen
Metropolitan Council's first Regional Citizen of the Year.
accepted the award April :30 at the Council's annual
State of the Region event in Minneapolis.
Council Member Josephine Nunn, who chaired the award
selection committee, said Brooks "exemplifies an individual
who has been an active participant in many facets of life in
our region. By choosing her as the first winner of this award,
we're setting the highest standard for future winners."
Twenty-one men and women from throughout the region
were nominated for the award.
Brooks' record of public service includes dozens of organ-
izations and extends from the Minneapolis City Council to the
Metropolitan Council to the Governor's Council on the World
Trade Center. Minneapolis Mayor Don Fraser, who also'
nominated her for the award, said that while a member of the
Metropolitan Council she was known "for a bipartisan
approach to regional issues and team-building for problem
solving."
APPLICATIONS ACCEPTED FOR
DISTRICT 8 COUNCIL SEAT
The Minnesota Secretary of State's office is accepting
applications for a Council seat vacated by Marcia Bennett,
from southern Anoka County (Council District 8). Bennett,
a Council member for nine years, resigned in March to
accept a position as legislative liaison for Anoka County.
Applicants must live in one of the following cities:
umbia Heights, Fridley, Hilltop. Soring Lake Park,
n Rapids, Blaine, Lexington or Circle Pines. Applica-
will be accepted until May 8. For an application, call
296-3266.
COUNCIL TO HOLD TELECOMMUNICATIONS
PLANNERS' FORUM
Satellite dishes, antenna farms, and microwave broadcast
towers will be the focus of a telecommunications planners'
forum sponsored by the Metropolitan Council June 12. The
meeting wiii be held from 9 to 11:30 a.m. in the Council's
Conference Room E. For more information, contact Jim
Uttley at 291-6361.
NATIONAL PLANNING CONFERENCE
FEATURES BELL, DURENBERGER
Educator and social analyst Daniel Bell and Minnesota
Sen. David Durenberger will deliver major addresses at the
American Planning Association's national planning conference
May 5-9, in Minneapolis.
About 2,500 attendees will also hear from Minneapolis
Mayor Don Fraser and St. Paul Mayor George Latimer, plus
speakers and panelists at more than 100 sessions. Technology,
Canadian planning, the Twin Cities planning experience and
other items of national interesl: will be discussed.
Bell is the Henry Ford II professor of social studies at
Harvard University. He has authored The Cu/~ural Con~ra.
dictions o£ C~/talisrn and The Coming o£ Post.industrial
Sen. Durenberger chairs the Senate Subcommittee
governmental Relations, which gets involved in
questions of planning and governmental structure.
People interested in registering for the conferenc.e or in
getting more information should call Al Lovejoy at 292-1577.
NEW PUBLICATIONS
The Great Outdoor=... It's Jun Next Doorl April 1984.
Updated directory shows recreational activities available at
region's 48 large parks and park reserves, plus how to get
there. No. 11-84~45; no charge.
Commerc/a! Consl~uc~ion in d~e Twin Cides Metropollran
Area, 1953. The value of commercial construction dropped
20 percent from 1982°s figure for a total of $274.5 million.
Only two construction categories increased-retail buildings
and shopping centers. No. 01 44-059; 25 pp.; $1.
1983 Construct/on in the Twin Cities Me~ropo/iran Area
and Ma/or Con,ruction Pro/ec~, July,December 1983.
April 1984. Value of all 1983 construction jumped 24 percent
over 1982 figure for total of $1.8 billion. Single-family
housing accounted for S731 million, up 67 percent from 1982.
No. 0164-050:21 pp.; $1'.
Housing ~he Twin C/r/es Area Population. Marc. h 1984.
Highlights housing changes from 1970 to 1980 based on
census data. Discusses type, age, cost and number of units,
rental vs. owner-occupied housing and other information.
No. 0164-030; 46 pp.; $2.
COMING MEETINGS (May 7-18)
(Meetings are ~en~arive. To verify, carl 291-~464.)
Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission, Monday,
May 7, 3 p.m. Tour of regional parks in Ramsey and Washing-
ton Counties.
Metropolitan Waste Management Advisory Committee,
Tuesday, May 8, 2 p.m., Council Chambers.
Metropolitan Systems Committee, Tuesday, May 8, 3 p.m.,
Conference Room E.
Dakota County Aircraft Disaster Committee, Tuesday,
May 8, 6:30 p.m., Council Chambers.
Metropolitan Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Advisory Committee, Wednesday, May 9, 9 a.m., H RA Confer-
enc~ Room, LL25 (Lower Level Metro Square).
Environmental Resources Committee, Wednesday, May 9,
3 p.m., Conference Room E.
Me~'opolitan Health Planning Board, Wednesday, May 9,
4 p.m., Council Chambers.
Metropolitan and Community Development Committee,
Thursday, May 10, 2 p.m., Council Chambers.
Metropolitan Council, Thursday, May 10, 4 p.m.,
Council Chambers.
Arts Advisory Committee, Tuesday, May 15, 5:15 p.m.,
Council Chambers.
Metropolitan Systems Committee, Tuesday, May 15,
3 p.m., Conference Room E.
Transportation Advisory Board, Wednesday, May 18,
2 p.m., Council Chambers.
Long-Term Care Task Force, Thursday, May 17, 8 a.m.,
Council Chambers.
Community Development Committee, Thursday, May 17,
1 p.m., Council Chambers.
Management Committee, Thursday, May 17, 3 p.m.,
Council Chambers.
Metropolitan River Corridors Study Committee,
Thursday, May 17, 3 p.m., Conference Rooms A and B.
Advisory Committee on Aging, Friday, May 18, 9 a.m.,
Council Chambers.
Pg. 1414
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATIOr',! DISTRICT
NEWS RELEASE
Frank Mixa, LMCD
Executive Director
473-7033
NIGHT SPEED LIMIT REDUCED
ON LAKE MINNETONKA
The night speed limit is 20 mph on Lake Minnetonka starting
with the 1984 boating season. The Lake Minnetonka Conser-
vation District (LMCD) reduced the nighttime speed limit
from 30 mph to 20 mph because of concerns for boater safety,
especially during late evening hours. The reduction was
set after the LMCD r~viewed the number of boating incidents
and increased boating-use of the Lake. The daytime limit
remains at 40 mph.
5-8-84
Pq. lql5
Here's how to see the eclipse
indirectly... ,safely,.. easily.,.
;ARDBOARD
321 ECLIPSE IS ON THE HORIZON ... on May 30,
there will be a major eclipse of the sun.
This annular eclipse x ill be visible in every
state except Alaska. It will be quite a spec-
ticle, but if you look directly at the sun
during the eclipse you're risking solar retin-
opathy, damage to the retina of your eyes.
To view the eclipse safety, get two sheets of
white cardboard and make a pinhole in the
center of one of them. Stand with the sun at
your back. With one sheet of cardboard in
each hand, hold the sheet with the pinhole so
the sun shines through the hole onto the other
sheet. Adjust the sheets to focus the light.
(You can change the size of the image by
changing the distance between the sheets.) By
looking at the bottom sheet, you can see an ex-
act image of the sun and its eclipse. As the
moon slowly crosses in front of the sun, you
can see it all happen! NOTE: looking at the
eclipse through a camera viewfinder, telescope
or binoculars is especially dangerous. There
~ is no shield generally available which will
protect your eyes. Best idea - watch the eclipse on television or at professionally
sponsored eclipse watches or with the method described above.
WHAT EVERY CAbIPER SHOULD KNOW ... cutting tools top the list of equipment that causes
camping injuries. Most injuries caused by cutting tools occur when people are chopping
firewood or driving in tent pegs. Other injuries occur when campers are unfamiliar
with outdoor heating and cooking equipment or when they attempt to start fires with white
ts or other highly flammable liquids instead of charcoal lighter fluid. Rashes, sun-
and insect stings are hazards in the great outdoors as well. Before you load the
car to head for your favorite camping spot, be sure you know how to use your equipment.
Have a complete first aid kit handy. And - take along a copy. of the new "Wilderness
Survival Guide", a pocket guide with dozens of tips to keep you alive and well until
rescue finds you if you're in trouble. It gives directions on assembling shelters,
provides rules of survival, improvising, building and maintaining fires safely and
plains simple rescue signals. Single copy cost is $1.50 per book plus 6% ~,~ sales tax.
quafitity prices available on request. Order from MSC today!
CONGRATS TO ... Ben Gilvin, General Hills, who was named 1984 Safety Professional of the
Year for the Northwest Chapter, American Society of Safety Engineers ... and to the De-
partment of Natural Resources for receiving an Award of Merit from the International
Assn. of Fish and Wildlife Agencies for excellence in firearms safety training for youth
... and to HSC member companies Generai Mills, 3b~, H. B. Fuller, Control Data and Dayton
Hudson Corporation for being named by national management consultants as among the top
100 best companies in America for which to work!
PLAN FOR SAFE GRADUATION/PROM NIGHT .. many communities in Minnesota are busy planning
to make prom and graduation nights safg for their high school students. Every year, the
media carry stories about teens being killed in car accidents on those special nights;
often alcohol is involved. Communities such as Fairmont, Worthington and others are or-
ganizing alternatives for their teens to drinking and driving. Alternatives ~an include
school or community sponsored all-night parties where parents and community leaders pro-
vide plenty of activities to keep young folks active and interested all night long.
communities have organized free "taxi" service, providing rides to and from prom
r graduation activities with parents serving as chauffers". Local Safety Counci'ls,
b~DD organizations, Students Against Drunk Driving, police departments, service clubs
and the schools serve as resources. Please let us hear about your community's plans
to keep teens safe during those special events this spring!
Pq. 1416
May 14, 1984
Acting Chief, Wm. Hudson
Mound Police Department
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
Telephone: 473-7710
Emergency: 544-9511
City of ORONO
Post Office Box 86 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Mailing Address
On the North Shore o fLake Minnetonka
Police Department
Offices at
445 Willow Drive
Long Lake, MN 55356
M.H. KILBO
Chief of Police
Dear Bill,
I wish to thank you and your department for unselfish
delivery of mutual aid by sending regular officers and
reserve persohnel to aid our department when the storm
struck Long Lake on April 27, 1984 at 9:47 a.m.
Your prompt response assisted our department in quickly
bringing order to the area. As you are aware, no one
was injured even though 50 homes were damaged to an
approximate of $300,000 value.
Again, thanks to you and your personnel for a job well
done.
Officer John Ewald
Reserves Groth, Saba, and
Mr. and Mrs. Highland
Sincerely,
Mol Kilbo
Chief of Police
MK:cjh
Pm 1/~17
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
320 Washington Av. South
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343
May
935-3381
FROM:
Those Listed Below
Dennis L. Hansen ~~
Hennepin County Traffic Engineer
SUBJEuT: Temporary Closure of CSAH 125 at the Bridge Between Black Lake
and Spring Park Bay.
On Tuesday, May 15, 1984. CSAH 125 (Interlachen Rd.) will be closed for
reconstruction of the bridge between Black Lake and Spring Park Bay.
A marked detour will be provided via CSAH 15 and Wilshire Boulevard.
The temporary closure will be in effect approximately 4 months.
DLH/JMD: de
cc: Hennepin CountM
Board of Ccrmmissioners
Bureau of Public Service-A.J.Lee
Transportation Staff
Sheriff' s Department
Sheriff's Radio Tower
Library Director-Robert Rohlf
Minnesota Dept. of T_ransportatio~
Distrie~ 5 Engineer-Wm. Crawford
Distric~ 5 Traffic Engineer-Joel Katz
Road Information & Permit Office
Minnesota Highway Patrol East
Minnesota Highway Patrol West
Mun~ci~lities
City of Mound
Leonard L. Koppy, City Manager
Lyle Swanson, City Engineer
Fire Chief
Police Chief'
City of Spring Park
City Administrator
Police Chief
Fire Chief
School District 277 - Westonka
Superintendent
Transportation Director
Emergency Service
Methodist Hospital-Emergency
North Memorial Medical Center-
Emergency
Smith Ambulance
Waconia Ridgeview Hospital
Ambulance Service
Mid~est Med Kab
Ken Eskedahl, Hennepin County
Medical Center
Mpls. Star and Tribune, Editor
Sun Newspapers, Editor
Post Publishing, Editor
The Laker
Radio Stations.~ KI~B, KRSI,
WWTC, KSTP, WCCO, WDGY, KQRS
Metropoli tan _Traffic Cgntr ol
John Lundell
American Automobile
Ken Mohr, Domestic Travel
MTC Transit Operating Division
Glen Peterson, Mgr. St. Operations
Superintendent
HENNEPIN COUNTY
an eaual opoodunity employer
(~VO ~1 .,,
N3HDV"IEI ~1LNI
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
320 Washington Av. South
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343
935-3381
May 11, 198~
FROM:
Those Listed Bel~
Dennis h. Hansen
Hennepin Cowry T~f~ic End,er
SUBJECT: Temporary Closure of CSAH 125 at the Bridge Between Black Lake
and Spring Park Bay.
The temporary closure of CSAH 125 at the Bridge between Black Lake and Sprin~
Park Bay .originally scheduled for May 15; 198~ has been postponed.
DLH/JMD: de
cc: Hennepin County
Board of Commissioners
Bureau of Public Service-A.J.Lee
Transportation Staff
Sheriff' s Department
Sheriff's Radio Tower
Library Director-Robert Rohlf
Minnesota Dept. of Trans_nortation
District 5 Engineer-Wm. Crawford
District 5 Traffic Engineer-Joel Katz
Road Information & Permit Office
Minnesota Highway Patrol East
Minnesota Highway Patrol West
Municipalities
City of Mound
Leonard L. Koppy, City Manager.
Lyle Swanson, City Engineer
Fire Chief
Police Chief
City of Spring Park
City Administrator
Police Chief
Fire Chief
School District 277 - Westonka
Superintendent
Transportation Director
Emergency Service
Methodist Hospital-Emergency
No~th Mamorial Medical Center-
Emergency
Smith Ambulance
Waconia Ridgeview Hospital
Ambulance Service
Midwest Med Kab
Ken Eskedahl, Hennepin County
Medical Center
Mpls. Star and Tribune, Edito~
Sun Newspapers, Editor
Post Publishing, Edito~
The Laker
~adio Stations, KDWB, KRSI,
WWTC, KSTP, WCCO, WDGY, KQRS
Metropolitan Traffi9 Control
John Lundell
American Automobile Association
Ken Mohr, Domestic Travel
MTC Transit Operating Division
Glen Peterson, Mgr. St. Operations
Superintendent
HENNEPIN COUNTY
an ~qual oppodunlty employer
Pg. 1420
Metropolitan Council
300 Metro Square Building
Seventh and Robert Streets
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Telephone (612) 291-635~
May 1, 1984
TO:
Local Officials From Municipalities, Townships and Counties in
Metropolitan Council Districts 13 and western half of 14
This year the Minnesota Legislature passed a bill creating a Regional Transit
Board. The Board will coordinate transit operations within the metropolitan
area and implement the Metropolitan Council's long-term transit plans;
establish a transit information service; adopt a transit service implementation
plan; contract with transit operators in the metropolitan area to provide
transit services; coordinate special transportation services for the elderly,
handicapped or others with special transportation needs; administer contracts
for paratransit projects; appoint the members of the Metropolitan Transit
Comnission; and other transit-related responsibilities. The new Board will
consist of fourteen members from the metropolitan area plus a chair to be
appointed by the Governor.
The Metropolitan Council is required by law to hold a public hearing to accept
statements from people who are interested in being appointed and to hear
recommendations on appointments. The public hearing for Regional Transit Board
Chair will be held on Wednesday, June 6 at 7:00 p.m. in the Metropolitan
Council offices, 300 Metro Square Building, 7th and Robert Streets, St. Paul.
The Council shall then provide the Governor with a list of nominees for this
position.
A public hearing will be held for interested parties and applicants for
Regional Transit Board District M on Wednesday, June 27 at 7:00 p.m. in the
Council Chambers of Hopkins City Hall, 1010 First Street South, Hopkins.
District M has the same boundaries as Metropolitan Council Districts 13 and
western half of 14. The deadline for applications is June 6, 1984. Public
hearings for all fourteen districts will be held between June 6-28 with the
Council making appointments on July 12, 1984. Attached is a list of individual
hearings within each district.
If you have any questions, contact~Bill Lester at 291-6630.
Maurice K Dorton
Staff Administrator
MKD:sl
An Equ~,l Op[~or~unity Employer
Pg. 1421
ANOKA C ·
HENNEi CO.
iNOEPENOENC~M NEDINA
COON IAPIOS
GELAINE
HOLLYWOOD
CAMDEN
WATERTOWN
WACONiA
I
CARVER CO.
NQIIWOOO
I COL
SHAKOPEE
LtNWO00
COLUMBUS
IrOIlST LAKE NEW SCANDtA
LIND LAKES
:IICLE WASHINGTON CO.
STILLWATER
GRANT
WOOOlGIY
INYEI GIOYE
HEIGHTS
DAKOTA CO.
IOSENOUNT
I
[RAVENN~
REGIONAL TRANSIT BOARD DISTRICTS
[7 FALCO~ NEtGHT~ 2, GEN LAKE
:, NEKaOTA 26 lllC~WOOO AN~A
County Boundary
Municipal Bounclary
Township Boundary
1422
PUBLIC HEARING LOCATIONS FOR THE REGIONAL TRANSIT BOARD
Wednesday, June 6
Chair
District A {Council District
Metropolitan Council Chambers
300 Metro Square Building
7th and Robert Streets
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
7:00 p.m.
Thursday, June 7
District B (Council District 2)
Highland Park Jr. High School
Room 105
975 South Snelling Avenue
St. Paul, Minnesota 56116
7:00 p.m.
Monday, June 11
District C (Council District 3)
Roseville City Hall
Police Training Room
N.W. Corner.of Lexington & County Road C
St. Paul, Minnesota 55113
7:00 p.m.
Tuesd.ay, June 12
District D (Council District 4)
Regina High School
Room 116
4225 Third Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55409
7:00 p.m.
Wednesday, June 13
District E (Council District 5)
South High School
Room 101
3131 - 19th Avenue south
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55407
7:00 p.m.
Thursday, June 14
District F (Council District 6)
Hennepin County Government Center
Meeting Room A ~ Level A
300 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487
7:00 p.m.
Monday, June I8
District G (Council District 8)
Fridley City Hall
Classroom - Basement Level
6431 University Avenue
Frtdley, Minnesota 55~32
7:00 p.m.
Tuesday, June 19
District H (Council District 10)
Brooklyn Center City Hall
Council Chambers
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
7:00 p.m.
Wednesday, June 20
District I (Council District 11)
St. Louis Park City Hall
Community Room - First Level
5005 Minnetonka Blvd.
St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416
7:00 p.m.
Thursday, June 21
District J (Council District 12)
Richfield Community Center
General Room
7000 Nicollet Avenue'
Richfield, Minnesota 55423
7:00 p.m.
Monday, June 25
District K (Council District I5)
West St. Paul City Hall
Conference Room
1616 Humboldt Avenue ~o
West St. Paul, Minnesota 55118
7:00 p.m.
Tuesday, June 26 '
District L (Council District 9 & 7),
White Bear Lake City Hall
Council Chambers, Worth Bldg.
4820 Cook Avenue
White Bear Lake, Mn. 55110
7:00 p.m.
Wednesday, June 27
District M (Council District 13 & 1/2 of 14)
Hopkins City Hall ,
Council Chambers
1010 First Street South
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343
7:00 p.m.
league of minnesota oities
May 9, 1984
TO:
FROM:
RE:
Clerks, Managers, and Administrators
Research Staff
Industrial Revenue Bonds
As you know, recently passed state legislation creates an allocation
system for issuance of industrial revenue bonds by cities. (See the
LMC Action Alert dated May 3 for a more complete summary of this law.)
The law provides that certain cities which have historically used
IRB's are "entitlement cities." Specifically, entitlement cities
are those which have issued an average of $1 million or more of IRB's
in three of the past four years. (To determine if you are an entitlement
city, look at the total IRB's you issued in 1980, 1981, 1982, and
1983, respectively. Take the three highest years, and add the amount.
If the total exceeds $3,000,000, you are an entitlement city.) Certain
IRB's are excluded from the total, however,
Entitlement cities are required to certify to the Department of Economic
Development the amounts of IRB's they have issued in the past four
years. This certification must be returned by May 29, 1984.
Certification forms have been sent to all cities known to be entitlement
cities. I[sou fe~l sou may quali~s and have not received the forms,
co~.act Dick Nadeau, Department of Energs and Economic Development,
imme.di, atel~, at (612)'" 297-4398, or (612) 297-3547.
If your city is not an entitlement city, but is considering anIRB
issue, you will want to move the process along as quickly as you can,
so that your application can be submitted before Septmeberl~at
which time the entitlement issuers are permitted to compete for the
unused IRB capacity reserved for non-entitlement cities.
(NOTE: The May 3 Action Alert contained 2 errors. The cutoff date
for non-entitlement cities exclusive access to the pool is Sept. 1,
rather than Sept. 30. And, the number of the bill in Congress is
H.R. 4170, rather than H.R. 1470.)
PT: sb
league of minnesota oities
May 9, 1984
TO:
FROM:
RE:
Clerks, Managers, and Administrators
Research Staff
Industrial Revenue Bonds
As you know, recently passed state legislation creates an allocation
system for issuance of industrial revenue bonds by cities. (See the
LMC Action Alert dated May 3 for a more complete summary of this law.)
The law provides that certain cities which have historically used
IRB's are "entitlement cities." Specifically, entitlement cities
are those which have issued an average of $1 million or more of IRB's
in three of the past four years. (To determine if you are an entitlement
city, look at the total IRB's you issued in 1980, 1981, 1982, and
1983, respectively. Take the three highest years, and add the amount.
If the total exceeds $3,000,000, you are an entitlement city.) Certain
IRB's are excluded from the total, however,
Entitlement cities are required to certify to the Department of Economic
Development the amounts of IRB's they have issued in the past four
years. This certification must be returned by May 29, 1984.
Certification forms have been sent to all cities known to be entitlement
cities. If Sou feel Sou maS qualifS and have not received the forms,
contact Dick Nadeau, Department.,of Energy and Economic Development,
immediately, at (612) 297-4398, or (612) 297-3547.
If your city is not an entitlement city, but is considering an IRB
issue, you will want to move the process along as quickly as you can,
so that your-application can be submitted before Septmeberl~]at
which time the entitlement issuers are permitted to compete for the
unused IRB capacity reserved for non-entitlement cities.
(NOTE: The May 3 Action Alert contained 2 errors. The cutoff date
for non-entitlement cities exclusive access to the pool is Sept. 1,
rather than Sept. 30. And, the number of the bill in Congress is
H.R. 4170, rather than H.R. 1470.)
PT: sb
league of minnesota cities
May 3, 1984
TO:
Mayors, Managers and Clerks
FROM: Donald A. Slater, Executive Director
RE:
STATE OF MINNESOTA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BOND ALLOCATION LAW
The Legislature enacted and the Governor signed into law, the compromise state
industrial development bond allocation bill at the end of the last session of
the Legislature. The League supported this legislation because the pending
federal industrial development bond limitation bill (H.R. 1470) contains a
much more restrictive allocation system than we were able to negotiate through
the State Legislature and the Governor's office.
Under the new law, 85% of the funds allocated to Minnesota for industrial
development bonds will be available to local issuers. The new law divides
local issuers into two categories, entitlement issuers (municipalities who
have averaged more than $1 million in industrial development bonds for three
of the past four years) and non-entitlement issuers (those who may apply to a
reserve pool of funds administered by the State Department of Energy and
Economic Development.
The law requires that entitlement municipalities provide information to the
Department of Energy and Economic Development within 30 days of the signature
of the new law by the Governor regarding their bonds issued over the last four
years. This information must be in the hands of the Department of Energy and
Economic Development not later than May 28, 1984.
The Department of Energy and Economic Development will be publishing further
information with respect to this program. The League will work cooperatively
with the Department on this enterprise. Cities may contact Dick Nadeau at
(612) 297-4398 or 297-3547 for additional information from the Department.
The League research staff will attempt to answers any inquiries you may have
on this subject and will be able to supply a limited number of copies of the
legislation as well as a more detailed summary of the law should you find it
necessary.
Cities who are not entitlement IDB issuers, as defined in the new law, should
prepare to make application to the IDB pool administered by the Department of
Energy and Economic Development. It is important that these applications be
developed as soon as possible in view of the fact that the non-entitlement
communities will have exclusive access to the pool through September 30 of
', ~ ,~' ~..,e ~it.v. ~'~,e,n~~ e ~-~ ~t, ~. ,o~ ~_.'! m~ n~-~ ....... ora 5~ ~ ~q (~ 't ~ ~7-~00
-over-
Mayors, Managers and Clerk
Page 2
May 3, 1984
each year. After that time, however, unallocated funds in the pool will
undoubtedly become quite competitive because the entitlement communities as
well as the state government may make application for the use of these funds.
Prior to September 30, non-entitlement communities will only have to meet four
of the processing points established in the new law in order to have their
projects funded.
It should also be noted that the state law will not be applicable to the~
issuance of IDBs if Congress fails to enact a per capita limitation system as
envisioned in H.R. 1470, and, indeed, it could be argued that this is a
substantial amount of trouble for cities just on the contingency that Congress
may enact a bad system. It was, however, the view of the League's Development
Strategies Committee and Board of Directors that the prospect of the severe
limits in the pending federal bill were so difficult that this initiative and
effort were fully justified.
DAS:lw
SUMMARY OF LAWS OF MINNESOTA 1984, CHAPTER 528 (IDB ALLOCATION BILL)
BACKGROUND
State legislation was enacted as the result of proposed federal legislation (H.R. 4170)
that restricts the issuance of industrial revenue bonds. The proposed federal
legislation would limit the use of industrial revenue bonds by making taxable the
interest on any bonds that were issued in excess of a proposed state ceiling of $150 per
capita and which did not comply with other restrictions in the legislation. It is
estimated that the federal bond limit would be approximately $600 million a year for the
next two years. Nearly all types of IDBs, except for certain refundings, rental housing
projects, and 501(c)3 (non-profit) uses are included in the ceiling. It is estimated
that the cap is substantially lower than current use of IDBs in Minnesota.
In addition to limiting, for the first time, the amount of IDBs that may be issued by a
state or local entity, the federal legislation would allocate the ceiling 50% to the
state and 50% to "local issuers" in proportion to their population. The allocation
could be modified by the Governor, or, after enactment of the federal legislation, by
the state legislature. Before the end of the 1984 session, the state legislature passed
H.F. 2186 (Chapter 582) which was signed into law April 26, 1984. Because it was passed
fore final federal action on H.R. 4170, the state statute authorizes the Governor to
a proclamation implementing the plan to give it full force and effect.
Chapter 582 which was the result of much study and negotiation by city representatives,
provides a more equitable allocation of the state ceiling than was provided in the
proposed federal legislation. It is important to note that the state law will not go
into effect if no federal IDB ceiling is imposed, and it will be repealed January 1,
1986.
HIGHLIGHTS OF CHAPTER 582
The state law provides that the $600 million state ceiling is allocated as follows:
1. .Approximately '$95 million (in 1984) to state agencies for student loans
agricultural, energy, and economic development projects, and
e
The remainder to "local issuers" which include cities, urban towns,
housing and redevelopment and port authorities, area or municipal
redevelopment agencies, and counties.
ALLOCATION TO LOCAL ISSUERS
Of the approximately $505 million allocated to "local issuers", 80% goes to
"entitlement" issuers and 20% to a pool for all other users. Any unused amount of an
allocation to the state or the local issuers is added to the pool. Up to 49% of the
-over-
Pn lb9~
-2-
pool is reserved for certain resource recovery and energy projects (which is expected to
be primarily county applications), while the rest will be distributed pursuant to ~
lication process from the pool.
This allocation process is effective from January 1 to August 31 of each calendar year.
After that, special procedures are used to ensure that both entitlement users and state
agencies who do not need their full allocation, share it with other potential users by
transferring unused allocations to the pool for reallocation.
ENTITLEMENT ISSUERS -- DEFINITION
An "entitlement issuer" is a local issuer (treating all local issuers with coterminous
boundaries as one) with an average annual previous use of $1,000,000 or more based on
the highest annual use in 3 of the calendar years 1980-83. "Previous use" means the
principal amount of IDBs subject to limitation during a specified period under a
"federal imitation act" (an act of Congress limiting the amount of tax-exempt IDBS
issuable during any calendar year, being H.R. 4170 for now).
FIRST CERTIFICATION
To obtain an entitlement allocation, aY May 28, 1984, an entitlement issuer must submit
to the Department of Energy and Economic Development a certification as to previous use
for 1980-83, and such average annual previous use. Within 15 days thereafter, DEED will
determine and publish the amount of issuance authority allocated to each complying
issuer. Second Certification. Within 15 days after a federal limitation act is
effective, any issuer who submitted a first certification shall submit a new one as to
previous use as defined by the federal limitation act for the same period. Within 15
days thereafter, DEED will determine and publish the revised amount of issuance
~thority allocated to the c~mplying issuers. Failure to make the second certification
~ults in forfeiture of the unused previous allocation.
AMOUNT OF ENTITLEMENT
The aggregate entitlement amount will be prorated to each entitlement issuer on the
basis of its previous use after each certification. The amount allocated to each
entitlement issuer submitting its certification will be a fraction of the amount
allocated to all entitlement issuers. The numerator of the fraction is the entitlement
issuer's previous use average, the denominator is the combined previous use average
certified by all entitlement issues. Authority after the second certification is
reduced by IDBs previously issued. If reducted to below zero or if the entity is no
longer an entitlement issuer after the second certification, IDBs already issued reduce
amounts available for other local issuers. Allocation among coterminous local issuers
is by a city council or county board, and may be made to any project for which IDBs were
issued after December 31, 1983, without regard to any preliminary resolutions.
APPLICATION TO THE POOL
After July 31, an entitlement issuer may also apply for an allocation from the pool, and
need not submit a preliminary resolution with its application.
JOINT POWERS
An entitlement issuer or the IRRRB (Iron Range Resource Recovery Board) may enter into
an agreement whereby another entity uses all or any part of the entitlement or statutory
authority to issue its own IDBs. A entity issues the IDBs for which the local issuer
received a competitive allocation.
LOCAL ISSUERS -- APPLICATION
non-entitlement issuer may apply for an allocation of issuance authority by submitting
to DEED, on or before the 20th day of any month from December to September, an
-more-
-3-
application accompanied ~¥ 1) a preliminary re~olution identifying the proposed project
IDB size and 2) an application deposit equalling 1% of the requested allocation (to
returned upon rejection). Allocations may be requested for IDBs issued prior to
Chapter 528's effective date, and need not be requested for every project for which a
preliminary resolution has been adopted.
ALLOCATION PROCEDURE
The DEED shall rank each application on the basis of its point total (see below).
Allocations of available issuance authority are made by the 5th day of the next month on
the basis of numerical rank, except 1) at least 4 points are needed, 2) certain waste
management projects receive an allocation without regard to numerical rank if less than
49% of the pool amount is allocated to them, 3) the DEED and IRRRB are preferred for
allocations returned by the others by September 1, for projects with four or more
points, and 4) ties in numerical rank are broken by lot unless the tying issuers
otherwise agree.
CRITERIA FOR POINTS
One point each is awarded for 19 criteria, including criteria relating to the issuer
(high unemployment, declining employment, tax base changes, or minority population), the
project (number of jobs, jobs per IDB amount, market value, energy conservation,
pollution control, rehabilitation of building [especially in historic areas], waste
management or solid waste, or where the issuer without reimbursement pays for a credit
enhancement device), the project site (enterprise zone, meeting criteria for a tax
increment redevelopment district, service connections already available, or already
properly zoned), and project ownership (owners are without a similar business in the
te or are not transferring existing employment within the state, or are women or
orities).
RETENTION OF ALLOCATIONS -- SEPT. 1 UNTIL OCT. 31
From September 1 to October 31, an allocation (by entitlement or competition) may be
retained only if the issuer submits to DEED by September 1 (1) a letter of intent to
issue IDBs pursuant to its allocation or any portion thereof before the end of the year
or different federal time period and 2) for entitlement issuers, a 1% application
deposit for the remaining unused allocation or portion to be retained. Otherwise the
allocation or portion not already used is cancelled (with return of any application
deposit) and reallocated. Thereafter, the application deposit will be returned only if
1) any part of the allocation so retained is returned for reallocation by October 31 or
2) the IDBs are issued.
POOL -- RECEIVING ALLOCATIONS FROM SEPT,. 1 UNTIL OCT. 31
From September 1 to October 31, any amounts available for (re)allocation will be
allocated among all issuers based on point rankings, Entitlement issuers may apply only
if they have issued IDBs equal to their allocation or return any remainder for
reallocation.
POOL -- RETAINING OR RECEIVING ALLOCATIONS FROM NOV. 1 - DEC. 31 (FINAL ALLOCATION)
From November 1 to December 31 any amount allocated which is not both previously
allocated and subject to a preliminary resolution for a specific project will be
reallocated among issuers based on the point ranking, with no minimum point requirement
(ties are broken as noted above). An issuer must apply for a final allocation by
October 20 with a preliminary resolution of intent to issue IDBs for a specific project
the end of the year or different federal time period, and the 1% application deposit.
notifies applicants by November 5, and later as any authority becomes available.
-ov~r--
Pg. 1
-4-
CARRYOVER ALLOCATION
For a return of 1/3 of the application deposit, an issuer can By December 20 returt an
ocatton it will not use. These amounts will be reallocated (by lot or other a§reed
%od if insufficient for all carryover projects) by December 31 amount issuers
applyin§ by December 10 for projects certified to quality for federal carryover
treatment (and thus to use the allocation for IDBs issued after year end).
NOTICE OF ISSUE
Within five days after issuing IDBs, issuers must give the DEED notice stating the date
of issuance, the allocation under which issued and the principal amount. If notice is
not filed, the IDBs shall be void unless the DEED Commissioner waives this provision.
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS ON PROJECTS
If a federal limitation act is adopted, effective 90 days after its signing by the
President or passage over his veto, Chapter 474 projects subject to limitation shall be
subject to certain conditions similar to those of H.R. 4170, and the following: a) the
governing body of the issuer must find that a project (other than under §474.02, subd.
If) would not be undertaken but for the availability of IDB financing; and b) no more
than 10% of the IDB proceeds may be used to finance movable equipment not constituting a
fixture.
DAS:JB:lw
Pm I~R1
May 8, 1984
JURAN & MOODY, INC.
Municipal Bonds Exclusively Since 1939
Minnesota Mutual Life Building
400 North Robert Street- Suite 800
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101
Telephone 612/224-1500
Minn. Wats 1-800-752-4886
Outstate Wats 1-800-328-3833
Mr. Jonathan R. Elam
City Manager
City Hall
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
RE: STATE LAW ALLOCATING THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT BONDS
Dear Mr. Elam:
As you may know, H.R. 4170, passed by the United States House of
Representatives, places a stringent per capita limitation on the
amount of industrial development bonds ("IDBs") which may be issued
in each state. The Minnesota Legislature has adopted Laws of
Minnesota 1984, Chapter 582, which allocates any such limited bonding
authority to the state and its political subdivisions if a "federal
limitation act" such as H.R. 4170 should be enacted.
Enclosed is a summary of Chapter 582 and the relevant provisions of
H.R. 4170. We recommend that you immediately review the summary to
determine whether action should be taken, particularly if the City is
planning to finance any IDB projects in 1984.
Under Chapter 582, a City may issue IDBs either as an "entitlement
issuer" or as a local issuer competing for a limited pool of bonding
authori~/. The deadline for qualifying as an_e_n~itlement issuer is
May 29. The City, however, may either not qualify as an entitlement
issuer or may conclude that it is in its best interests to compete
for the limited pool of bonding authority. Such competition is tied
to a specific project, requires a deposit equal to 1% of the amount
of bonding authority requested and is based on the number of points,
out of 19 possible, assigned to the project. The procedures for
securing such competitive bonding authority will not go into effect
unless and until a federal limitation act has actually been acted.
Since we have served as underwriter to your City on either current or
prior transactions, we want you to be aware of the May 29 deadline
for applying for entitlement issuer status. Please contact me with
any questions you may have.
Sincerely,
JURAN & MOODY, INC.
Vice President
RLP/eh
e~c.
Saint Paul, MN - Minneapolis. MN - Houston, TX - Clearwater, FL
SUMMARY OF LAWS OF MINNESOTA, 1984, Cf~%F~ER 582
May 2 · 1984
ALT~0CATION OF AUTHORITY TO ISSUE INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT BONDS SUBJECT TO FEDERAL LIMITATION
INTRODUCTION
Proposed federal legislation ("H.R. 4170") makes
taxable the interest on a "private activity bond" issued in
excess of "an authority's private activity bond limit for such
calendar year". This bond limit applies to all student loan
bonds and "industrial development bonds" ("IDBs") other than
certain refunding, rental housing and certain exempt facility
bonds. The limit is based on a state ceiling equal to $150
multiplied by the state's population, subject to a possible
upward adjustment for the year 1984 and a 1/3 downward
adjustment commencing in 1986. The League of Minnesota Cities
has estimated that, unless it is modified in the finally
adopted federal legislation, the bond limit for Minnesota will
be about $600,000,000 for 1984 and 1985. H.R. 4170 allocates
50% of the bond limit to the state and the balance to local
issuers in proportion to their population. This allocation m~y
be modified by the Governor or, after enactment of H.R. 4170,
the State Legislature. Laws of Minnesota, 1984, Chapter 582
[S.F. 2100] (the "Act") attempts to effect such a change, but
since it was not enacted after enactment of H.R. 4170, the
revised allocation will only become effective if the
Governor issues a proclamation implementing the allocation
provisions of S.F. 2100. The Governor signed S.F. 2100 on
April 26, 1984 but has not, to date, issued a confirming
proclamation. We understand that the Minnesota Department of
Energy and Economic Development has recommended to the Governor
that he issue such a proclamation, which requires two weeks
published notice. The act sunsets on January 1, 1986.
ALT~)CATIONS OF AMOUNTS TO LOCAL ISSUERS
By statute, the Higher Education Coordinating Board
("HECB"), the Iron Range Resources and Rehabilitation Board
("IRRRB") and the Department of Energy and Economic Development
("EED") receive the first $100,000,000 a year of bonding
authority. The balance of Minnesota's per capita limit is
allocated among local issuers of IDBs. From January 1 to
August 31, 80% of this amount is available solely to
entitlement issuers, and 20% solely to other local issuers.
Allocations not used by certain dates are to be reallocated
unless preserved by certain action.
ISSUERS
Definition. An "entitlement issuer" is a local
issuer (treating all local issuers with coterminous boundaries
as one) with an average annual previous use of $1,000,000 or
more based on the highest annual use in three of the calendar
years 1980 through 1983. "Previous use" means the principal
amount of IDBs subject to limitation during a specified period
under a "federal limitation act" (defined to mean an act of
Congress limiting the amount of tax exempt IDBs issuable during
any calendar year). For purposes of the first certification,
described below, it is assumed that the standards of H.R. 4170
will apply. If, however, the requirements of H.R. 4170 are
modified prior to its adoption, the finally adopted Federal
requirements will be used to determine the amount of previous
use to be identified in the second certification. For example,
if the federal limitation act ultimately excludes all "exempt
purpose" IDBs from the per capita limit, local issuers cannot
take such issues into account in determining previous use.
First Certification. To obtain an entitlement
allocation, an entitlement issuer must submit to EED, on or
before May 29, 1984, a certification setting forth both its
previous use for 1980 through 1983 and its average annual
previous use for the highest three of the four years, using the
federal limitation act then in effect or, if no such act is in
effect, H.R. 4170 as reported by the House Ways and Means
Committee on March 5, 1984. Within 15 days after the deadline
for that submission, EED must determine and publish the amount
of issuance authority allocated to each complying issuer.
Second Certification. Within 15 days after a federal
limitation act becomes effective, any issuer who submitted a
first certification when no federal limitations act was then in
effect must submit a new certification setting forth its
previous use for the same period, but determined under the
terms of the finally adopted federal limitation act. Within 15
days after the deadline for the second certification, EED will
determine and publish the revised amount of issuance authority
allocated to the complying issuers. Failure to make the second
certification results ~in the forfeiture of any unused portion
of the previous allocation.
Amount of Entitlement. After each certification, the
aggregate entitlement amount will be prorated to each entitle-
ment issuer on the basis of its previous use. Available
bonding authority, as determined after the second certifica-
tion, will be reduced by IDBs issued under the first
certification. If bonding authority is reduced to, or below,
zero, or if the entity is no longer an entitlement issuer after
the second certification, the amount of IDBs already issued by
2
that issuer will be treated as being issued within the issuer's
entitlement, but will be deducted ~rom the pooled amounts
available for other non-entitlement local issuers. Allocation
among coterminous local issuers is by a city council or county
board, and may be made to any project for which IDBs were
issued after December 31, 1983, without regard to any
preliminary resolutions.
Application to the Pool. After July 31, an
entitlement issuer may also apply for an allocation from the
pool, and need not submit a preliminary resolution with its
application.
Joint Powers. An entitlement issuer, or the IRRRB,
may enter into an agreement whereby another entity uses all or
any part of the entitlement or statutory authority to issue its
own IDBs.o A local issuer may also enter into an agreement
whereby another entity issues the IDBs for which the local
issuer received a competitive allocation.
OTHER LOCAL ISSUERS
Application. A nonentitlement issuer may apply for
an allocation of issuance authority by submitting to the EED,
on or before the 2Oth day of any month from December to
September (commencing only after any federal limitation act is
actually enacted into law), an application accompanied by (1) a
preliminary resolution identifying the proposed project and the
size of the proposed bond issue and (2) an application deposit
equalling 1% of the requested allocation (to be returned upon
rejection of the application). Allocations may be requested
for IDBs issued prior to the effective date of the Act
(April 27, 1984), and need not be requested for every project
for which a preliminary resolution has been adopted.
Allocation Procedure. The EED shall rank each
application on the basis of its point total (see below).
Allocations of available issuance authority are made by the 5th
day of the month immediately following the submission of the
application on the basis of numerical rank, except (1) no
Project will receive any allocation at this time unless it
receives at least 4 points, (2) certain waste management
projects receive an allocation without regard to numerical rank
if less than 49% of the pool amount is allocated to them, (3)
the EED and IRRRB are preferred for allocations returned by the
other by September 1, for projects with 4 or more points, and
(4) ties in numerical rank are broken by lot unless the tying
issuers otherwise agree.
criteria for Points. One point is awarded for each
of 19 criteria, including criteria relating to the issuer (high
unemployment, declining employment, tax base changes, or
minority population), the project (number of jobs, ratio of
jobs per dollars of bond financing, market value, energy
conservation, pollution control, rehabilitation of building
[especially in historic areas], waste management or solid
waste, or where the issuer, without reimbursement, pays for a
credit enhancement device), the project site (enterprise zone,
meeting criteria for a tax increment redevelopment district,
service connections already available, or already properly
zoned), and project ownership (owners are without a similar
business in the state or are not transferring existing
employment within the state, or are women or minorities).
RETENTION OF AI/X)CATIONS - SEPTEMBER I'UNTIL OCTOBER 31
From September 1 to October 31, an allocation (by
entitlement or competition) which has not yet been used may be
retained only if the issuer submits to EED by September 1 (1) a
letter of intent to issue IDBs pursuant to its allocation, or
any portion thereof, before the end of the year or different
federal time period and (2) for entitlement issuers, a 1%
application deposit for the remaining unused allocation or
portion thereof to be retained. Otherwise, the portion of the
allocation not already used is cancelled (with return of any
application deposit) and reallocated. Thereafter the
application deposit will be returned only if (1) any part of
the allocation so retained is returned for reallocation by
October 31 or (2) the IDBs are issued.
POOL - RECEIVING ~L~OCATIONS FROM
SEPTEMBER 1 UNTIL OCTOBER 31
From September 1 to October 31, any amounts available
for (re)allocation will be allocated among all issuers based on
point rankings. Entitlement issuers may apply only if they
have issued IDB's equal to their allocation or return any
remainder for reallocation.
POOL - RETAINING OR RECEIVING ~L~OCATIONS FROM
NOVEMBER 1 UNTIL DECEMBER 31 (FINAL AT.~)CATION)
From November 1 to December 31 any amount allocated
which is not both previously allocated and subject to a
preliminary resolution for a specific project will be
reallocated among issuers based on the point ranking, with no
minimum-point requirement (ties are broken as noted above).
4
The Issuer's application for this final allocation must be made
by October 20 and must be accompanied by a preliminary
re~olution o~ intent %0 i~ue IDB~ ~or a specific project ~y
the end of the year (or different federal time period) and the
1% application deposit. EED will notify applicants by November
5, or later if any authority becomes available.
CARRYOVER AL~CATION
For a return of 1/3 of the application deposit, an
issuer can, by December 20, return an allocation it will not
use. These amounts will be reallocated (by lot or other agreed
method if insufficient for all carryover projects) by December
31 among issuers applying by December 10 for projects certified
to qualify for federal carryover treatment (and thus to use the
allocation for IDBs issued after year end).
NOTICE OF ISSUE
Within 5 days after issuing IDBs, issuers must give
the EED notice stating the date of issuance, the allocation
under which issued and the principal amount of such IDBs. If
notice is not so filed, the IDBs shall be void unless the EED
Commissioner waives this provision.
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS ON PROJECTS
If a.federal limitation act is adopted, effective 90
days after its signing by the President or passage over his
veto, Chapter 474 projects which are subject to the limitations
contained therein shall be subject to certain conditions
similar to those of H.R. 4170, and the following additional
conditions: (a) the governing body of the issuer must find
that a project (other than under §474.02, Subd. lf) would not
be undertaken but for the availability of IDB financing; and
(b) no more than 10% of the IDB proceeds may be used to finance
movable equipment not constituting a fixture.
Attorneys at Law
ES $. HOLMES
ID L. G RAVEN
N R. LARSO,~
RLES R. WEAVER
ROBERT L. DAVlDSON
ROBERT J. LINDALL
JOHN M. LE.FEvRE. JR.
LARRY M. WERTHEIM
JOHN C. UTLEY
STANLEY E. KEHL
JONATHAN P. SCOLL
HOLM£S & GRAV£N
CHARTERED
470 Pillsbury Center Minneapolis. MN 55402
(612) 338-117'/
2200 Northwestern Financial Center. Bloomington, MN 55431
(6 ~ 2) 893-940~
MEMORANDUM
J~FFR£Y R. [~RAIJCHL£
RICHARD LEL^ND ]~ROOKS
STEFANIE ~. GALEY
DANIEL R. ~ELSO~
~RB*RA L. PORTWOOD
ROBERT J. DEIKE
~ARK A. LI~DGRE~
L*URA R. KAISLER
CHRISTINE M. CHALE
MARY G. DOSS~XS
Of Counsch
KATHERINE M. HOLMES
TO: Concerned Public Officials
DATE: May 9, 1984
RE: Allocation of Authority to Issue Tax Exempt Industrial Development Bonds
Introduction
The Tax Reform Bill of 1984, H.R. 4170, includes among its proposed restrictions on industrial
development bonds a state per capita limit on the amount of tax-exempt industrial development
and student loan bonds issued in any calendar year. In the absence of action by the state
legislature or interim action by the governor, the House bill allocates fifty percent of the overall
cap to the state and its agencies, and fifty percent to other issuers within the state on the basis of
their relative populations.
The Minnesota legislature has adopted an allocation bill, Laws of Minnesota 1984, Chapter 582,
hich is intended to provide a final allocation mechanism for Minnesota's issuers. $43,750,000 in
and $61,500,000 in 1985 would be allocated to the Department of Energy and Economic
Development, to be allocated to state agencies and other issuers within the state. Thirty million
dollars in 1984 and Ten million dollars in 1985 would be allocated to the Higher Education
Coordinating Board for student loans. $23,750,000 in 1984 and $24,500,000 in 1985 would be
allocated to the Iron Range Resources and Rehabilitation Board. Th~ remaining issuance authority
less $1,250,000 in 1984 and less $500,000 in 1985 would be allocated to local issuers as follows:
eighty percent of the authority provided to local issuers would be allocated to issuers who presently
have issued an average of $1,000,000 per year of industrial development bonds in three of the last
four years. These "entitlement" issuers would receive an annual allocation based on a three-year
average of their industrial development bond issues. Other local issuers would compete for the
remaining twenty percent less $1,250,000 in 1984 and less $500,000 in 1985 of local issuer authority
on the basis of certain minimum criteria. Between September 1 and October 31 of each year, all
allocations not committed with a letter ~of intent to issue by the end of the year would be
reallocated among all issuers on the basis of the allocation criteria. During November, all
allocations not yet subject to a preliminary resolution for a specific project would be reallocated
on the basis of the allocation criteria, but with no minimum criteria requirement.
Summary of Provisions.
1. Department of Energy and Economic Development
The Department of Energy and Economic Development (the 'qDepartment") is
designated as the administrative body responsible for reviewing applications for and
making the allocations of issuance authority. The commissioner of the Department of
Energy and Economic Development is to adopt rules, including temporary rules, to provide
for allocation of the $43,750,000 or $16,500,000 of the federally-imposed state volume
-1-
limit available to the state among the department and any other state or local issuing
authority whose obligations are subject to the volume limit imposed by a "federal
limitation act." The term "federal limitation act" is used to refer to any act which, like
the proposal in H.l% 4170, would impose an annual volume limit on the i~uan¢~ of
obligations the interest on which is exempt from inclusion in gross income for purposes of
federal income taxation, and which allows or requires state legislatures to provide for the
allocation of issuance authority under that volume limit. The Department of Energy and
Economic Development is required to make available through August 31 of each year out
of its allocation $5,000,000 in 1984 and $6,000,000 in 1985 for farm loans authorized by
Section 116J.90.
The Department's allocation is cancelled after August 31 of each year except that it
may be retained through October 31 if it designates a specific project and submits a letter
of intent and 1% application deposit. Unused allocation is available for allocation among
pool applicants, with a priority given to the IRRRB for its projects.
2. Higher Education Coordinating Board
The Higher Education Coordinating Board (the "HECB") is allocated $30,000,000 in
1984 and $10,000,000 in 1985. Any unused allocation on September 1, 1985 shall be
available for allocation among local issuers. If the HECB cannot issue tax-exempt
obligations, than its allocation is divided between the Department and local issuers.
3. Iron Range Resources and Rehabilitation Board.
The Iron Range Resources and Rehabilitation Board (the "IRRRB") is allocated $25
million for use from January 1 to October 31 of each year, provided that such allocation is
cancelled on August 31 except to the extent the IRRRB has submitted a letter of intent to
issue and designated a specific project, and submitted a 1% application deposit which is
refunded within 30 days of issuance of obligations or cancellation of allocation by October
31st. Unused allocation amounts are available for allocation in accordance with pool
procedures, except that projects of the Department are given a preference with regard to
such amounts.
4. Entitlement Issuers
An entitlement issuer is any local issuer, defined to include any non-state issuer with
authority to issue obligations which could be subject to the federal limitation act,
including, cities, whether home rule or statutory, towns, housing and redevelopment
authorities or bodies authorized to exercise their powers, port authorities or bodies
authorized to exercise the powers of a port authority, area or municipal redevelopment
agencies, counties, and any other municipal authority or agency other than the iron range
resources and rehabilitation board, which issued an average of $1,000,000 principal
amount of obligations which would be subject to the federal limitation act's volume limit.
Entitlement issuers are entitled to an annual allocation of authority under the volume
limit. The average is based on the amount of obligations issued in the highest three of the
years 1980 through 1983. The amount available for allocation among entitlement issuers
is 80% of the amount remaining after the share of the Department, HECB, and IRRRB,
less $1.25 million in 1984, and less $500,000 in 1985.
Entitlement issuers must apply for an initial allocation by May 27, the date which is
thirty days after adoption of the act. The issuers must submit a certification for the last
four calendar years of the principal amount of obligations issued which would have been
subject to the volume limit had H.R. 4170 been adopted prior to their issuance, together
with their average annual use based on the highest three of the four calendar years
preceding the application. The Department of Energy and Economic Development will use
these figures to determine each entitlement issuers proportionate amount of the eighty
-2-
percent earmarked for all entitlement issuers. The allocations must be published within
15 days after the deadline for the issuer~ certifications. Each entitlement issuer's
allocation will be determined according to the following formula:
aggregate authority
available to entitlement
issuers
one entitlement issuer's
average use for highest 3
of last 4 years
total of such average use
for all entitlement issuers
submitting certification
Within 15 days after the effective date of a federal limitation act, entitlement
issuers must submit a new certification as to previous use as defined, by the federal
limitation act (which may differ from the provisions of H.R. 4170). Within 15 days
thereafter, the Department must publish the revised amount of issuance authority, which
is determined in accordance with the formula set forth above, except that allocation
authority for any entitlement issuer is reduced by the amount of obligations issued by such
entitlement issuer pursuant to the initial allocation. Any obligations issued in excess of
final allocation amounts, including amounts issued by an issuer that does not qualify as an
entitlement issuer after redefinition of terms in the federal limitation act, as adopted,
shall reduce the amount available for allocation to non-entitlement issuers in accordance
with pool procedures.
If two or more local issuers have boundaries which are eo-terminous (for example, a city,
a port authority, and a housing and redevelopment authority which all have the same
boundaries), they are treated as a single issuer for purposes of determining their eligibility
for and the size of any entitlement allocation. The bill allows the city or the county to
allocate the authority among such coterminous issuers.
If an entitlement issuer wishes to retain its allocation from September 1 to October
31, it must submit two things to the Department of Energy and Economic Development.
The first requirement is a letter which states its intent to issue all or a portion of the
allocated authority either before the end of the year or within the time period permitted
by the federal limitation act. This provision is intended to take advantage of any
provisions of the federal limitation act which permit a carry-over of authority for a
project. The second requirement is a deposit of one percent of the amount of the issuer's
allocation with respect to which it has stated its intent to use. Any portion of the
entitlement issuer's allocation which is not covered by a letter of intent and deposit by
September 1 is rea]2ocated among all issuers pursuant to the pool allocation procedures.
An entitlement issuer is entitled to the return of a pro rata portion of its deposit if it
returns all or a portion of its initially allocated authority to the Department on or before
October 31.
Entitlement issuers will be allowed to "share" their allocation by entering into an
agreement allowing any other local issuer or the IRRRB to issue obligations pursuant to
the entitlement issuer's entitlement authority. If such other local issuer or the IRRRB
issues obligations pursuant to this agreement, the entitlement issuer may include that
amount in its annual amount of obligations issued, in order to increase its average
previous use.
5. Local issuer allocations
From January 1 until August 31 of each year, local issuers which are not entitlement
issuers compete among themselves for a portion of the twenty percent of the volume limit
on local issuers remaining after allocation to the Department, HECB, and IRRRB. Then,
from September 1 through October 31, all local issuers, including entitlement issuers, and
-3-
t~e It{RRB and the Department of. Energy and Economic Development compete for any
rem aining am ounts.
Applications for issuance authority are due by the 20th day of each month.
Applications must be submitted with evidence of enactment of a preliminary resolution
and a deposit of one percent of the requested allocation.
Applications will be ranked on the basis of whether the issuer and the project
proposed meet certain criteria. Each application receives a numerical rank based on the
following criteria, with one point for meeting each. The criteria are intended to provide
an objective threshold requirement; once this is met, the point is awarded without further
project comparison. The criteria are as follows:
a. The current rate of unemployment for the applicant is at or above one
hundred ten percent of the statewide average unemployment rate for the previous
year, as determined by the department of economic security. The unemployment
rate for the applicant shall be the greater of (i) the most recent estimate available
for the smallest jurisdiction which wholly includes the jurisdiction of the applicant, as
reported by the department of economic security; or (ii) such other estimate supplied
by the applicant with respect to its jurisdiction, which is documented by the
applicant.
b. The number of individuals employed in the applicant's jurisdiction declined
from the second calendar year prior to the application, to the first calendar year
prior to the application. The estimate of the number of individuals employed for
each year shall be based on the same source, and shall be (i) the most recent estimate
available for the smallest jurisdiction which wholly includes the applicant, as
reported by the department of economic security, or (ii) such other estimate supplied
by the applicant with respect to its jurisdiction, which is documented by the
applicant. ..
c. The number of jobs to be created by the project described in the application
is at least one-tenth of one percent of the number of individuals employed in the first
calendar year prior to the application as determined in the manner provided in (b.)
above.
d. The number of jobs to be created by the project described in the application
is at least 2 jobs for each $100,000 of issuance authority requested for the project.
e. As of the date of application the total market value of all taxable property
in the applicantfs jurisdiction, as based on the most recent certification of assessed
value to the commissioner of the Minnesota department of revenue, has either (i)
declined in relation to the first calendar year prior to such certification or (ii)
increased in relation to the first ~calendar year prior to such certification at a rate
which is not in excess of ninety percent of the rate of increase of the state average
market value over the same period.
f. The estimated market value of the project described in the application is at
least 1/2 of 1% of the total market value of all taxable property in the applicants
jurisdiction as based on the most recent certification of assessed value to the
commissioner of the Minnesota department of revenue.
g. The project is wholly located in an enterprise zone designated pursuant to
section 273.1312.
-4-
1441
h. The project site meets the criteria necessary to qualify as a tax increment
redevelopment district as defined in section 273.73, subdivision 10, provided that the
project site does not have to be included in a tax increment financing district.
i. The project meets one of the following energy eonservation criteria: (i) the
project is eligible for addition federal investment tax credits for energy property; (ii)
the project involves construction or expansion of a district heating system as defined
in section 116J.36; or (iii) the project involves construction of an alternative energy
source as described in section l16J.26(a), (b) or (d), or in section 116J.922, subdivision
6or 7.
j. Ninety percent or more of the proceeds of the proposed obligations will be
used for construction, installation, or addition of equipment used primarily to abate
or control pollutants and to meet or exceed state laws, rules or standards.
k. The project consists of the renovation, rehabilitation or reconstruction of an
existing building which is (i) located in a historic district designated under section
138.73, or on a site listed in the state registry of historical sites under sections
-138.53 to 138.5819; or (ii) designated in the National Register purSuant to 16 U.S.C.
§470a.
1. Ninety percent or more of the proceeds of the proposed obligations will be
used to finance facilities for waste management as defined in section 115A.03,
subdivision 36 of solid waste as defined in section 116.06, subdivision 10.
m. Service connections to sewer and water systems are available to the project
at the time the application is submitted.
n. The minority population in the applicant's jurisdiction is at least one hundred
ten percent of the statewide average as determined from the most recent census
data.
o. As of the time the application is submitted either (a) neither the anticipated
owner of the project, nor any party of which such owner was a controlling partner or
shareholder, or which was a controlling shareholder or partner of such owner, owned
or operated a substantially similar business within the state or (b) the project is an
expansion of a Minnesota business which does not reduce other employment in the
state.
p. A controlling interest in the project will be owned by one or more women or
minority persons.
q. Seventy-five percent or more of the proceeds of the proposed issue will be
used to rehabilitate an existing structure.
r. At the time of application, the property on which the project is to be
located is properly zoned for the proposed use.
s. The project involves a credit enhancement device providing additional
security for bondholders involving commitments or fees to be paid by the issuer other
than out of bond proceeds. No points shall be awarded for credit enhancement
devices financed directly or indirectly by a private, for-profit party which has a
financial interest in the project.
Allocations will be made by the Department of Energy and Economic Development by
the fifth of the month following each application deadline. During the January 1 to
October 31 period, allocations will not be made for applications with less than four points,
-5-
Pa. 1~2
except that forty-nine percent of the pool is available for waste activities, without regard
to numerical rank. If two or more applications have the same numerical rank, and there is
insufficient authority available for both projects, the Department of Energy and Economic
Development will use a lottery to determine which issuer gets the allocation unless the
issuers agree on some other method of determining the allocation. After each allocation
date, the deposits for rejected applications will be returned. Up to Ten million dollars of
any amount returned by the IRRRB is available to the Department of Energy and
Economic Development first. Up to ten million dollars of any amount returned to the pool
by the department is available to the IRRRB first.
If a local issuer which is not an entitlement issuer wishes to retain an allocation received
prior to September 1 after that date, it must file a letter of intent with the department of
energy and economic development. If no letter of intent is submitted, the department of
energy and economic development will return the issuer's deposit and reallocate the
authority. If local issuers, including entitlement issuers, return their authority for
reallocation on or prior to October 31, the 1% deposit is returned.
6. Final Allocation Process
During November and December, any remaining amounts available for allocation will
be allocated among issuers on the basis of the stated criteria, but with no minimum point
requirement. Any allocation previously made is subject to reallocation unless the issuer
has enacted a preliminary resolution with respect to a specific project. Applications must
be submitted by October 20, include evidence of passage of a preliminary resolution for a
specific project, reaffirm intent to issue, and include a one percent deposit. Applications
will be ranked and allocations awarded on the basis of the criteria and methods set forth
in subdivisions 3 and 4 of Section 12, except that no minimum number of points is required
to qualify. Allocations will be awarded on November 5.
If any authority to'issue becomes available for reallocation after November 5, it is to
be allocated among issuers who filed an application by October 20.
If, by December 20, any issuer determines that it will not issue obligations pursuant
to its allocation by the end of the year or within an applicable carry-over period, it may
notify the Department and receive a refund of one-third of its deposit. The bill provides
for a carry-over allocation on or before December 31 of any remaining authority to
prospective issuers which may carry the allocation over to su~equent years. Applications
for the carry-over allocation must be submitted by December 10. If there is insufficient
authority the allocation will be determined by lot.
7. Required Notices
a. Notice of Issue
The bill requires that issuers notify the Department of issuance, s. tating the date
of issue and the principal amount of the obligations. If this notice ~s not filed the
obligations are void unless waived by the commissioner of the Department. This
notice provides the Department of Energy and Economic Development with essential
'monitoring data and triggers a refund requirement. Within 30 days after receipt of a
notice of issue, the Department of Energy and Economic Development is required to
refund a pro-rata portion of any deposit.
b. Notice of available authority.
In order to ensure that local issuers receive notice of available authority in time
to prepare applications, the 'bill provides that the Department of Energy and
Economic Development m.ust publish the allocation remaining available for the next
-6-
month. While this is the only publication requirement, local issuers should be able to
contact the Department of Energy and Economic Development in the interim periods
to determine whether any allocations have been forfeited.
8. Legislative review
The allocation formula is based on a division between entitlement issuers and other
local issuers. On March 1, 1986, the Department of Energy and Economic Development is
required to report to the legislature on the operation and status of the allocation
mechanism.
9. Amendments to Chapter 474
Chapter 474 provides general authority for the issuance of industrial development
bonds. The bill provides for a number of restrictions on the issuance of such obligations if
a federal limitations act is passed. The following limitations take effect 90 days after the
federal limitation act is signed by the President.
The bill amends chapter 474 to require the governing body of the municipality or
redevelopment agency issuing obligations which are subject to a federal limitation act to
make a specific finding that the project to be financed would not be undertaken but for
the availability of financing under Chapter 474.
The bill also adds a number of limitations on the type of project which may be
financed under Chapter 474 which are subject to a federal limitations act; these
limitations are substantially identical to certain provisions of the present form of H.R.
4170. Industrial development bonds may not be issued to finance any airplane, private
luxury box, any facility primarily used for gambling, or any store the principal business of
which is the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises.
The bill also requires that no more than ten percent of the proceeds of an issue of
industrial development bonds may be used to finance moveable equipment unless such
equipment is considered a fixture, and that no more than twenty-five percent of the
proceeds of an issue may be used to finance the acquisition of land. Finally not more
than $10,000,000 principal amount of industrial development bonds which qualify as small
issue IDB's pursuant to Section 103(b)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code, may be issued to
finance any one building which is to be used for commercial, office, industrial or other
purposes, regardless of whether ownership of the building is divided under condominium
ownership. This provision is primarily intended to place a volume limit on the use of a
number of small-issue industrial development bonds to finance separate condominium
projects in the same building.
10. Conformance to provisions of federal limitation act.
a. Executive Order
The bill authorizes the governor to issue an executive order consistent with the
terms of the bill if the bill is not effective for allocating bonding authority under a
federal limitation act.
b. Override of Federal Priority
H.R. 4170 creates a preference as to allocation for obligations which were given
preliminary approval prior to October 19, 1983. The state bill provides that
entitlement issuers are not required to use a portion of their allocation for such
projects, and that other local issuers are not required to apply for an allocation for
such projects.
-7-
Pg. 1444
Toll Free Minnesota (800) 862-6002
Toll Free Other States (800) 328-6122
Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc.
Northwestern Financial Center, 7900 Xerxes Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431 · (612) 831-1500
May 11, 1984
Mr. Johnathan Elam, City Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
Re: Summary of Laws of Minnesota 1984, Chapter 58Z Allocation of Authority
to Issue IDB's subject to Federal Limitation
Dear Mr. Elam:
Just a reminder to your City that May Z8, 1984 is the deadline for First Cer-
tification to the State Department of Energy and Economic Development to obtaix{
an entitlement allocation for an entitlement issuer.
We recommend you list all of the IDB's issued, regardless of purpose, even
if before 1980. Of course, your average annual use based on the highest annual
use in three of the calendar years 1980 through 1983 will be the criteria used to
determine the amount of issuance authority allocated to your City.
Enclosed is a summary of the law for your use.
Very truly yours,
MILLER & SCHROEDER MUNICIPALS, INC.
Vice President
ELC/dj~
Enclosure
He*dqu*rt*rs: Minneapolis. Minnesota Pg. 1445
Brunch Offices: Downtown Minneapolis · Solana Beach. California · ~orthbrook, Itlinois · St. Paut, ~innesota · Naples. Florida · Qarson Ci~, ~evada
MemDel of the Securities Investol Protection Corporatlo~
American Legion Post 398
DATE APRIl. >0, 108A
CURRENT MONTH YEAR TO DATE
GROSS: , _,700.00 . 1,5 ~ ~
EXPENSES:
^ ~ ~09 ~2
SUPPLI ES 237 · ~' ~
PAYOUTASPRIZES:
PROFIT:
r.O,,.O,. O0
f1625.7~'
?60q.O0
DISTRIBUTION OF PROFITS:
Flants for hosp '/cts.
Hina. Police Chiefs Assn.
Cit.]:-of Hound [street fl~s)
Alano
Chack~n~ Account .~z~O'(.51
36 a~
289, oo
3oo. oo
95,00
0'~ ~., 3R
1446
OPRIVATIZATION
... next logical step in wastewater treatment, construction and operation
by W.H. McCombs, President
McCombs-Knutson Associates, Inc.
There's no doubt that the funding of
public wastewater treatment is in a
period of transition. Among the
numerous alternatives being studied
by the State of Minnesota and vari-
ous other groups is privatization,
a method that is rapidly gain-
ing attention.
Grant Programs
Insufficient To Meet Needs
During recent years, reductions in
federal funding for wastewater treat-
ment have been witnessed here in
Minnesota and across the country.
Future appropriations will more than
likely be made for only those proj-
; cts that contribute the most to water
uality improvement.
EPA estimates that Minnesota com-
munities alone will need to spend
$1.07 billion in order to comply with
the 1988 deadline set forth by the
Clean Water Act. Funding has been
available (EP,~s 75% and the state's
15% grant program ) but in steadily
decreasing and difficult to obtain
amounts. On October 1, 1984, the
EPA share will be reduced to 55%
and the program may end in 1988. It
is, therefore, easy to conclude that
unless a state program is adopted,
only a fraction of the amount needed
by Minnesota municipalities
can be funded.
The problem of financing is com-
pounded even more by inflation plus
the costs incurred when municipali-
ties must follow lengthy and speci-
fied probedures in simply trying to
obtain funds from various govern-
mental sources.
;Combs - Knutson Associates
(MKA) feels that one of the logical
Privatization may become a cost-effective and logical method for financing the construction
and operation of wastewater treatment plants such as the one pictured above.
solutions to the country's growing
concern over wastewater treatment
funding is privatization, an approach
that is presently considered a viable
and cost effective alternative. The
advantages are worthy of serious
consideration and pursuit.
Advantages of Privatization
Privatization can provide a timely
solution to current environmental
needs, for it minimizes federal and
state invol~,ement in local projects.
When compared to a treatment facil-
ity built through the federal grants
program, privatization avoids con-
struction time delays and the neces-
sity to comply with federal procure-
ment regulations, which together can
increase the capital cost of a facility
by 20 to 40%. It has been estimated
that privately funded projects can
feasibly be placed in service within
nine to eighteen months after
preliminar7 design. Federally funded
projects normally require about five
to seven years and longer.
Because of the tax benefits to be
derived from privatization, enthusi-
asm by the private sector in regard to
designing, constructing, owning, and
operating wastewater treatment fac-
ilities is building quite rapidly. In those
cases where requests for privatiza-
tion have been formally advertised,
the response has far exceeded
expectations. To understand the sud-
den private sector interest, one has
to merely consider the tax advan-
rages: a) an investment tax credit of
10% of eligible project cost, b) an
additional 10% pollution investment
tax credit, c) depreciation of machin-
ery and equipment over five years, d)
depreciation of structural compoo
nents over 15 years, and e) an inter-
est expense deduction.
There are other advantages of privat-
ization, particularly to the local com-
munity. Tax savings derived by private
investment result in a benefit esti-
mated to be equivalent to a 50%
grant. When 100% of a new facility is
Pg. 1447
PRIVA TIZA TION (c o n t 'd)
financed by the private sector, a mun-
icipality's debt capacity is preserved
Qdr other essential local needs. In
dition, the community and the
investor have an opportunity to work
together to issue industrial revenue
bonds which reduce interest cost
without obligating the community.
Other factors also favor privatization
from the standpoint of economies to
be gained in the operation and
maintenance of multiple facilities.
Lower user fees can't help but result
when licensed operators are shared
among multiple plants and when
such common services as pre-
ventative maintenance, accounting
and administration, and laboratory
services are centralized and
consolidated.
Certain legal, legislative, and regu-
latory hurdles need to be faced and
resolved before privatization be-
comes a reality. However, because
of the interest and enthusiasm pres-
ently expressed by the private and
public sectors, these obstacles
should not become a deterrent.
Based on many years of experience
in assisting communities to obtain
financing for water quality improve-
ments as well as in designing and
constructing wastewater treatment
facilities, MKA feels that privatization
is one of the most promising and
logical financing vehicles that will be
available. We, therefore, encourage
our clients and members of the pri-
vate sector to seriously consider the
benefits, and we welcome their
comments and inquiries.
NORT ST BUS1N S CAMPUS
... combined landowner effort made the difference
Prudential Insurance Company's
Northwest Business Campus is pres-
ently taking shape at the intersection
of Interstate 494 and State Highway
5 in Plymouth, MN. Very few, how-
realize what this project required
the standpoint of organizing the
selling effort and planning the entire
development. '
Several different parties once owned
the land. When one of the landown-
ers sought development advice from
MKA, it became obvious that the frac-
tured ownership was a real hindrance
to effective property use. The firm
began to meet and plan with all the
property owners; and through this
combined effod, an attractive 250
acre site with considerable potential
was offered to Prudential.
Mixed use was called for, and MKA
began to develop preliminary plans
for the site. Prudential proposed
that the entire area be divided
into eight major sections based
on a specified type of development
for each.
i~. ?lmerous design requirements were
owed in preparing the plat/plan.
Ail buildings and landscaped areas
were to be placed toward the public
streets with parking and driving areas
located internally. Natural woodlands
had to be preserved, and a master
walkway system was to be included
for pedestrian circulation between
buildings, along public roads, and
throughout the site. In addition, provi-
sions had to be made for locating
bus drop off/pick up facilities for
future transit service; restrictive cove-
nants were needed in regard to signs,
trash disposal, outside storage, load-
ing facilities, etc.; and a landscape
plan showing proposed plantings
was required for the entire site.
Following approval of preliminary
plans by the City's Planning Commis-
sion and City Council in May, 1981,
a decision was made to begin the
first phase of construction by mid
summer. In order to meet the tight
schedule, it was necessary for MKA
to expedite the preparation of final
plans plus manage and coordinate
alt the technical services required
by the firm's staff of surveyors,
planners, and civil engineers. In
only a four month period (July-
November, 1981), and preceded by
necessary staking and grading,
construction of streets and water
and sewer lines was completed.
III, ' '~ ,..
t/dH '~,
/./×-
:' '~ ,r ~', ~:,~'~":~_---.~.,, ' .'~
"'~-?-q'~ is?- '~1.'~-~
.... · ~ I~
The deadline was met, and ~ruden-
tial's marketing phase started in the
spring of 1982. Shortly thereafter,
new building construction began,
and various types of businesses
are now moving in and beginning
operations.
Many factors contributed to the suc-
cess of the Northwest Business Cam-
pus. A prime location, a good plan,
and a well executed marketing pro-
gram were essential. However, MK/~s
foresight regarding the propedy's
potential combined with an ability to
organize the landowner selling effort,
proved even more important.
PROJECTBRIEFS
Last Treatment Plant To
Stop Discharging Into
,ake Minnetonka
was recently selected by the
Metropolitan Waste Control Com-
mission to design approximately five
miles of interceptor sewer between
Maple Plain and Long Lake, MN. A
new pumping station to be con-
structed in Maple Plain will pump
wastewater to an existing station at
Long Lake, and from there it will be
pumped to Wayzata and on down
to the Blue Lake Wastewater Treat-
ment Plant. Unwanted development
in Prone will be prevented as the
force main passes through, for di-
rect connections cannot be made
to a line of this type.
charged treated wastewater into
Lake Minnetonka.
Determining Effectiveness
By Computerized
Comparative Analysis
Whether producing a product or
providing a service, in either the
private or public sector, the objec-
rive is to perform in the most cost-
effective manner possible. Compar-
lng one practice with another to
measure effectiveness and arrive
at a conclusion is not always an
easy task when large amounts of
data must be processed. With the
aid of a computer, however, MKA
feels it can now provide needed
decision making assistance to a
public utility's management.
When the interceptor is completed,
the wastewater treatment plant in
Maple Plain will cease operation,
thus making it the last of several
municipal plants which once dis-
To illustrate the point, MKA recently
conducted a comparative analysis
study at the Wastewater Treatment
Plant in Glencoe, MN. The objective
was to determine the effectiveness
of a new biological culture being
added to improve the planf effic-
iency and reduce operating costs.
Daily test results from an earlier
period when the additive was not
used were compared with the results
from a like period when the bacteria
was being added for many different
plant parameters, including Total
Volatile Suspended Solids (TVSS),
BCD, DO, power consumption,
MLSS, SVI, and others. The daily
data was fed to a computer and
percentages of each parameter
were graphed and compared against
each other. After studying the
operational data and comparing
the percentage differences, it was
simple to determine the additive's
effectiveness.
When armed with the foregoing
dependable and supporting data,
decision-making procedures that
affect various types of operations
and a utility's performance can be
simplified considerably.
EED FOR WA TER LFAK DETECTION INCREASES
years past, water utility manage- Sounds emitted by leaking water
ment was not too concerned about
unaccounted-for water and system
leakage. In fact, system losses of
20 percent were considered a nor-
mal part of the cost of doing busi-
ness, and help was not sought until
losses reached 30 and 40 percent.
The situation has changed. Be-
cause of increasing costs for ener-
gy, water treatment, and distribu-
tion, much smaller losses are cur-
rently triggering the need for a leak
detection survey.
Electronic amplification equipment
and the use of sonic techniques
are presently employed to isolate
underground leaks. When. high
pressure water is forced out through
a leak, it loses energy to both the
pipe wall and surrounding soil area,
and sound waves are created in an
audible range. The sound waves
are picked up by a detection
mnstrument and evaluated by a
ained individual who can deter-
ine the exact location and relative
size of a leak.
are influenced by a number of fac-
tors. Metallic pipe, for example,
transmits a different sound than
plastic pipe, and the tTpe of sur-
rounding soil greatly influences the
amount of sound carried to the sur-
face. The placement of sounding
instruments can also make a differ-
ence; sod tends to muffle sounds
while concrete and asphalt are
good resonators. The problem is
compoun.ded even more by the
fact that smaller leaks emit sounds
different than larger leaks, as do
larger diameter pipes vs. smaller,
and deeper water mains vs. those
more shallow.
Recent technical advances in re-
ceiving equipment has simplified
the leak detection process consid-
erabiy and increased accuracy.
However, interpreting sound emis-
sions and estimating the location
and size of a leak still requires ex-
perience and an indepth under-
stand, ing of the instrumentation.
Because water utility management
is placing more importance on
water system losses, MKA is now
providing a leak detection service.
Staff specialists employ a sonic
evaluation instrument to quickly Io-
cate leaks, and assistance is provid-
ed in establishing a repair program.
PEOPLEAND PROGRESS
Skip McCombs, president of MKA,
has been named one of seven trus-
les of the Consulting Engineers
ouncil Insurance Trust. The trust
is national in scope and provides
group health and life insurance to
thousands of consulting engineer-
ing firms.
Paul Dries, an MKA environmental
engineering specialist, has earned
his license as a registered profes-
sional engineer in the State of
Minnesota.
Greg Frank, MKA vice president,
recently attended a meeting of of-
rice and industrial park developers.
Ch uck Wilson, secretary-treasu rer
of MKA, was recently installed as
Grand Master of Minnesota Mas-
ons. Installation was performed by
his father, who was Grand Master
25 years ago. Chuck has been a
state officer since 1974, and as
~rand Master, he now oversees the
rams and activities of some
40,000 members in 240 lodges
throughout the state.
Harvey Strom and John Christian-
son were recently honored for fif-
teen years of service when they
were presented an MKA signet ring
by Skip McCombs. Chuck Wilson,
an earlier recipient and company
officer, looks on. Harvey joined the
firm after working for the City of
Bloomington, and John started
while still a student atthe U of M.
Both Harvey and John have been
with MKA since its third year in
business'and have served as a
survey crew chief and senior
engineering technician.
John Cameron~ Paul Pearson, Tom
Christianson, and Jerry Hauer were
recently presented with ten year
service pins. John began with MKA
as a draftsman and now heads the
drafting and production areas of
the company. Paul is a registered
civil engineer who handles most of
the engineering for private develop-
ment projects and also serves on
some of MK,~s municipal projects.
He joined the firm upon graduation
from North Dakota State University.
Tom comes from Fairmont, MN and
joined MKA as a rod man. He now
is a construction inspector and/
or draftsman as required. Jerry
handles most of the planning
for commercial and industrial sites
as well as industrial park planning
for private developers.
Viet Ngo, former MKA vice
president, has established a
minority firm providing technical
services and specialized environ-
mental studies as related to water
and air resources.
McCOMBS-KNLITSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
[CONSULTING ENGINEERS - LAND SURVEYORS - PLANNERS
Hr. 5on Elam
City of Hound
5341Haywood Road
Hound~ HN 55364
Pg. 1450
TWIN
LABOR
CITIES
MARKET
INFORMATION
LABOR MARKET CONDITIONS
VOL. 8 NO. 5 MAY 1984
The March unemployment rate in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area fell to 5.1
percent from 5.3 percent in February. The decline indicates continued improvement in
the economy as the seasonal effects on employment and unemployment between February and
March are minimal.
Since March 1983 employment has grown by a robust rate of 6.2 percent or 66,600 work-
ers. The current expansion compares favorably with the record-setting pace of 6.9 per-
cent which took place between March 1977 and March 1978. In addition, while employment
is currently growing at a slightly slower rate than in the previous expansion period,
the unemployment rate is falling twice as fast, 3.0 percentage points compared to 1.5
percentage points. National data indicate that the labor force is currently growing at
a slower rate than during the 1977-78 period for two reasons. First, the adult female
labor force participation rate increased by only half as much in the past year as be-
tween March 1977 and 1978. 'Secondly, while the teenage labor force participation in-
-eased over the year, the national teenage labor force decreased by 148,000 compared
an increase of 177,000 in 1977-78.
LABOR FORCE ESTIMATES
(not seasonally adjusted)
AREA CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE TOTAL EMPLOYMENT ' UNEMPLOYMENT UNEMPLOYMENT RATE
MAR.. Feb.~ !' Mar.. Mar. Feb.~ Mar.~ Mar.p Feb.~ Mar.. Mar.. Feb.~ Mar.
1984~ 1984" 1983K 1984P 1984K 198~K 1984' 1984" 1983K 1984v 1984" 1983R
Minneapolis-
St. Paul SMSA* 1,195.2 1,187.1 1,161.8 1',134.6 1,124.8 1,068.O 60.6 62.3 93.8 5.1 5.3 8.1
County:
Amok& )13,704 112,862 111,567 107,407 106,478 101,lO4 6,297 6,384 10,463 5.5 5.7 9.4
Carver 21,642 21,540' 21,oog 20,301 20,126 19,110 1,341 1,414 1,899 6.2 6.6 9.0
Chtsago 15,523 15,473 14,999 14,093 13,971 13,266 1,430 1,502 1,733 9.2 9.7 ll.6
I~akot~ 112,248 111,638 109,O16 106,373 105,453 lO0,13~ 5,875 6,185 8,885 5.2 5.5 8.2
Henneptn b40,604 536,618 525,538 515,894 511,429 485,619 24,710 25,189 39,9)9 4.6 4.7 7.6
Ramsey 264,818 262,B66 256,535 251,962 249,782 237,176 12,856 13,O84 19,359 4.9 5.0 7.5
Scott 25,797 25,685 25,135 23,994 23,786 22,586 1,803 1,899 2,549 7.0 7.4 10.1
Washington 65,516 65,260 63,332 62,237 61,698 58,585 3,279 3,562 4,747 5.0 5.5 7.5
Wright 35,351 3b,158 34,69B 32,311 32,032 30,414 3,040 3,126 4,284 8.6 8.9 12.3
City of
Minneapolis 213,412 2)1,742 207,546 203,281 201,523 191,352 10,131 10,219 16,194 4.7 4.8 7.2
City of
St. Paul 156,128 155,056 151,165 148,086 146,805 139,396 8,042 8,251 11,769 5.2 5.3 7.6
Minnesota* 2,161.6 2,14D.9 2,132.7 2,008.3 1,900.7 1,910.7 153.3 158.2 222.0 7.1 7.4
United States* 111,82B 111,368 109,873 )02,770 101,961 97,994 9,057 9,407 11,879 8.1 84 10.~
P - Preliminary
R - Revised
EMPLOYMENT. HOURS AHO EARNIHGS
in the Hinneapolts-St. Paul Metropolitan Area
PERCEE[ PRODUCTION WORKERS' HOURS & ~ARNING 1~/
EMPLOYMENT CHANGE Average Weekly Average Houely Average Weeklx
iNDUSTRY (0001 FROH Earnings Earntngs H~,ur~
HARCH Month Year Pc)nth Year M~,RCH Year HARCH Year MARCH Year
1984 Ago Ago Ago Ago 1984 Ago 1984 Ago 1984 A~o
TOTAL NONAGRICULTURAL 1098.7 1092.8 1047.0 O.S 4.9 XX ZX XX XX XX XX
~A~uFACTURING 240.6 238.7 227.S 0.8 5.8 419.22 397.00 10.20 10.00 41.1 39.7
Durable Goods 153.6 152.3 143.9 0.9 6.8 424.62 407.71 :10.11 9.92 42.0 41.1
Lumber & Furniture 6.5 6.3 6.1 4.3 6.5 420.16 413.17 10.61 10.54 39.6 39.2
Stone. Clay & Glass 3.6 3.6 2.9 2.3 26.5 370.74 365.47 9.68 9.72 38.3 37.6
Primary Metals 4.5 4.4 4.0 0.7 12.7 369.98 351.74 8.98 8.60 41,2 40.9
fabricated ~etals 26.4 26.2 25.6 0.8 3.3 485.93 468.10 11.38 11.04 42.7 42.4
Non-Electrical ~4achinery 64.3 64.0 S8.6 0.5 9.8 431.46 392.12 10.20 9.73 42.3 40.3
Office & Computing Equipment 33.4 33.4 29.8 0.2 12.3 XX XX XX XX XX XX
Electrical Machinery 17.8 17.5 17.0 1.9 4.6 371.~ 387.16 8.89 9.24 4).8 41.9
Transportation Equipment 4.0 4.0 3.2 0.3 23.4 556.48 526.75 12.59 12.25 44.2 43.0
Scientific Instruments 22.8 22,7 22.6 0.3 0.8 412.22 406.85 9.62 9.71 43.3 41.9
Miscellaneous 3.6 3.6 3.9 O.g .-6.4 323.79 339.87 8.26 8.17 39.2 41.6
Nondurable Goods 86.9 86.4 83.S 0.6 4.0 408.83 380.63 10.35 10.IS 39.5 37.5
Food & Kindred Products 17.4 17.6 17.9 -1.0 -2.7 390.99 343.56 9.49 9.57 41.2 35.9
Textiles & Apparel 2.2 2.2 2.3 0.9 -4.2 233.05 197.23 6.35 5.87 36.7 33.6
Paper & Allied Products 24.8 24.7 23.7 0.5 5.0 461.18 432.55 10.75 10.25 42.9 42,2
Printing & Publishing 25.6 25.3 24.2 1.0 6.7 397.33 376.88 11.32 11.25 35.1 33.5
Chemical & Petroleum Products 7.9 7.8 7.8 1.3 1.6 467.08 432.33 11.42 lO.Bg 40.9 39.7
Rubber, Plastic, and Leather 8.9 8.7 7.6 2.5 16.9 353.63 353.08 8.93 9.10 39.6 38.8
NONMANUFACTURING 858.1 854.1 819.5 0.5 4.7 XX XX XX XX XX XX
CONSTRUCTION 32.g 31.9 29.9 3.1 lO.O 586.61 555.03 16.16 15.29 36.3 36.3
Building Construction 9.7 9.4 9.0 3.4 8.3 591.37 525.70 15.94 15.02 37.1 35.0
Highway & Heavy Construction 2.2 1.9 2.1 15.2 3.7 418.14 427.95 13.80 12.89 30.3 33.2
Special Trades Contracting 21.0 20.6 18.8 1.8 ll.5 600.43 583.37 16.45 15.64 36.5 37.3
TRANSPORTATION 42.2 41.7 39.6 1.O 6.5 XX XX XX XX XX XX
Railroads 6.5 6.5 6.7 0.0 -3.2 534.78 505.70 11.33 ll.Og 47.2 45.6
lrucking & Warehousing 15.2 15.0 13.3 1.O 13.6 436.48 437.54 12.40 12.43 35.2 35.2
PUBLIC UTILITIES & CO(~. ~l.1 20.9 20.7 1.O 1.8 505.29 463.59 12.89 12.01 39.2 38.6
TRADE 262.2 260.8 253.0 0.5 3.6 240.80 223.67 8.00 7.66 30.1 29.2
Retail Trade 191.9 190.9 183.7 0.5 4.5 188.93 174.24 6.87 6.60 27.5 26.4
General Merchandise Stores 31.7 32.8 30.7 -3.1 3.3 174.28 168.97 6.18 6.10 28.2 27.7
Food Stores 24.4 24.2 23.8 0.8 2.6 252.11 238.85 8.46 8.44 29.8 28.3
Eating & Drinking Places 61.4 60.2 59.5 1.9 3.1 87.62 83.33 4.54 4.48 19.3 18.6
Specialty Merchandise2_/ 74.4 73.7 69.6 1.O 6.9 259.52 232.55 7.77 7.29 33.4 31.g
WhOlesale Trade 70.2 69.9 69.3 0.5 1.3 405.98 377.72 10.60 9.94 38.3 38.0
FINANCE, INS. & REAL ESTATE 76.8 76.7 73.3 O.1 4.7 312.83 295.87 8.32 8.04 37.6 36.8
Finance 33.0 32.9 31.3 0.2 5.5 316.35 307.28 8.62 8.35 36.7 36.8
Insurance 30.3 30.3 29.3 O.1 3.S 357.32 337.79 8.61 8.32 41.5 40.6
Real Estate 13.5 13.5 12.8 0.0 5.7 210.29 180.98 6.74 6.35 31.2 28.5
SERVICE & MISCELLANEOUS 266.8 264.9 249.9 0.7 6.7 Y~X XX XX XX XX XX
Lodging & Recreation 24.4 24.4 23.1 -O.1 5.2 149.00 129.12 5.96 5.79 25.0 22.3
Personal Services ll.3 ll.2 ll.l 0.6 1.6 XX XX XX XX XX XX
Business Services 58.9 58.0 49.8 1.6 18.3 XX XX XX XX XX XX
Nepair Services 12.9 13.0 12.1 -0.5 6.6 257.69 252.70 7.06 6.65 36.5 38.0
Health Services 73.7 73.5 72.9 0.3 1.2 233.B1 213.13 7.98 7.75 29.3 27.5
Hospitals 29.9 29.9 30.2 0.0 -0.8 266.87 250.06 9.43 9.06 28.3 27.6
Nursing Hcxbes 19.6 19.6 20.4! 0.2 -3.7 189.61 177.02 6.92 6.63 27.4 26.7
Other Healt~ 24.2 24.0 22.3 0.9 8.3 Y~X XX XX XX XX XX
Legal Services 8.4 8.4 7.8 0.8 7.3 459.41 329.73 11.26 B.B4 40.0 37.3
Private Education 16.3 16.2 15.1 0.6 8.0 XX XX XX ~ XX XX
Other Services~ 57.7 57.2 55.0 0.9 5.1 XX XX XX XX XX XX
GOVERNMENT 156.1 157.1 1..gl -0.6 2.1
Federal 18.0 18.0 17.5 0.1 2.7
State 47.9 48.5 47.B -1.1 0.3
Local 90.2 90.6 87.6 -0.4 2.g
" Less than .05
~/ Average earnings data are on a "gross" basis and are derived fro~ reports of payroll for full- and part-time
proOuction or nonsupervisory workers. The payroll is reported before deductions of any kind. Bonuses, retro-
active pay, tips, payment in kind, and "fringe benefits" are excluded.
~/ Includes Building ~terials, A~to~otive, Apparel, Home Furnishings, Drug, Mail Order and Miscellaneous
Retailing.
~/ Includes Social Services, )~embers~ip Organizations, and Miscellaneous Services such as Engineering and
Accounting.
Source: Current Employment Statistics Program {Figures rounded to nearest hundred).
EMPLOYMENT AND EARNINGS CONDITIONS
The total number of nonagricultural wage and salary jobs in the Twin Cities metropoli-
tan area rose again between February and March. The rate of increase, 0.5 percent,
matched the average increase over the past fourteen years. In general, the goods-pro-
~m~d~cing industries of manufacturing, construction, and transportation registered above
erage job gains, while increases in the service-producing industries were below
~average. The improvement in total nonagricultural wage and salary employment between
February and March was a milestone of sorts, as it marked the completion of twelve con-
secutive months of job growth when normal seasonal variations are taken into considera-
tion.
A comparison over the past year between the Twin Cities and the United States shows
that nonagricultural job growth is slightly more rapid locally than nationally, 4.9
percent versus 4.1 percent. Nationally, job growth is outpacing local growth in both
manufacturing and construction while the Twin Cities leads in the other categories.
The most rapid job gains in the national manufacturing sector have been in the lumber
and furniture, transportation equipment, and electrical and electronic equipment indus-
tries all of which have grown by more than 11 percent in the past year.
The national economy during the first quarter operated at a blistering pace, up 7.7
percent from a year ago, but will probably cool down as the year continues due to the
restraining influence of higher interest rates. Employment in the Twin Cities area is
expected to continue to expand rapidly during the rest of the year due to the lag-time
between national GNP changes and employment changes. Employment growth at slower rates
would be expected during 1985.
AVAILABLE PUBLICATIONS
Emplosment, Hours and Earnings:
apolis-St. Paul Area, 1970-1984.
Minne-
COn-
tains monthly and annual average wage
and salary employment levels by industry
from 1970 through February 1984. Also
included are annual average hours, earn-
ings and female employment by industry.
Labor Market Information Summars for
1985: Minneapolis-St. Paul Area. Re-
views recent trends affectin~ the labor
market with particular focus on employ-
ment by industry and occupation and the
status of disadvantaged groups. Employ-
ment and unemployment projections
through 1985 and an in-depth look at
geographic segments of the metropolitan
area are included.
To order,, please call or write the LMI
Center. No charge for publications.
TERISTICS OF THE INSURED UHEMPLOYED
(Regular Benefits Program)
MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL SMSA
Week Ending 3/12/84
Percent Change
From; Percent Percent l/
Month Year of Long-Ter~y Percent
,Number Ago Ago Total Unemployed Women
:19,'779 -4.1 -41.1 lO0.O 23.9 24.8
6,382 -4.6 -21.9 32.3 21.0 3.2
4,062 -3.6 -55.6 20.6 23.6 31.0
2,704 -7.7 -61.1 13.7 25.5 30.6
1,358 6.0 -38.2 6.9 19.7 31.7
809 -8.4 -46.5~ 4.1 22.7 16.3
1,338 -1.3 -49.4 6.8 27.1 29.1
2,12b -3.9 -49.1 10.7 23.9 38.8
671 -1.6 -35.3 3.4 33.5 53.1
3,105 -2.1 -39.3 15.7 23.7 49.3
338 -15.5 -27.2 1.7 30.2 23.J
735 -15.8 -25.5 3.7 42.9 8.2
205 0 1.0 -
19,779 -4.1 -41.1 lO0.O 23.9 2~.~
2,662 -2.9 -43.4 13.5 27.0 29.9
2,058 -3.6 -46.3 10.4 28.5 75.C
729 -5.7 -47.8 3.7 27.0 31.7
1,323 5.4 -38.8 6.7 25.2 ~1.7
476 -12.8 -15.9 2.4 46.6 7.1
351 8.3 -25.6 1.8 19.1 16.$
1,144 -0.3 -58.9 5.8 21.5 16.6
1,488 -6.7 -56.5 7.3 22.2 56.~
6,i3~ -4.6 -27.7 31.0 20.1 i.~
3,435 -6.1 -39.1 17.4 23.1 9 m ~
19 0.1
Industry and
Occupational
Attachment
Total, All Industries
Construction
~tanufacturing
Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
Trans., Comm., and
Public Utilities
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Fin., Ins., and
Real Estate
Services
Public Admin.
All Other
Inf. Not Available
Total, All Occupations
Prof., Tech., Mgr.
Clerical
Sales
Service
Farm., For., Fish.
Processing
Machine Trades
Benchwork
Structural Work
Miscellaneous
Inf, Not Available
NOTE: Percentages may not total to lO0.O due to independent rounding.
~ Long-Term unem~ployed refers to unemployment insurance claimants whose
current spell of unemployment has lasted 15 weeks or longer.
THE JOB MARKET
The advent of warm weather sprouts thousands of area teens looking for seasonal em-
ployment. Our best estimates indicate that in the Twin Cities area 27,000 to 32,000
will enter the labor force for the sunm~er months. This represents approximately twenty
rcent of the teen working age (16-19) population. An additional sixty percent work
ar-round. Taken together, the Twin Cities labor force participation rate for teens
ceeds the national average reflecting greater social emphasis on youth employment and
a greater availability of year-round part-time work. According to national data, the
teenage participation rate falls slightly during recessionary periods as does the actu-
al employment level, but not as dramatically as commonly thought. Nationally, a seven-
teen percent drop occurred between 1978 and 1982 in the number of teens employed just
for the summer season. The recession obviously was a big factor but the recent drop in
the teen population also had some effect. The Twin Cities currently has close to
20,000 fewer 16 to 19 year olds than four years ago, a decrease of roughly 13 percent.
This reduction along with an improved economic outlook portends better employment pro-
spects for 1984.
Statistics on which occupations teens work in during the summer are available only na-
tionally. At this level, sixty percent work in the broad areas of agriculture and ser-
vices as farm helpers, groundskeepers, food preparers and servers, health aides, re-
creation workers, personal care attendants and other related tasks. This compares to
only sixteen percent of the general labor force who work in these occupations. Almost
all of the remaining teens working just in summer are employed as sales clerks, assem-
blers, material movers and handlers, and general laborers. Despite the low levels of
training and experience needed in all of the above occupations, roughly ninety percent
of teens are able to procure full-time work. The best opportunities are usually in in-
dustries which add to their work force during the summer. In Minnesota this includes
Agriculture, Forestry, Lodging, Recreation, Food Processing, Construction and Wholesale
Trade. The opportunities are somewhat better outside the metropolitan area where many
the above are concentrated. As in past years most summer jobs will be supplied by
ivate industry. However, there are some publicly-funded programs in operation pri-
marily for economically disadvantaged youth, High school counselors and local Job Ser-
vice offices have specific information on them.
Economic Indicators
Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Area
Initial UI Claimsl/* Mar.
UI Claimants-Regular]_/* Mar.
Avg Wkly Hours in Mfg,/* Mar.
Help Wanted Index2__/* Mar.
Mortgage Rate3/ Mar.
Residential Bldg Permits4__/* Feb.
Retail Sales (Millions)?* Jan.
Consumer Price Index6/ Feb.
US Employment Cost Index~/ Mar.
Latest Month Current Previous Percent Change
Available Period Period Year Ago Year AgR
2,061 1,823 2,752 -25.1
15,662 15,896 26,446 -40.8
41.0 41.2 39.6 3.5
68 73 34 100.0
12.56 11.31 13.69 -
2,458 1,624 1,614 52.3
1,265 1,177 1,084 16.7
319.6 317.5 305.8 4.5
119.8 117.8 113.2 5.8
Sources ·
l/ MDES, 2/ The Conference Board, 3/ Minneapolis Star & Tribune via Data
R-esources~ Inc., 4/ Metropolitan C~uncil, 5__/ U.S. Dept. of Commerce, and
6/ Bureau of Labor Statistics.
* Denotes seasonally-adjusted data.
Pg. 1454