2000-12-12, ' " ,~LE~'~E TURN OFF AT CEI,IJ PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
AGENDA
MOUND CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2000, 7:30 PM
MOUND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
*Consent Agenda: Items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered routine in nature and will
be enacted by a single roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless
a Council Member or Citizen so requests. In that event the item will be removed from the Consent'
Agenda and considered in normal sequence.
1. OPEN MEETING - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
PAGE
2. APPROVE AGENDA, WITH ANY AMENDMENTS
0
*CONSENT AGENDA
*A. APPROVE MINUTES:
NOV 28 REGULAR MEETING 46194633
DEC 4 SPECIAL MEETING [ozce-C~ ~
*B. APPROVE BILLS
46194633
*C.
SET PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. CASE # 00-71' STREET/EASEMENT VACATION -
NW CORNER OF LYNWOOD DR AND COMMERCE
DR: JAN 9
CASE #00-59: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 1800 COMMERCE
BOULEVARD - JOHN PASTUCK: DEC 19
CASE #00-68: ZONING AMENDMENT - 5989 AND 5964 CHESTNUT
- BRENSHELL DEVELOPMENT: DEC 19
CASE #00-35: PRELIMINARY PLAT - 5989 AND 5964 CHESTNUT
ROAD - BRENSHELL DEVELOPMENT: DEC 19
*D.
APPROVE 2001 CONTRACTS FOR SERVICE
1. GAS OPERATED VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT LIP TO AND
INCLUDING 23/4 TON: ISLAND PARK SKELLY
o
DIESEL OPERATED VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT:
GARY'S DIESEL SERVICE
o
13.
3. GAS OPERATED VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT ONE TON
AND OVER: GARY'S DIESEL SERVICE
COMMENTS 8: SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT ON ANY
ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA. (L/MIT TO 3 MINUTES PER SPEAKER.)
PRESENTATION OF COMMUNITY POLICING AWARD TO OFFICER
JASON SWENSEN AND MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT 46344638
DISCUSSION/ACTION ON RESOLUTION APPROVING BUSINESS
SUBSIDY AGREEMENT WITH METROPLAINS DEVELOPMENT FOR
OLD SCHOOL SITE
4639
W~ ESTEDGE BOULEVARD
4640-4654
A. PRESENTATION OF CONCEPT PLANS
B. PRESENTATION OF PERTINENT AGREEMENTS
DISCUSSION/ACTION ON RESOLUTION OF INTENT BY THE CITY
OF MOUND TO SUBMIT A SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
4655-4657
PROPOSAL FOR PARKING CONCEPT BY POND ARENA 4658
_W~NDS CONSERVATION ACT FINDINGS OF FACT
ON BAY BY R0~,.L..UND HOM~s
RECOMMENDATION ON LANGD AND
DEVELOPMENT
4659-4705
DISCUSSION/ACTION ON FIRE RELIEF ASSOCIATION PROPOSAL
FOR PENSION INCREASE
4706-4730
DISCUSSION/ACTION ON RESOLUTION APPROVING 2001 BUDGETS
AND TAX LEVIES
4731-4733
CONSIDERATION/ACTION ON CITY MANAGER REQUEST TO
FINANCE HOME COMPUTER SYSTEM FOR WORK PURPOSES
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS
A. AMM FAX News -
B. School District communications
14.
Police Department Report: November 2000
Co
4734
47354737
47384740
This is a preliminary agenda and subject to change. The Council will set a final agenda at the
meeting. More current meeting agendas may be viewed at City Hall or at the City of Mound web
site: www. cityofmound, com.
2
COUNCIL BRIEFING
December 12, 2000
Pictures, Pictures!
There will be a group photo of the current City Council, City Attorney and City Manager at 7:00
p.m., on Dec 19, unless there is an HI:LA meeting called. Then the picture will be taken at 6:00
p.m. There will be a group picture of the new City Council, City Attorney and City Manager at
6:00 p.m., on Jan 23. Please wear your best duds, trying to stay away from large prints and real
bright colors. Thanks!
#7. Westedge Boulevard
Mound has a history of assessing the total cost of the improved right of way to the abutting
property owner, minus the cost of over-sizing the street. However, if the assessment exceeds the
amount of the increase in value of the property, and the City is challenged in court, there is a
great likelihood that the property owner would win the case. To minimize that liability, cities
can assess any amount less than 100% that would safely assure that the assessment would not be
challenged in court. The balance is then spread across the city in the form of tax levy.
#8. Surface Water Management Plan
Staff was notified that that this letter and resolution must be submitted to the Met Council before
year-end in order to maintain our good standing with them for grant and other considerations.
#9. Pond Arena Parkin~
A show of support for fulfilling this request should do away with some of the public concern for
taking away Pond Arena parking, which has come up numerous times at Metro Plains public
hearings. I recommend a council directive to staff to study the parking possibilities on two sides
of the street and to prepare a sketch and rough cost estimates for a future meeting.
#12. 2001 Budget
At this point in the budget process the budget may decrease but not increase. Any changes made
that increase the general fund levy will require cuts in that fund to keep it below the 6% increase
and maintain the same level of reserves.
#13. Home Computer
The estimated cost for a computer meeting my needs is $1,400. I am would like to finance that
over two years and make monthly payments of approximately $60 per month. Gino prefers that
arrangement over payroll deduction, which is fine with me. Gino will provide the technical
assistance except for when problems exceed his knowledge. The only direct cost to the City is
the $30.84 per month for a phone line. Gino has confirmed the City's ability to assist.
Human Resources Report
The temp services person that took minutes at last week's HRA meeting admitted to her
supervisor that she walked off the job. All the temp services are really short of help. I will cover
the Dec 11 meeting and we should have someone in time for the Dec 12 meeting. Pinky Charon
has committed to organizing Fran's office and maintaining the resolutions and minutes for City
Council, HRA and EDC. When more time has gone by I should have indicators as to whether or
not I should appoint a full-time temporary clerk.
The loss of Rhonda and Fran at the same time has increased the workload for all those
remaining. There is remarkable teamwork as everyone pulls together and does more than their
usual duties. I am really please to see this.
The extra workload and meetings every week have not allowed me to schedule the interviews for
the Planning and Inspections Secretary. They will take place before Christmas.
MINUTES OF THE MOUND CITY COUNCIL MEETINC
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 28,2000, 7:30 P.M,
MOUND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CONSENT.4 GEND.4
MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Brown to approve consent agenda.
MOTION carried unanimously.
COMMENTS .4ND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT ON
.4NY ITEM NOT ON THE .4GEND~4
Ronald Motyka, 1545 Bluebird Lane, Mound. My issue and concern is with the postage
free box by the entryway of the Mound City Hall Building. I have been trying to fill a
position on the Park and Open Space Commission for a while. On November 4, 2000, I
received a letter that was dated November 2, 2000, to attend a meeting on Thursday,
November 9, 2000. I was not able to attend that meeting because of business purposes. I
wrote a letter to Jim Fackler and to Mayer Meisel explaining why I could not make that
meeting. On November 5, 2000, I placed both letters into the box at the curb (my wife
was present as I put them in). On November 9, 2000, my wife started receiving calls as
to whether I would be at the meeting or not. She said I was out of town and couldn't
make the meeting. On November 11, 2000, I called Mr. Brown to ask if the letters did
appear and they did not. Suddenly they appeared on November 17, 2000. I am not naive
enough to believe that they set out in that box for eight days without someone seeing
them. However, without a stamp on them they were not federally protected postage. So
my only warning to the citizens are if you are going to use that box make sure it is for
something that doesn't require a postage to verify when you in fact paid the bill or sent
your letters or what ever else.
.4 CTION ON PARK .4ND OPEN SPA CE `4D VISOR Y COMMISSION
RE COMMENDA TION FOR APPOINTMENT
The recommendation from the Parks Commission is to add another Commissioner and
appoint the three (3) applicants listed. This would have to be an Ordinance Amendment
to add another Commissioner to the Board. There are six (6) Commissioners on the
Parks Board including the Liaison. The Ordinance amendment would have to be printed
in the paper. The third person would not be appointed at this time.
MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Brown, to increase the Park Commission Board to
seven (7) members effective with an Ordinance change.
MOTION carried unanimously.
There is a proposal to the City Council to appoint two (2) new Commissioners. Susan
Taylor will be appointed to begin in December 2000 and Derrick Hentz would be
appointed in January of 2001 to replace Peter Meyer's position.
MOTION by Brown, seconded by Weycker, to appoint two (2) Park Commissioners.
Susan Taylor to begin December 2000 and Derrick Hentz to begin January 2001.
MOTION carded unanimously.
/tCTION ON SUPPORTING DATA AND SIGNAGE
RECOMMENDATION PERTAINING TO CLEAN OUTDOOR AIR.
City Manager Kandis Hanson displayed a picture of the signage. Basically the signs will
be hunter green and tan with dark lettering.
Council Member Hanus has an issue with the Resolution. It is correct to say that the two
(2) organizations will be paying the cost of all the signs and could we add a Section 4
under the 'be it resolved' section of the resolution to state that fact.
Mr. Dean suggested adding to Section 2 "upon receipts of the signs the Park and
Recreation Department will install them at the mentioned parks."
Mayor Meisel questioned the verbiage of the signs. She believed they would read 'thank
you for refraining from the use of tobacco' instead of thank you for not using tobacco.
City Manager Kandis Hanson explained staff reviewed several options that were
presented by the committee and staff is recommending the verbiage in the packet.
Carol Weber explained the reason that we suggested this one is that it does have the word
'youth' on it, which is the primary purpose of the whole project. Also, we have 'thank
you for not' from some examples we heard from other citizens in the community and
primarily from the Senior Center as they have a no smoking policy in their center. This is
a much more positive attitude, upbeat tone. This is wording that all kinds of all age
groups would understand. Our primary focus is reducing youth tobacco use and part of
that does incorporate adults because of the role model issues.
The previous MOTION was by Weycker, seconded by Brown to pass the Resolution
contingent upon verification of the facts and also that staff will develop appropriate
verbiage for the signs and that friendly amendment was made by Council Member
Ahrens that the sign verbiage be subject to City Council approval. Member's Weycker
and Brown accepted that amendment and that is what passed.
CONDITION OF THE MOTION by Weycker, seconded by Brown, to accept the signs
with the correction of the spelling and reaffirm the cost of the signs is to be bom by some
entity other the City of Mound.
Council Member Brown withdrew second.
MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hansus to reconsider the previously approved
Resolution.
AYES: 3 (Meisel, Hanus, Brown)
NAYS: 1 (Weycker)
MOTION carried.
MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus to keep the Resolution as written including the
new signage as written and upon receipt of the signs, the Parks Department is hereby
direct to install said signs at the appropriate parks.
MOTION carried unanimously.
ACTION ON MUELLER/LANSING PROPERTIES' REQUEST FOR
REINSTATEMENT INTO CBD PARKING PROGRAM,
Mr. Mike Mueller representing Mueller-Lansing properties has requested to be included
in the Central Business District (CBD) Parking program retroactive to November 15,
2000. Mr. Mueller reassured the Council of their participation in the program until their
building is removed or the program is terminated.
MOTION by Brown, seconded by Weycker, to formally include them back into the CBD
Parking Program retroactive to November 15, 2000.
Mayor Meisel believes this is a very good idea; however, Mueller-Lansing Properties
then must continue with the CBD Parking until removal of their building. Also the
handicapped parking spaces (2) must be reinstated to their previous condition including
the painting.
City Manager Kandis Hanson explained that staffhas pointed out that the success of the
program depends on total participation. The formula was based on certain number of
spaces and that it how it is applied across the business community.
Council Member Brown accepted Mayor Meisel's amendment to his MOTION to
include the stipulation that Mueller-Lansing Properties must continue with the CBD
Parking until removal of their building or program termination. Also Mueller-Lansing
Properties is responsible for reinstating the two (2) handicapped parking spaces to their
original state.
MOTION carried unanimously.
ACTION ON ETHICS GUIDELINES
City Manager Kandis Hanson explained that we have amended forms that would act as
disclosure forms that would accompany this police. The change in these over what you
have seen before tonight is #3. There was not clarity in that the way it was first written
and we believe this further clarifies the intent. The sentence should read 'A business
entity in which the person has an ownership interest, either legal or equitable.'
Council Member Hansus made the point that under the Disclosures Item B, he believes
any and all financial interest should be disclosed not 'greater than 50%'. Also Item E is a
similar issue. The sentence should read 'Real property within the City owned by the
person or in which the person has a beneficial interest.'
MOTION by Meisel, seconded by Brown to make corrections and/or changed as
discussed and to proceed at the December 4, 2000 meeting.
MOTION carried unanimously.
CONSIDERATION OF WESTONKA SCHOOL DISTRICT CLAIM:
EXECUTIVE SESSION.
Mr. Dean explained this is a consideration of a possible settlement offer on the Westonka
School District matter and it is staff's recommendation that the City Council go into
executive session to meet with the legal representative for the City to discuss possible
settlement options.
CO UNCIL IN EXECUTIVE SESSION
COUNCIL RETURNED FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mr. Dean explained there was discussion tenure of a proposed settlement offer of the
claims between the City of Mound and the Westonka School District. As a result of the
Executive Session there is a Resolution before the Council entitled Resolution
Authorizing Reimbursement to Independent School District #277 for certain
expenditures.
MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus to accept the Resolution.
MOTION carded unanimously.
CITY MANA GER PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: EXECUTIVE
COUNCIL IN EXECUTIVE SESSION
COUNCIL RETURNED FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Meisel explained the reason for the Executive Session was for an evaluation on
our City Manager Kandis Hanson after 7 ½ month of employment.
MOTION by Meisel, seconded by Brown, for approval of the performance evaluation
including a 2% salary increase based on the performance evaluation and a continued
commitment the City will go forward with some type of goal setting evaluations. A
commitment from the City that we continue the use of a third party evaluation tool. The
City will front the costs associated with the purchase of a home computer for the City
Manager's use.
MOTION carries unanimously.
MOTION by Brown, seconded by Weycker to adjourn City Council Meeting.
Chair Michael adjourned the meeting at 11:15 p.m.
Secretary Sue Schwalbe
Chair Geoff Michael
PAYMENT BILLS
DATE: DECEMBER 12, 2000
BILLS ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
BATCI 1 tl
#0112
#0121
AMOUNT
$.138,542.68
$148,586.71
TOTAL BILLS $287,129.39
PAGE 1
AP-C02-Oi
PURCHASE JOURNAL
CITY OF MOUND
VENDOR INVOICE DUE wOLD
NO. INVOICE NF,~R DATE DATE STATUS
q0431 2179
12/i2/00 12/12/00
AMOUNT DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER
244.95 CAKPET CLEANING 71-7100-2200
264.95 JRNL-CD 1010
PRE '
AF
ATHE~;A CARPET CLEAr;Ii;G VENDOR lOlAL 244.95
_~ ~ 5-z.,~. -32~ 50900 ?~.~6 H I-5-C-E-A-L-L-A-N Ed) U S -
12/12/00 12/12/00 75.06 JRNL-CD
2 ~-t~O 1.260.~0 LIQUOR
~2/12/00 ~/12/00 Z,260.00 JRNL-CD
12/12/00 12/12/00 523.14 JRNL-CD
2~3600 1.07~.36 LI~UO~
12/12/00 12/12/00 1,078.36 JRNL-CD
--.-E{~5OY- CORPORATION .......... VC~R TOTAL
30580 198600
12/12/00 12/12/00
..... 71--7t'00-q55~
1010
1010
1010
1010
111.06 HYDRALIC OIL 01-4280-2250
'~' ~ ...... ~*' 'C OIL 7~-7300-~25~~
111.07 HYDRALIC OIL 78-7800-2250
333.19 JRNL-CD 1GlO
}~ILL CLARK OIL COMPANY VENDOR TOTAL
-
12112/00 12112/00
- VE-NDO~ TOTAL
,0210 001117
.... 12 l&2-,'-O~) 12112/90
~REITN[R, JOitN VENDOR TOTAL
~0740 0016615
12/12/00 12/12/00
~UDGET LIGHTING INC VENDOR TOTAL
333.19
20682601
2,530.34 JRNL-CD 1010
----2~b 92470
20093954
.... 20~95452
1,906.53 THRU 11-17-00 INSOECTIONS 01-3254-0000
..- ............... -1-O-1-O--
12112/00 12112/00
1906.53
12112100 12/12/00
87.96 BULBS 71-7100-2200
87.96 JRNL-CD !010
B7.96
5/~9.5~ 5UL~(~ £~- .............. 01-4280-234-0
54~.56 JRNL-CD 10!0
12112/00 12/12/00
!=060.';7 BULK !.C~ .... 01-4280-23-40-
1,060.47 JP, NL-CD !010
12/12/00 12/12/00
2;e~0.76 ,~4J,L-IC-4< E .................... Ot-4280-2340 ..........
2,630.76 JRNL-CD 1010
-vf~J DO R TOT ~.t
~ ~,-.9. '.; O P~A.J,-L K I-CE
959.00 JRNL-CD
CARGILL SALT DIVISION
C 001120
5200.41
22.71
..................... q) 1-4 280-2-34 0
1010
lO-BO ,,'" ~F t.'D
71-7109-3740
PAGE 2
AP-C02-01
PURCHASE JOURNAL CITY OF .HOUND
IHvOICE DUE HOLD PRE-I
DATE DATE STATUS AMOUNT DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUHBER
ND U R
NO. INVOICE NM~R
~.-J TY
C0970 61301099
6138612 5
COCA
12112/00 12112/00
TOTAL
12/12¥~0---1~42/00
12712/00 12/12/00
COLA BOTTLING-MIDWEST VENDOR TOTAL
22.71 JRNL-CD 1010
22.71
87.12 MIX TAXABLE 71-7100-9540
............ 4) -1-0 tt)
86.72 HIX TAXABLE 71-7100-9540
,~,. '-r, ,~ ..... ." "' ---i O I O
173.84
ClllO 001031
12/12/00 12/12/00
375.00 CONCRETE SLAB FOR GENERATOR 22-4170-5000
375.00 JRNL-CD 1010
'RETE WORKS INC VENDOR TOTAL
01~4~--ti~504 -- -
12/12/00 12/12/00
116-515
---.i 17 047 -
12/12/00 12/12/00
375.00
775.35 ~E~ 71--7~00--q5~0
776.35 JRNL-CD 1010
36.§0 ~!SCELLANEOUS T-A~X~H_~ -7~-~-C+0--~-~5~.
36.80 JRNL-CD 1010
2.318.99 BE~--- - ..... 7t-7t-00-953~--
2,31B.00 1010
3131.15
23.25 COUNCIL PLATES (4) 01-4020-2200
23.25 JRNL--CD t0t~---
23.25
12/12/00 12/12/00 JRNL-CD
LLA-Y.~-S-T-R-I..~UTING COHP~AN~--- VE~-iDSR TOTAL
31300 0333~6
12 / l~l-OO 12-J12/09
:)IXCO ~NGRAVING V~NDOR TOTAL
£1420 712865
4,055.65 BEER 71-7100-9530
12/12/00 12/12/00 4,055.65 JRNL-CD 1010
1,936.75 BEER 71-7100-9530
i2/12/00 12/12/00 1,936.75 JRNL-CD lOlO
12.i5 MISCELLANEOUS TAXABLE 71-7100-9550
12/i2/00 i2/12/00 12.15 JRNL-CD 1010
714636
714637
716006
12/12/00 12112/00
~27.00 BEER 71-7100-9530
427.00 JRNL-CD 1010
717744
EAST SIDE 5EVERAG[
~_ ! ~7-7--5250
1,165.50 BEER 71-7100-9530
12/12/00 12/12/00 1,165.50 JRNL-CD 1010
VE'JDOR TOTAL 7597.05
.. - ~S.23 SE~W-J-C~-~gMP--~t~S~ CNG{NE 2A ....... 22-Gi~0-4~0O
12/12/00 12/12/00 448.23 JRNL-CD 1010
410.90 5~VICE PUMP--TE$~--ENG~£-~ ~2--~7~--4~
12/12/00 12/12/00 410.90 JR~L-CD 1010
PAGE' 3 P U R C H A S E J O U R N A L
AP-C02-01 C]TY OF MOUND
VENDOR INVOICE DUE HOLD PRE.
NO. INVOICE NH~R DATE DATE STATUS AHuUNT DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMSER Al
5252 1,159.78 SERVICE PUMP TEST LADDER 11 22-4170-4100
12/12/00 12/12/00 1,159.78 JRNL-CD 1010
5253 495.06 SERVICE PUMP TEST ENGINE 11 22-4170-4100
12/12/00 12/12/U0 495.06 JRNL-CD 1010
EKERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT. VENDOR TOTAL 2513.97
£--%515 166-~ '- "~'~ '~ '~-"~ ..... CIDE ~ ......
12/12/00 12/12/00 6,779.35 JRN[-CD 1010
~-~-YLL I N G INC-
F1571 45~31 85.20 STUDENT PACKAG~ 22-4170-4110
12~&-2~ 0 12/i
..................
FIRE INSTRUCTORS ASSR OF H VENDOR TOTAL &5.20
F1725 27539500
12/12/00 12/12100
169.76 BASIC PLANNER 01-4190-2100
169.76 JRNL-CD 1010
FRANKLIN COVEY COMPANY
475190
VENDOR TOTAL 169.76
12/12/-00~2~12/00
12/12/00 12/12/00
24.76 UNIFORMS ll-i4-O0 73-7300-2240
24.76 UNIFORMS 11-14-00 78-7800-2240
21.22 ~ATS 11-14-00 0t--42~0-2250
21.22 MATS Ii-I&-O0 73-7300-2250
21.23 HATS 11-i4-00 78-7800-2250
23.25 UNIFORES 11-21-00 01-4280-2240
23.25 UNIFORMS lq--~t--O~O ~-7300-224~0
23.25 UNIFORM5 11-21-00 78-7800-2240
i2.?0 MATS 11-21-00 01-4280-2250
12.70 HA4S l~--2-t--{H) .................... 73-7~00-2250
475192
i2/12/00 12/12/00
47519i
i2/12/00 12/12/00
12.71 MATS 11-21-00 78-7800-2250
107.86 JRNL-CD 1010
30.43 MATS 11-14-00 22-4170-2230
30.43 JRNL-CD 1010
37.24 HATS 11-14-00 01-4340-2330
37.24 J~NL-CD 1010
481489
12/12/00 12/12/00
4~7791
i2/12/0~ 12/I2/00
487790
12/12/00 i2/12/00
487789
82.31 MATS 11-21-00 01-4320-4210
82.31 JRNL-CD 1010
27.04 MATS 11-28-00 71-7100-4210
27.04 J~NL-CD 1010
28.76 MATS 11-28-00 22-4170-2230
28.76 JRNL-CD 1010
34.74 MATS 11-29-00 01-4340-2330
34.74 JRNL-CD lOlO
lZ/12/O0 12112/00
PAGE 4
AP=C02-01
PURCHASE JOURNAL
CITY OF MOUND
VENDOR INVOICE DUE HOLD
NO. INVOICE NMBR DATE DATE STATUS
A~OUNT DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER
G & K SERVICES
VENDOR TOTAL
4B6.33
G1890 OOi130-A
O01130-B
001130-C
12-/t2t00--1-2/12/00
t--2-/-1-2~'""v~ 12/12/00
12112/00 !2/12/00
40.60 !1-00 WATER #5158600 01-4020-2200
40.BO 11-00 WATER #5158600 01-4140-4100
~'.vO JRNL--qZD t01~
19.66 11-00 WATER #5158501 01-4320-2200
........... lOlO
4.39 11-00 WATER #5158502 01-4280-2200
4.~9 11 O0 WA~SR #5~5B502
4.40 ll-O0 WATER #5158502 78-7800-2200
13.1~ JRNL-CD lOlO
GLENwOOD INGLEWOOD
9-7-2-. 303 582
30]~-8-3
30355~
VENDOR TOTAL
12/12/00 12/12/00
12/12/00 12/12/00
114.44
&2.25
12/12/00 12/12/00
3~3585 .......
12/12/00 12/12/00
-COOPER & COMPANY. ---¥E~OR TgTAL
WI NE -7t- 7 t00-95-2d2
JRNL-CD 1010
42.25
1.$20.~0 ~INE
520.O0 JRNL-CD 101'
2°~.0~ '.'~ NE ...... 71-7100-9520
288.00 JRNL-CD 1010
726.!3 L! JUgR 7t---7 tO 0--95~l~
726.13 JRNL-CD 1010
6575.9~
G1977 O01119-A
001119-C
3 T E
H2004
001204
HINNESOTA
208158
HAMCO DATA
12/12/00 12/12/00
118.~1 THRU 11-19-00 PHONE SERVICE 01-4320-3220
.~n ......... ?o T~,, !!~--00 L~NG--D4-S~NC~- Ot-~90-~'-
6.3] THRU 11-19-00 LONG DISTANCE 01-4040-3220
.15 THRU 11-19-00 LONG DISTANCE 01-4340-3220
!.OO THRU !--1--.~-OO--L~NG---D~ST~N£~ 0t-4~9~--~22~
l~O.~B JRNL-CD 1010
12/12/00
49.03
49.03
49.02
!~7.~
THRU !~--t~-00-~72-1251 ~HONE ..... 0t-q280-3220 ........
THRU 11-19-00 472-1251 PHONE 73-7300-3220
THRU 11-19-00 472-i251 PHONE 78-7800-3220
JR~--CO ............................. t01~ ......
1.2 / 12/-OXJ---L2J ! 2 / 00
117.98 THRU 11-19-00 PHONE SERVICE 01-4140-3220
!!7.98 JR ~.'L--CD -t-0-t-9
173.37 THRU 11-10-00 472-3555 PHONE 22-4170-3220
173.37 JR44~---C-D ..................... 10t0 ........
VENDOR TOTAL 585.11
12/12/00 12/12/00
200.01 REGISTER CARTRIDGES
200.01 JRNL-CD
71-7100-2200
lOIO
PRODUCTS
VENDOR TOTAL
200.01
PAGE
AP=C02-01
VENDOR
NO. 1N~'OICE NM~R
n2241 001109-A
PURCHASE JOURNAL
CITY Of MOUND
INVOICE DUE HOLD
DATE DATE STATUS AMOUNT
12/12/00 12/12/00
1,978.73
1,97~.73
PR
DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER
10-00 TRAFFIC STUDY, ETC. 55-5877-3100
JRNL-CD lOlO
001109-B 925.00 10-00 PARK AND RIDE LOCATION 30-5640-3100
12/12/00 12/12/00 925.00 JRNL-CD 1010
001109-C 1,278.62 10-00 LANGDON AUDITORS 55-5882-3100
12/12/00 12/12/00 1,278.62 JRNL-CD 1010
OOii09-D i,I78.62 10-00 METRO PLAINS 01-2300-1096
12/12/00 12/12/00 1,178.62 JRNL-CD 1010
O01109-E 1,078.63 10-00 POST OFFICE SITE 55-5879-3100
12/I2/00 12/12/00 1,078.63 JRNL-CD 1010
O01109-F 2,746.67 10-00 MISC PLANNING SERVICES 01-4190-3100
12/12/00 12/12/00 2,746.67 JRNL-CD 1010
HOISINGTUN
KOEGLER GROUP,* VE.~:DOR TOTAL
~3
1-!-94) 96~
--- ~190969
12/12/00 12/12/00
9186.27
363_~0 '~!t~E ~t-9~--9~20
363.80 JRNL-CD 1010
12112/00 12112/00
187.05 L-LQU OR ................ 7 t-- 7-t-00- 95 t~0
187.05 JRWL-CD 1Ol0
12/12/00 12/12/00
9/~7.!7 L!~IJrJR 7i-7~0~-95t~--
947.17 JRNL-CD 1010
12112/00 12112/00
889.76 ~I~----- ............................. 7t-7100-9520
~9.76 JRNL-CD 1010
JOHt!SON--~RO:T~-ERS-L-I.~U~R VEt:DOR TO!AL
32585 001122
....... 12 / 12 / 05--t~At-2/00
JON 5UTHERLAND VENDOR TOTAL
2387.7£
50.00
50~0
50.00
REIMBURSEMENT EYE GLASSES 01-4190-3140
JR-N-L---{~ ...................................... 1010 .........
32610 001121
001128
12/12/00 12/12/00
6.98 COOKIES
6.98 JRNL-CD
12112100 12/12/00
78.06 COUNCIL
78.06 JRNL-CD
FOR NEETING 70-4270-4120
1010
CDOKIES 01-4020-4120
1010
001130
3UB~LEE FOODS
~-2~P~9.--35385-A
---353~5-b ....
12/12/00 12/12/00
23.03 OPEN HOUSE REFRESHMENTS 01-4280-4120
23.03 JRNL-CD 1010
VE~;DOR TOTAL
108.07
12/12/00 12/12/00
~0.50 lO-O0 :I I-SI-E-t_ L-A~ EOU S --3 t-L-L~ B L-5 .... 55-5880-3t~ .........
60.50 JRNL-CD 1010
12/12/00 12/12/00
.......... Rf-DE-VT-J_-OP--PR~ JE{--T-A~E-A--1-- -55--5~50--
1,496.11 JRNL-CD I010
'AGE 6
:,P-C02-O1
p U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L
CITY OF MOUND
,'ENDOR INVOICE DUE HOLD
NO. INVOICE NMSR DATE DATE STATUS
AMOUNT DESCRIPTIDN
PRE-P
ACCOUNT NUMBER AMO
35385-C
12/12/00 12/12/00
12.60 i0-00 BALBOA AC@UISITION 01-2300-1051
12.00 JRNL-CD 1010
35385-D
12/12/00 12/12/00
66.00 10-00 COAST TO COAST C3NTRACT 55-5881-3100
66.00 JRNL-CD 1010
35355-E
12/12/00 12/12/00
269.50 lO-O0 POST OFFICE RELOCATION 55-5879-3100
269.50 JRNL-CD lOiO
35385-F
12/12/00 12/12/00
1,957.84 10-00 METRO PLAINS CONTRACT 01-2300-1096
1,957.84 JRNL-CD lOlO
35389-A
12/12/00 12/12/00
720.00 10-00 DEVEL REX ALWIN PROPERTY 01-2300-1095
720.00 JRNL-CD lOlO
35389-m
12/12/00 12/12/00
1,382.00 I0-00 BECKER PERMIT REDUEST 01-2300-1098
1,382.00 JRNL-CD lOlO
35389-C
12/12/00 i2/12/00
2,278.00 10-00 EXECUTIVE LEGAL SERVICES 01-4110-3100
2,278.00 JRNL-CD lOlO
35389-D
35389-E
12/12/00 12/12/00
297.37 lO-O0 ADMINISTRATIVE LEGAL SER 01-4110-3100
297.37 JRNL-CD 1010
12/12/00 12/12/00
144.00 10-00 PUBLIC SAFETY LEGALS 01-4110-3100
144.00 JRNL-CD 1010
35389-F
12/12/00 12/12/00
86.45 10-00 P/W ~ISC LEGAL SERVICES 01-4280-3100
86.45 JRNL-CD 1010
35359-G
12/12/00 12/12/00
1,107.94 10-00 P/Z ~,ISC LEGAL SERviCES 0i-~190-3100
1,107.94 JRNL-CD 1010
35389-N
12/12/00 12/12/00
60.00 10-00 PARKS MISC LEGAL SERVICE 01-4340-3100
60.00 JRNL-CD 1010
<ENNEDY ~ GRAVEN VENDOR TOTAL
~ 030--21-5 161 ......
12/12/00 12/12/00
..... 21760~
12/12/00 12/12/00
~.2_.1.9594. -
12/12/00 12/12/00
...... 222081
12/12/06 12/12/00
222082--
12/12/00 12/12/00
MARK- .¥ I I DISTRIBUTOR
VE~;DO-R- TOT ~,t
0935.31
l~9!q.9g
1,914.00
2,871.00
2,B26.65
4,9~0.~5
~2.bO
92.00
~20.00
BE-E-R ............................... 7t-7100-953~
JRNL-CD ~010
....... 71-7100-9530 ..........
~E-ER ....
JRNL-CD 1010
BE-ER
JRNL-CD 1010
bEE-R-- ................... 71-7100-9530
JRNL-CD 1010
L! ~gOR ........................... 71-7100-9510 ............
JRNL-CD 1010
10-OO ~ESTEDGE MISC ENGINEER S 01-2300-1095
PAGE 7
:,P-C02-O1
P U R C H A S E J O U R N A L
CITY OF MOUND
VENDOR
NO.
INVOICE
iNVOICE DUE HOLD
DATE DATE STATUS
AMOUNT
PRE'
DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER A!
--34724
34725
34-7-2-6
---34727
34-7-2-8
--34729
12112/00 12112/00
12112/00 12/12/00
12/12/00 12112/00
12/12/00 i2/12/00
12112/00 12/12/00
12/12100 12/12/00
12/12/00 12/12/00
12/12/00 12/12/00
--34731
12/12/00 i2/12/00
---$4732
720.00
315.00
90.00
1,395.00
225.^"~
225.00
387.00
5~5.00
45.00
/.5.00 ---
'-5.00
2.41~ .70
12/12/00 12/12/00
2,410.70
JPNL-Cb lOlO
I O = "0 .... "- D G E 'V AT [ R~ A-I~-C--l',~GIi4- .... 9)1--2~3t~0 --1'-095~
JRNL-CD 1010
JRNL-CD 1010
.,.,~-,,,, P/I,-,,~,- ~,,~iNEERiNG-SER 01-v.-1-90--3-1-00
JRNL-CD 1010
.,.,., ,,O--P-/-Z MIS~='G.I-NEE-R-INB-SER ..... 0t-4190-St-00
JRNL-CD 1010
JRNL-CD 1010
,^_nn S UR~:~{ ~-E--~:~ E ,q - MAN A G EMENT ....... 01-4190-3100 ...........
JP,., NL-C b lOlO
i 0 - 00 L-(-)-S-T--L-AA-E-~A-E-H-A~-{-Lq T-AT-{ON -30- 56
JRNL-CD lOiO
lOgO0 P4_~'~ E~/4 E V; ......................... 01-2300-1043
JRNL-CD 1010
1 O - O 0 U E GK-E-R,--P~OPEQ T-¥-.-E.NG { NEE.-R ...... 0t- 23-00-i99~ --
JRNL-CD 10~0
34733
12/12/00 12112/00
---34734 ~-
12112/00 12/12/00
34735
12/12/00 12/12/00
34736
12/i2/00 12/12/00
34737
12112/00 12112/00
------34736
12/12/00 12112/00
......... 34739
12/12/00 12112/00
12/12/00 12112/00
34741
1,03~-,00 I0-00 ;IE-T-R.O-PLA-I~S ENGINEERING ....... 01-2300-1096
1,035.00 JRNL-CD 1010
~ 0. C O 10 - 00 ::£-X-F-~ R-L-~/-B-RENSHEL-L--H OME$ --0 t- 2-300--1-07 6
90.00 JRNL-CD 1010
45.00 l-O-OO L~.qS:~----L-AK£-£NGtNEER-ING SE ..... 30-5640-3i0~
45.00 JRNL-CD 1010
1~035.0C i¢,-~)-O--C-T-Y-~ O AD- t 5 ~ E A L I GN M E NT ....... 55-5877-3t00
1.035.00 JRNL-CD 1010
450-.-O~)---I-0--4)-0-J-l-F-DISTF~ICT E;~G SERVICE - 55-5880-310-0
450.00 JRNL-CD 1010
~.~....~.L_ zn~ =n 10-~O~J~--SU~¥-E¥' LOAS-T ~O-CO ......... 55-58~1--3i99'
4,308.30 JRNL-CD 1010
315.-00 1-0--00-$212 LYNWOOD ENG SERVICE .... 01-2300-1097 ........
315.00 JRNL-CD 1010
220.00 iq)--O 0 ~FA-SA~- EN G~ ~PZER tN G - SER V-I .... 0t-2 300-t~089 .........
220.00 JRNL-CD 1010
.... 1~-0-.-00 lq)~U.ON-I-O- E4~ G--SE R V ]{£ S 0 t-- 23-O0--st-O 85-
12/12100 12/12/00 180.00 JR'JL-CD 1010
PAGE 8 P U R C H A 5 E J O U R N A L
AP-C02-01 CITY OF HOUND
VENDOR INVOICE DUE HOLD
NO. INVOICE NHI:SR DATE DATE STATUS AMOUNT DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUHbER
PRE-
AM
34742 1,694.20 10-00 REX ALUIJ; ENG SERVICES 01-2300-1005
12/12/00 12/12/00 1,694.20 JRNL-CD 1010
34743 720.00 lO-O0 GILLESPIE ENG SERVICES 01-2300-1088
12/i2/00 i2/12/00 720.00 JRNL-CD 1010
34744 333.00 10-00 POST OFFICE ENG SERVICES 55-5879-3100
12/12/00 12/12/00 333.00 JRNL-CD 1010
34745 903.00 lO-O0 CHESTNUT HILL PLAT 01-2300-1113
12/12/00 12/i2/00 903.00 JRNL-CD i010
34746 180.00 10-00 HUFNAGLE ENG SERVICES 01-2300-1100
12/i2/00 12/12/00 180.00 JRNL-CD 1010
34747 225.00 10-00 CODDON SUB-DIV EN6 SERVI 01-2300-1108
12/12/00 12/12/00 225.00 JRNL-CD 1010
34746 135.00 10-00 1800 COMMERCE ENG SERVIC 01-2300-1115
12/12/00 12/12/00 135.00 JRNL-CD 1010
34749 45.00 10-00 HTKA BOAT RENTAL ENG SER 01-2300-1114
12/12/00 12/12/00 45.00 JRNL-CD lO1O
MCCOHBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCI* VENDOR TOTAL i8091.20
',mL250 00i-li5-
12/12/00 12112/00
151.13 THT'{U ii~-14~00 ,g£-P~)T 01--4S4~--~-7-2-~-
37.28 THRU 11-15-00 PARKS 5UILDING 01-4340-3720
i04.35 IHRU 11-15-00 L]QUORE STORE 71-7100-3720
27~.~7 T H-R4:I--t-1 - 15 - 00 -F-I4%E-- S-T~AT ~]ON 22-~- ~720
751.27 THRU !i-15-00 CITY HALL BUILD 01-4320-3720
5~.69 THRU ll-15-O0 P/~ 5UILDING 01-4280-3720
56.69 THRU l]~-~O P~~- ~-7~-2~
56.70 THRU 11-15-00 P/W BUILDING 78-7800-3720
1,492.78 JRNL-CD 1010
v, I NNEG ASC 0
HN-J~EJ~-T- oF HEALTH
Z3370 001108
M~t LUT I ON
M3500 001231
MOUND FIRE
VENDOR TOTAL
12/12/00 12112/00
. -¥£~QQ-R TOTAL
12/12/00 12/!2/00
CONTROL AGENC VENDOR-TOTAL
RELIEF ASSN VENDOR TOTAL
I492.78
~.195.00
4,195.00
105.00
105.00
210.00
24-~.00
~,484.17
8484.17
10-O{--~-e--T-H-R~-t2-3i-0O ..................... 73-3590--000~
JRNL-CD 1010
01-17-00 REGISTRATION HARDINA 73-7300-4110
0 i---t-7--q)q)~-E~G~ .5-T R~T~I ON--H AR~ { N A ......... 78- 7800-- 4 i-1~
JRNL-CD 1010
12-00 FIRE RELIEF 95-9500-1400
,~3710 29935
86.88 C-FOLD PAPER TO~ELS 01-4040-2200
86.88 C-FOLD PAPER TOWELS 01-4090-2200
PAGE 9
AP-C02-OL
VENDOR
NO. INVOICE NMBR
INVOICE DUE HOLD
DATE DATE STATUS
PURCHASE JOURNAL
CITY OF MOUND
PRE.
AHOUNT DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER A~
12/12/00 12112/00
86.58 C-FOLD PAPER TOWELS 01-4140-2200
86.68 C-FOLD PAOER TOWELS 01-4190-2200
~a.~8 C FOLD DAP[R
28.96 C-FOLD PAPER TOWELS 01-4280-2200
28.96 C-FOLD PAPER TOWELS 71-7100-2200
43.44 C-FOLD PAPER TOWELS 78-7800-2200
579.20 JRNL-CD 1010
NETWORK
SERVICES COMPANY VENDOR TOTAL
H.E Y~! AN ,S-I ~N S
P395~ 000203838
12/12/00 12/12/00
V£XDOR TOTAL
12/12100-t~V~2/00
OF MINNESOTA VENDOR TOTAL
PAGENEl
579.20
88.80
18.89
1S.89
18.89
JRNL-CD 1010
11-14-00 THRJ I2-13-00 PAGERS 01-4140-3950
JR h't-~-D-- ................................................ -10t0
~4
140999 956.00 WINE 71-7100-9520
12/12/00 12/12/00 956.00 JRNL-CD 1010
& SONS ~INE COHPAN V~;DDF: TOTAL 956.00
12/12/00 12/i2/00 149.44 JRNL-CD 1010
.... ~J44.)0~ TOTAL I(9.44 .....................................
668067 309.00 LI~UO? 71-7100-9510
...... 12-/&2~-~-2/!2/09 309.00 JR~L-CD 1~ --
PAUSTIS
-PqOgrJ 54~95169-
AE~S4-~OLA COMPANY
P4021
66~068
12/12/00-1~¥1~00
90.00 MIX NON-TAXABLE 71-7100-9540
9O.-O~---~R-N-L-{-D- ................................ 10t~ .......
669917 2,161.50 LIuUOR
12/-12M0~/!2/90 2;161.50 JR~L-CD
71-7100-9510
.................................. tDtO ....
669918 272.20 WINE 71-7100-9520
..... 12 / 12/.0.0- -12-/-i-2-/-0-0 2-7-2.20 JRJ~L~-C-D- .....................
............ I010 .....
PHILLIPS ~'INE ~ SPIRITS, ~ VENDOR TOTAL 2832.70
P4038 36681
37097
37254
37513
12112/00 12/12/00
820.94 CIGARETTES
820.94 JRNL-CD
12/12/00 12/12/00
1,046.21 CIGARETTES
1,046.2i JRNL-CD
71-7100-9550
1010
71-7100-9550
1010
71-7100-9550
10]0
71-7100-9550
1010
i2/12/00 12/12/00
652.64 CIGARETTES
652.64 JRNL-CD
12112/00 12112/00
929.59 CIGARETTES
929.59 JRNL-CD
UAJE 10
AP-C02-O1
VENDOR INVOICE DUE HOLD
NO. INVOICE NMBR DATE DATE STATUS
P I ,';NACLE DISTRIBUTING
P U R C H A S E J 0 U R
CITY OF NOUND
AMDU,~T DESCRIPTION
VE;.DOR TOTAL
3449.38
N AL
ACCOUNT
NUMSER
PRE -
o4049 764954
12/12/00 12/12/00
PLUNRETT'S, INC VENDOR TOTAL
~,-~i-7-t 67.9404-00 ....
12/12/00 12/12/00
..... ---902103-00
12/12/00 12/12/00
91X~45-~O
12/12/00 12/12/U0
...... 905029-00
12/12/00 12112100
38.90 NOV.DEC.JAN PEST CONTROL 71-7100-4200
38.90 JRNL-/D 1010
38.90
52.42 JRNL-CD 1010
50'-.39 LIQUOR 71--71-00-9-5-1-0
504.89 JRNL-CD 1010
I..--.. ~°~ =- ~. -~,,', .,~,~,= 7-1---7-1'00-95t-0
1.955.76 JRNL-CD 1010
',,.,UAL4-T-Y--~'~aE & SP-IRITS .... V-EXDOR TOTAL
~4209 1556
12/12/00-&2-~-1~O0
qANDY'S SANITATION V£NDOR TOTAL
~4248 001023
12/12/00 12/12/00
2IDGEVIEN HOUND CLINIC VENDOR TOTAL
k~290 -~X) 319
261.16 JRNL-CD
NON'.S ICE CO~PAt;Y
343~1 00!11§
SHIRLEY HAWKS
34391 3030
12/12/0u 12/12/00
110.77 11-00 TRASH
110.77
110.77
¥ £.N D O,R---l'~ T AL
71-7t00-952~
1010
SERVICE 01-4320-3750
........................................... t~t~
VENDOR TOTAL
948.00 PHYSICALS FOR (3) NEW EE
948.00 JRNL-CD
22-4170-3100
I010
948.00
i e 5.46 I C E 7 t-- 7-~{) 0-0 550--
105.46 JPNL-CD I010
105-.-4-6
1~2.51
1g2.5!
182.51
11-16-00 EDC MEETING SECRETARY 01-4020-3100
JR !~ L~-C-D .............................. 1010
1,080.30 ll-00-0O REMOVE TREES 80-6000-4100
12/12/00 12/12/00 1,0gO.30 JRNL-CD 1010
1066.30
~$-O~-00---C-JON -~ON-NECT- CH ARGE, ETC
~30.00 JRNL-CD
SHOREWOOD TREE SERVICE VENDOR TOTAL
.qA 521 PO7MN0271300
12/12/0U i2/12/00
030.90
118.30 SIREN INSTALLATION
1-1-ff~.--3-Q-~ -J Rqq~.~ C-D .......................
~IJN-I-E--OF MN-~UREAU
54600 192244.1
1,277.57 AMAUNITION
OF 4R-]$--v.E-,']bOk TOTAL
12 / 12 / 00- -1~¥-1~-/00
100462.2
01-4140-3800 - '
1010
01-4140-3810
1010
01-4140-2270
PAGE 11
AP-C02-01
P U R C H A 5 E J O U R N A L
C~'TY OF
VENDOR INVOICE DOE HOLD
NO. INVOICE NMBR DATE DATE STATUS
12/12/00 12/12/00
S4o30 001222
SPEEDWAY
PRE
AMOUNT DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER
1,277.57 JRNL-CD 1010
TOTAL
301.71 THRU 11-25-00 GASOLINE CHARGES 01-4340-2210
1,494.69 TIIRU ii 25--O0-G'ASOLINE CHARGE5 ..... 01-4280-22t0 ........
133.13 THRU 11-25-00 SASOLINE CHARGES 73-7300-2210
191.55 THRU 11-25-00 GASOLINE CHARGES 78-7800-2210
2,111.13 JRNL CD ~O~O
SUPERAMERICA LLC VENDOR TOTAL
2111.13
34631 001222
12/12/00 12/12/00
1,15o.81 THRU 11-25-00 GASOLINE CHARGES 01-4140-2110
1,156.81 JRNL-CD
SPEEDWAY SUPERAtIERICA LLC VENDOR TOTAL
JJ-~7-]-O- 872~7
12/12/00 ~2/12/00
THE L-A-K£~ ............... -V-C!:DOR TOTAL
180756
12/I.2/~0 ~/i2/00
181209
- 12-/12¥~4 12/12/00
21134I
........... 12/12/08~12!00
211342
212075
212076
2!2060
121t21-0~ &~2-/12/00
12/12/00 .I. 2~/4~2-/00
THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPAN VENDOR TOTAL
T4780 O01OO1
12/12/00 12/12/00
1156.81
405.00
405.00
142.00
142.00
46.00
40.00
12.10
12.10
2,735.55
2,735.55
i2.10
12.10
&,99~.70
3,999.70
856.30
lt---04-~2$-~RU--i~-t8-O~-CLASSI~--- 01-4190-3510 ..........
JRNL-CD lO10
BEER KEGS
JR-C,I-L~CD
CEER KEGS
JR-N~--~-D-
71-7100-9530
............................... tOl-O ....
71-7100-9530
........................... t0-t~
MISCELLANEOUS TAXABLE 71-7100-9550
~EER 71-7100-9530
JRRL-C~ 1~i~
HI SCELLANEOUS TAXABLE 71-7100-9550
'~ *" -CD
..... ': ...................................... !~lO-
BEER 71-7100-9530
JRNL-C-~ ............................ tOlO ......
BEER
856.~,~,---.-J~L~..C~ .............
71-7100-9530
· -- t0!0 ......
12803.75
21.02 PHOTO PROCESSIi;G 22-4170-2200
21.02 JRNL-CD lOlO
THRIFTY '--'HIT[
-~J, .F,.A.b - J 3 -1 42
...... 13152
DRuG STO~ES VENDOR TOTAL
12/12/00 12/12/00
12/12/00 12/12/00
21.02
....... 0~4::'~ SC -~ [-E~ t N6 .......... 01-4340-4200 ........
140.50 JRNL-CD 1010
tO~q-5----~t--16--Q~-D~C M£ETING
101.25 J~NL-CD
81-4350-4200
lO10
,PAGE 12
AP-C02-01
PURCHASE JOURNAL
CITY OF MOUND
VENDOR INVOICE DUE HOLD
NO. INVOICE NHSR DATE DATE STATUS
TIME SAVER OFF SITE SECRE* VENDOR TOTAL
12/12/00 12112/00
AMOUNT
241.75
2,250.U0
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT NUMBER
LE ;, K--S-Y=S-T-{-~M- -S L4Rq~ E ¥- -? 3- 730~)- 3
JRNL-CD 1010
PRE -
AM
04~013 --
12/12/00 12/12/00
TOLTZ K!~.G~OUVALL--AND£~-S~JN VE~DOR TOT^L
T4940 lg431
..... 12/127X10--1-2/12!~0
450.00
2790.00
1,613.73
1.6!3.73
L~-A~--S¥-S-T~M--SUg VEY .................... 73--7300-4200
JRNL-CD 10~0
MILLTRONICS MULTIRANGER PLUS 78-7800-2310
J R NL---{ D
TRI-STATE PUMP & CONTROL I VEKDOR TOTAL
1613.73
T495i 072012
TRUE VALUE
T/:9~5 2~-84~ 5-0
280477-0
276461-0
12/12/00 12/12/00
VENDOR TOTAL
5.94 FUSE, CHRISTHAS 01-2300-0500
5.94 JRNL-CD 1010
5.94
40.74 MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES PAPER
40.74 MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES PAPER
60.7~ MT~--QF-F-~--SUPPL-IES ~APER ..............
40.74 MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES PAPER
13.55 MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES PAPER
13.53 ~ISC OFF~CE S~P.-PL~S-~APE~-
20.37 MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES PAPER
20.35 HISC OFFICE SUPPLIES PAPER
01-4090-2100
01-4140-2100
.01-41-90--2~00
01-4340-2100
01-4260-2100
73-7300-2100
78-7800-2100
2799516-0
121121.00--t2~4~-7-00
271.5 g -Jq .~--C~ ........................ 1-010 .....
94.56 PLANNERS 01-4140-2100
18.05 PLANNERS 01-4340-2100
i8.05 PLANNERS 01-4190-2100
6.02 Pt *. ~!K"E~ S - 0t-4~ 80- 2-1~
6.02 PLANNERS 73-7300-2100
6.00 PLANNERS 78-7800-2100
.127t~7-O~J 12-/12/0C
12/12/00 12112/00
19.22 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4040-2100
!9.22----M4~C~NEOVS-~FF-I£E 5UPP~-ES ....... O~--4090-2~O~
19.22 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4140-2100
19.22 HISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4190-2100
19.22 M!-S-C£LLA,N-E-Q4J$--OF~-ICE-SWPP~-t~S ...... ~1-4340-2{0~-
6.41 HISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES
6.41 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES
9-.~>O---~-Sf-E~NEOUS-OFFI~E-SUPPLIES
9.59 HISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES
128.11 JRNL-CD
16.60 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES
16.60 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES
16.50 M! S C~L-L *- NE-~J ~--~F~-t~--SU~P~-~-E S
16.60 MISCELLAN[OUS OFFICE SUPPLIES
16.60 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES
01-4280-2100
71-7100-2100
73-7300-2100
78-7800-2100
lOlO
01-4040-2100
01-4090-2100
~ t--4-14 0-~2-t$ $ --
01-4190-2100
01-4340-2100
AP-C02-01
U RC HA §E JOURNAL
CITY OF HOUND
VENDOR INVOICE DuE HOLD
NO. INVOICE NM~R DATE DATE STATUS AMOUNT
280466-0
280473-0
12112/00 12/12/00
12112/00 12/12/00
5.53
5.53
8.30
96.10
Z06 ~
6 .~3
6.83
6.83
6.83
2.28
2.28
3.42
3.42
45.55
72.63
72.63
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT NUHBER
MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES
MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES
MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES
EASEL
J:,qNL=C~
MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES
....... ~ ....... OFFICE SUb'PriES
MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES
MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES
PRE'
Al
01-4280-2100
71-7100-2i00
78-7800-2100
01-4020-2100
.............. 1~t~ ....
01-4040-2100
01-4140-2100
01-4190-2100
HI S C EL±-A NS OL45~-FF-~ CE -SUPPLIES ....... 01-4 3,~0- 21'OO-
MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4280-2100
MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 71-7100-2100
............... 0 'F-F--I-C-E~t~ ~H~t-- 1-E5 7'5--7 -30 O - -2-1t) 0
MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 75-7800-2100
JRNL-CD 1010
CASSETTE TAPES 01-4020-2100
JRNL-CD 1010
281792-0
8.62 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4040-2100
8.62 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4090-2100
~-~ M4~-SC~-ANE~US-OF~tCE-SVPPL-IES- 01-4140-2100
8.02 dISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4190-2100
8.62 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPL1ES 01-4340-2!00
2.g9 ~-;ISCELLANEOUS OFW~C--~P-P£-I~S ---O~-42~0--~-~0
2.89 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 71-7100-2100
4.31 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 73-7300-2100
4.30 MI-~ELL-AJ~IE~O~--O~-SUPPbt~S ....... 78-~800-2t~
13.15 CONTERFEIT PENS 71-7100-2100
i2/12/00 12/12/00 70.04 JRNL-CD 1010
76.25 DISCS, SURGE PROTECTOR, ETC 01-4140-2~00
i2/12/00 12/12/00 76.25 JRNL-CD 1010
516.53 CHAIR MATS (2) 01-4140-2100
12/12/00 12/12/00 51o.53 J~NL-CO 1010
CO VENDOR TOTAL 1572.85
279352-0
281030-0
TWIN CITY OFFICE SUPPLY
~5492__ 001231
91.33 12-00 CLEANING
91.33 12-00 CLEANING
· 91.34 12~00
12/12/00 12/12/00 1,400.00 JRNL-CD
N£$L-METRO BUILDING MAINT~--¥EN$OR TOTAL !~00.90
26786 207562
~OYER TRUCK PARTS
89 032800
77.06 RESERVE ASSEMBLY
7-7..,~ 6 J ~N-~C-~- .....
VENDOR TOTAL 77.66
12/12/00 12/12/00
74.55 BENCHES
7~..55 JRNL-¢D
01--4320-421~ ...........
01-4250-4200
73-7300-4200
.................. 78-7-800-~2~
1010
78-7800-2310
...... 1010 ......
01-2300-0500
1010
PAGE 14
AP-C02-O1
PURCHASE JOURNAL
CITY OF MDUND
VENDOR
NO. INVOICE NM~R
INVOICE DUE HOLD
DATE DATE STATUS ANOUNT DESCRIPTION
7~.55
HENNEPIN COOPSEED EXCHANGE VENDOR TOTAL
Z6790 001122
12/12/00 12/12/00
75.00 MEMBERSHIp DUES
75.00 JRNL-CD
ACCOUNT NUMBER
PRE-
AM
01-&140-4130
1010
rJATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ETHI VE~:DOR TOTAL
ZS?OZ
12/12/00 12/12/00
~]~4'4-O-V~ON GROUPS .......... VENDOR TOTAL
Z6792 001130
~g-O-.S~E-T '-T-,--C I ND Y
12/12/00 12/12/00
....... WENDOR TOTAL
TOTAL ALL VENDORS
75.00
3~.70 ELECTED O~FIC-I-ALS H-~NDBq2e. K
34.70 JRNL-CD
3~.70
20.00 i~-08-00 HRA MEETING
20.00 Il 2~ O0 H:-,'A H~-.ET-I-N~
40.00 JRNL-CD
~0 .o0
148,586.71
01-4030-3100
1010
2000 Community Policing Award
Night Vision
ITT Industries
November 12, 2000
Dear InternationalAssociation of Chiefs of Police (IACP) Members:
On behalf of the IACP and 1Tr Industries Night Vision, we are proud to teco~iTe and
congratulate the winners and finalists of the 2000 Commllllity Policing Award.
The winnin~ deparlIllents are setting new stalldal'ds [or effective policin[ throllgh
commtlRity problem solving. More important, they are demonstrating that community
policing is a proactive practice of identifying problems and taking steps to solve them
before they occur. Much in the way preventive medicine is used as pan of a total wellness
prograln, commllllity policing RRites all law enforcement and community resources
available to address crime through preventive, community-based actions.
The committee had a difficult time selecting five winners and nine finalists fzom mote
than 100 excellent nominations. We are pleased to recognize those "best practices" that
surfaced in the awards process.
It is our hope that agencies and communities can use this booklet, provided by rl'f
Indnslzies Night Vision, to further community-policing efforts. This booklet allows ns to
learn from each other and see these outstanding applications in practice.
Sincerely,
Gary B. Kempk~
Chairman
CommRllity Policing Gommittee
Vice President & Director, Business Development
1TT Industries Night Vision
Introduction ..................................................... 2
c,4~;oRr:. Agency Serving a Population of Fewer than 20,000 Residents
Winner: Mound, Minn. Police Department ............................. 3
Finalists: Clayton, Calif. Police Department ............................. 4
Silverthorne, Colo. Police Department .......................... 5
~rrGoRr: Agency Serving a Population of 20,001 to 50,000 Residents
Winner: Mundelein, Ill. Police Department .............................6
Finalists: Ponca City, Okla. Police Department ........................... 7
Suisun City, Calif. Police Department ........................... 8
CA~C, ORr:. Agency Serving a Population of 50,001 to 100,000 Residents
Winner:. Ashevilh, N.C. Police Department ............................. 9
Finalists: Red Deer City RCMP, Red Deer City, Alberta, Canada .............. 10
Beaverton, Ore. Police Department ............................11
cAr~GoRr: Agency Serving a Population of 100,001 to 250,000 Residents
Winner: Fremont, Calif. Police Department ............................. 12
Finalist: Fontana, Calif. Police Department ............................. 13
cArrc, o~r.' Agency Serving a Population of 250,001+ Residents
Winner: El Paso, Texas Police Depm'tment .............................14
Finalists: Sa, amAna, Calif. Police Department ........................... 15
Winnipeg Police Service, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada ............ 16
~~Winners and finalists of the 2000 Community
~W Policing Award, sponsored by ITT Industries Night
~ Vision and the IACI~ are anything bm soft on crime.
To the contrary, these five winners and nine finalists have
transformed their policing models from traditional, reactive
approaches to aggressive, proactive solution-oriented
str~_t_egies and tactic~ A fluid plan to delve into the trenches
of the potential and real problems in their communities sets
them apart Using available resources and creative
approaches to address these problems, they emerged with
solutions that empowered both officers and citizens.
These 14 departments stand as community-policing
models, not because of their individual initiatives but because
they demonstrated that they had adopted community policing
as a way of life. Once that change was accepted, implemented
and encouraged, departments witnessed success in their
community initiatives. In the following pages, you will read
summaries from essays submitted by these departments.
Night Vision
ITTIndustries
~ound Police Department serves a community
ff: of 9,800 residents on the shores of Lage
~' Minnetonka. An outlying suburb oftheTwin
,.~:i: Cities metropolitan area, Mound once served as
the last stop for trains coming from Minneapolis to the
Lake Minnetonka area. ~ith 13 sworn officers, two secre-
taxies, a community service officer, eight volunteers and its
police chief of more than 16 years, the department has
dedicated itself to closing a once significant gap between
the police and citizens by providing better serxice to all of
its citizens and improving community relations.
As part of its commitment to a community-focused
approach, the department worked with the community to
determine what issues the community faced. Residents
expressed concern that a complete gap between the
residents and police existed. Once the concerns were iden-
tiffed, action was taken to implement community policing
via training, mission statement, persotmd changes,
performance evaluations, community evaluation and
attitude changes. Officers were encouraged to work with
the community to solve and prevent crime through active
community participation.
The department's mission statement was and continues
to be used as the measuring stick for all services provided
to citizens. This statement asserts,'~rhe Mound Police
Department, through teamwork and cooperation, will be
responsive to our citizens' needs with a professional level
of dedicated service. Officers will display the highest
integrity and regard for each citizen with a focused and
unbiased attitude. Our dtizens will determine our
Success."
The department implemented numerous community-
based programs to address citizen concerns, including
Juvenile and Adult Citizens Academies, DARE, Bike Patrol,
Crime Watch, TRIAD, Juvenile Conferencing, Offensive
Behavior Corrective Curriculum, Safety Days, Open Gym
Night, School Liaison Officers,Juvenile Safety Camps and
others. Using these program.% resources and personnd,
the department built and implemented a solid community
policing foundation. The most important resources were
the partnerships devdoped with the Mound Crime
Prevention Association, Westonka Public School District,
Our Lady of the Lake Parochial School, Westonka Rotary
Club, Westonka Senior Center, Faith Community, City
Business District, Chamber of Commeree, Westonka
Helping Youth, Westonka Healthy Pamilies Collaborative
and individual members of the community.
To determine its progress against this mission state-
ment, the department tracked citizens' reactions to
whether or not they considered the department's service
and efforts successful. It distributed Citizen Comment
Cards on traffic contacts and other calls for service. The
department was fortunate to receive a z0 percent return
rate from citizens. Each response card was totaled, and a
numerical number was given for that officer's levd of serv-
ice. Each officer in the department met with a supe sor
on a monthly basis and was evaluated on his/her strengths
and weaknesses.
The department also conducted
door-to-door surveys on a semi-
annual basis. Each officer was
assigned approximately 300 homes
with which to make contact. The
homeowners were asked about any
problems they have in the neighbor- .:
hood and ff they were satisfied with
the service being provided by the
Mound Police Department.
The City Council approved the
police department's efforts and
awarded the officers with a two
percent pay increase on their yearly
gross salaries for the completion of a new S.A.R.A. project
that had a positive impact in the community. Current
S.A.R.A. projects are:
· Calling Tree, a program for elderly persons living
alone in the community;,
· Operation Safe Spokes, a stolen bicycle recovery
program; and
· Larceny from Yehides Program, which involves
members of the business district and local neighbor-
hoods.
Key to Mound's success was the belief that community-
policing methods needed to be adopted, supported and
communicated across the department and community,
from management to officers in the field. The department's
efforts to improve service answered the community's need
to focus on crime prevention through communication and
cooperation.
CITY OF MOUND
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING BUSINESS SUBSIDY AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Mound has
entered into a Contract for Private Redevelopment with MetroPlains Development LLC, calling for
the redevelopment of certain lands within the City of Mound; and
WHEREAS, the Contract calls for the providing of economic assistance by the HRA to the
Redeveloper which meets the defmition of "business subsidy" as that term is used in Minnesota
Statutes, Sections 116J.993 through 116J.994 (the "Act"); and
WHEREAS, THE Act requires the adoption of a business subsidy agreement by the HRA
and approval of the agreement by the City as a precondition to the making of a business subsidy;
and
WHEREAS, pursuant to notice as required by the Act, the HRA has held its public heating
and adopted the business subsidy agreement with the Redeveloper; and
WHEREAS, City Council has reviewed the business subsidy agreement and is familiar
with its terms.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of Mound
that the business subsidy agreement attached hereto as Exhibit A is hereby approved.
Dated:
Pat Meisel Mayor
Attest:
Kandis M. Hanson, Acting City Clerk
JBD-188397vl
MU195-9
MEMORANDUM
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
rill
To: Kandis Hanson, City Manager
From: Loren Gordon, City Planner
Date: December 7, 2000
Subject: Westedge agreements
City staff has prepared draft agreements for the Westedge Blvd. projects related to the Langdon Bay
development for City Council review on the December 12th agenda. Minnetrista City Staff has also
reviewed the agreements and will be bringing them to their December 18th City Council meeting. The
agreements fulfill the City's obligations relating to the Langdon Bay preliminary plat approval. In short,
they provide for the following:
Water Agreement - Allow the extension and looping of Mound watermain through Minnetrista
to connect the main at the NE comer of the Alwin property to a main at the SE corner of the old
treatment plant site (current MCES). Provisions for an interconnect anticipate the North
Saunders Lake development so either city can provide water to one with emergency needs for
water. Because the watermain is a Mound line, repair and maintenance points are also identified.
Street Agreement - Provides the ability for Mound to design plans for roadway lA each city,
allowing the ability for Minnetrista review and approval those plans. Upon approval holds
Mound to the costs and liabilities of the project. Upon completion, Minnetrista would accept the
roadway and release Mound obligations.
Sewer Agreement - Allows Minnetrista the use of an easement for future sanitary sewer line
purposes they would own and maintain.
Right of Entry Agreement - Provides the ability to access private properties along Westedge.
Please call me if you have any further questions.
123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
(612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838
DRAFT
Water Agreement
12/7/00
JOINT AND COOPERATIVE WATER AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF MINNETRISTA
AND
THE CITY OF MOUND
THIS AGREEMENT, is made and entered into as of the ~ day of ,2000 by
and between the City of Minnetrista, an Minnesota municipal corporation CMinnetrista"), and the
City of Mound a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Mound").
BACKGROUND
1. Minnetrista and Mound are each authorized by law to construct, operate and
maintain municipal water utilities for the purpose of supplying water within their respective
corporate limits.
2. Mound is undertaking the establishment of a new residential subdivision that will be
located on land that abuts the border between Minnetrista and Mound.
3. In order for Mound to supply water service to the subdivision, it is necessary and
convenient for the water service lines to be located on land lying within the corporate limits of
Minnetrista and shown in Exhibit A (the "Property").
4. Location of the service lines in Minnetrista will also provide the oppommity for
Mirmetrista and Mound to have access to the other's water service for emergency purposes.
5. The purpose of Agreement, made in accordance with the authority of Minnesota
Statutes § 471.59, is to provide Mound the right to locate the service within Minnetrista, and to
provide Minnetrista the right to use of the water service, all in accordance with the terms and
conditions hereinafter contained.
RECITALS
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter contained, the
parties hereto do stipulate and agree as follows:
1. Grant of Easement: Minnetrista agrees to deliver to Mound temporary and
permanent easements and/or licenses necessary for the construction maintenance and operation of
the Mound water service lines over under and across the Property. The descriptions of the areas of
the Property covered will be prepared by Mound and reviewed by the Minnetrista. The dimensions
of the easement and/or license areas will conform to standard practices. Minnetrista agrees to
deliver such instruments within a reasonable time, but not later than 60 days following the date that
JBD-188280v3
MU200-85
Mound fumishes Minnetrista with the proposed legal descriptions. Minnetrista represents to Mound
that it has the full power and authority to grant such easements and/or licenses.
2. Interconnection. Mound agrees to design the water line to include an
interconnection with the Minnetrista service lines at a location, and utilizing structures that shall be
mutually acceptable to the parties as reasonably determined by their respective engineers.
3. Proiect Costs and Permits. Mound shall be responsible for 100% of the project costs
and for acquiring any and all permits from applicable state agencies. Minnetrista shall cooperate, as
necessary in any applications.
4. Use of Interconnection. The interconnection shall have a valve which shall be
opened only in emergencies. In the event of an emergency in Mound, the valve may be opened to
supply water to Mound by Mound employees upon the direction of the City Manager, the Public
Works Director or the Police or Fire Chief of the City of Mound. In the event of an emergency in
Minnetrista, the valve may be opened by Minnetrista employees at the direction of the City
Administrator, the Public Works Director, or the Police or Fire Chief of Minnetrista. The City
opening the valve shall make every reasonable effort to notify the other City as soon as possible.
The City opening the valve shall be responsible for closing it.
If the water is needed for more than 24 continuous hours, it can be supplied only upon the
approval of the Mound City Manager following consultation, if possible, with the Public Works
department.
5. Charges for Water Usage. The volume of any water used shall be calculated
according to the length of time the valve is open and the water pressure flow. Charges for each
volume unit of water used will be based on the water rate charged by the City supplying the water.
6. Repair and Maintenance. Mound shall be responsible for repair and maintenance of
the interconnection, the valve and its lines. Minnetrista shall be responsible for the repair and
maintenance of its lines beyond the valve. Each party shall, except in the case of emergency repair
or maintenance, give the other party 24 hour advance notice of any repair or maintenance activity.
The City performing the repair or maintenance activity shall be responsible for the restoration (and
the cost of such) of property or improvements that are disrupted as a result of such activities.
7. Indemnification. Mound agrees to indemnify, defend and save harmless
Minnetrista, its officers agents and employees from any claims or causes of action, of whatever
nature, occasioned by or arising out of Mound's construction, repair, maintenance and operation of
the Mound water service on the Property. Minnetrista agrees to indemnify, defend and save
harmless Mound, its officers agents and employees from any claim or cause of action, of whatever
nature occasioned by or arising out of Minnetrista's repair, maintenance or operation of the
interconnection. Such undertakings shall not extend to acts that are the result of the intentional or
negligent conduct of the other party, nor shall such undertakings be deemed to waive any limitation
of liability available to either party.
8. Termination of Agreement. This agreement may be terminated only upon the
mutual agreement of both parties.
JBD-188280v3
MU200-85
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, and pursuant to authorization of their respective City
Councils, the Cities of Minnetrista and Mound have entered into this Agreement as of the day and
year first above written.
CITY OF MINNETRISTA
CITY OF MOUND
Mayor Mayor
City Administrator
City Manager
JBD-188280v3
MU200-85
DRAFT
Road Agreement
12/7/00
JOINT AND COOPERATIVE STREET AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF MINNETRISTA
AND
THE CITY OF MOUND
THIS AGREEMENT, is made and entered into as of the __ day of ,2000 by
and between the City of Minnetrista~ an Minnesota municipal corporation ("Minnetrista"), and the
City of Mound a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Mound").
BACKGROUND
1. Minnetrista and Mound are each authorized by law to construct, operate and
maintain public streets and roadways within their respective corporate limits.
2. Mound is undertaking the establishment of a new residential subdivision that will be
located on land that abuts the border between Minnetrista and Mound.
3. In order for Mound to adequately provide for the transportation requirements of the
subdivision, it is necessary and convenient that existing roadways, including a portion of Westedge
Road, be improved. The portion of Westedge to be improved is shown on the attached Exhibit A.
4. The portion of Westedge Road straddles the boundary between Minnetrista and
Mound; and it is necessary that the roadway improvements take place in both cities.
5. The purpose of Agreement, made in accordance with the authority of Minnesota
Statutes § 471.59, is to authorize Mound to act in behalf of Minnetrista in the construction of the
portion of the roadway lying in Minnetrista all in accordance with the terms and conditions
hereinafter contained.
RECITALS
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter contained, the
parties hereto do stipulate and agree as follows:
1. Grant of Authority, Design, Minnetrista hereby grants to Mound the authority to
enter into the City of Minnetrista for the purpose of constructing the improvements to Westedge
Roadway in accordance with the plans and specifications to be prepared by Mound and approved by
Minnetrista. Promptly upon the execution of this agreement, Mound shall cause to have prepared
detailed plans and specifications of the construction of the roadway. Upon completion, such plans
and specifications will be presented to Minnetrista for approval. Such approval shall be not be
unreasonably withheld, and will be given within a reasonable timeframe, but in no event more than
JBD-188438v2
MU200-85
60 days from the date of submission, unless, during such period, Minnetrista notifies Mound of its
disapproval of the proposed plans and specifications. Such notification shall state the reasons for
such disapproval, and the steps necessary to correct the plans and specifications.
2. Construction, Warranty and Insurance. Once apProved, Mound, will let the project.
Any contract for construction of the improvements to the portion of Westedge lying in Minnetrista
must contain a standard wan'anty of work that runs to Minnetrista, and must also contain insurance
coverages running in favor of Minnetrista of an amount that Minnertrista would require on similar
projects.
3. Project Costs and Permits. Mound shall be responsible for 100% of the project
costs, including any necessary easements, and for acquiring any and all permits from applicable
state agencies. Minnetrista shall cooperate, as necessary in any applications.
4. Acceptance Upon Completion. Upon completion in accordance with the approved
plans and specifications, Minnetrista shall accept the portion of Westedge Road lying within its
corporate limits. Such acceptance shall constitute a full release and satisfaction of Mounds
obligations to construct the roadway.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, and pursuant to authorization of their respective City
Councils, the Cities of Minnetrista and Mound have entered into this Agreement as of the day and
year first above written.
CITY OF MINNETRISTA
CITY OF MOUND
Mayor Mayor
City Administrator
City Manager
JBD- 188438v2
MU200-85
11/27/00
DRAFT
License Agreement
LICENSE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into as of the ~ day of ,2000, by and
between the CITY OF MOUND, a Minnesota municipal corporation, (the "Grantor"), and the CITY
OF MINNETRISTA, a Minnesota municipal corporation, (the "Grantee").
WHEREAS, the Grantor and the Grantee are municipal corporations each possessing
certain powers and authorities conferred upon them by law; and
WHEREAS, one of the powers so conferred is the authority to construct, operate and
maintain sanitary sewer facilities; and
WHEREAS, the Grantor holds and utilizes a public utility easement over certain lands
lying within the corporate limits of the City of Mound, which easement is described in the attached
Exhibit A, (the "License Area"); and
and
WHEREAS, the easement area abuts upon the corporate limits of the City of Minnetrista;
WHEREAS, although not presently scheduled, Grantee anticipates that it will be expanding
and upgrading its sanitary sewer system in the foreseeable future; and
WHEREAS, in order to accomplish such activities it is desirable that space be made
available within the License Area for a portion of its sanitary sewer lines; and
WHEREAS, Grantor is willing, subject to the provisions of this agreement to grant to
Grantee a license for such purposes.
NOW THEREFORE, the parties stipulate and agree as follows:
1. License Granted. Subject to the provisions of this agreement, the Grantor grants to
theGrantee, and the Grantee hereby accepts a license to construct, operate and maintain sanitary
sewer facilities within the License Area.
2. Consideration. Consideration for this agreement is the mutual promises and
agreements made herein, and also is the full and faithful performance of the mutual promises of the
parties contained in those separate agreements entitled: [Road Agreement] and [Water Agreement].
3. Grant of Authority, Design, By such license, Grantor hereby grants to Grantee the
authority to enter into the License Area for the purpose of constructing the improvements to
Grantee's sanitary sewer system at locations acceptable to Grantor and in accordance with the plans
and specifications to be prepared by Grantee and approved by Grantor. Promptly upon determining
the need to construct a sanitary sewer line within the License Area, the Minnetrista City Engineer
shall cause to have prepared detailed plans and specifications of the construction of the sanitary
sewer. Upon completion, such plans and specifications will be presented to the Mound City
Engineer for approval. Such approval shall be not be unreasonably withheld, and will be given
within 30 days from the date of submission, unless, during such period, Grantor notifies Grantee of
its disapproval of the proposed location, plans and specifications. Such notification shall state the
reasons for such disapproval, and the steps necessary to correct the plans and specifications.
4. Construction, Warranty and Insurance. Once approved, Grantee, may let the project.
Any contract for construction of the improvements to the portion of the sanitary sewer lying in the
License Area must contain comprehensive public liability insurance coverage nmning in favor of
Grantor of an mount that Grantor would require on similar projects.
5. Project Costs and Permits. Grantee shall be responsible for 100% of the project
costs and for acquiring any and all permits from applicable state agencies. Grantor shall cooperate,
as necessary in any applications.
6. Maintenance. Grantee shall be exclusively responsible for repair and maintenance
of its sanitary sewer lines located within the License Area. Grantee shall, except in the case of
emergency give the Grantor 24-hour advance notice of any repair or maintenance activities.
7. Indemnification. Grantee agrees to indemnify, defend and save harmless the
Grantor, its officers and its agents and employees from any claims or causes of action, of whatever
nature, occasioned by or arising out of Grantee's construction, maintenance and operation of the
sanitary sewer lines ion the License Area. Such undertaking shall not extend to acts that are the
result of the intentional or negligent conduct of the Grantor, nor shall such undertakings be deemed
to waive any limitation of liability available to the Grantee.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, and pursuant to authorization of their respective City
Councils, the Cities of Minnetrista and Mound have entered into this Agreement as of the day and
year first above written.
CITY OF MINNETRISTA
CITY OF MOUND
Mayor Mayor
City Administrator
City Manager
RIGHT OF ENTRY AGREEMENT
DRAFT
10/25/00
THIS AGREEMENT, made on this __ day of ., 2000, by
and between the City of Minnetrista, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Minnetrista"), and the
City of Mound, a Minnesota municipal corporation, ("Mound").
I.
RECITALS
1.01. Minnetrista has an interest, through easement, dedication or otherwise of certain real
estate located within the City of Minnetrista, and which is described on Exhibit A attached hereto
and incorporated herein ("Property").
1.02 Mound is considering undertaking certain public improvements which in order to be
of optimum efficiency and design, may need to be constructed partially within the City of
Minnetrista.
1.03 Minnetrista and Mound are currently in discussions concerning the conditions under
which Minnetrista may permit Mound to construct the public improvements within the City of
Minnetrista.
1.04. To assist it in the design work, and to determine the extent of the lands within
Minnetrista that may be involved, Mound desires to secure the consent of Minnetrista to enter the
Property for the purpose of conducting land surveys, and other tests or inspections of the Property.
Mound has requested that Minnetrista grant its consent to the entry onto the Property to conduct
such studies.
JBD-188247vl
MU200-85
1.05. It is understood that in executing this agreement, Minnetristra will not be granting
any permanent interest in the Property to Mound or, committing in any way to permit Mound to
construct public improvements in Minnetrista.
II.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and their mutual promises, the
parties hereto hereby agree as follows:
2.01. Right of Entry. Effective upon the date hereof, Minnetrista hereby grants to Mound,
its agents, employees, contractors and invitees the right to enter upon the Property, for the purpose
of making surveys, inspections, investigations, soil borings, drilling, and testing relative to Mound's
construction of public improvements on portions of the Property, should such construction be
authorized by further agreement of the parties.
2.02 Consideration. In consideration for such right of entry, Mound agrees to:
(a) Notify Minnetrista of the date and time that work by Mound on the Property will
commence under this Agreement which notice shall be at least five (5) business days
prior to doing any work on the Property in order to permit Minnetrista's employees
or consultants retained by Minnetrista to be present during the time any work is
being done by Mound or its consultants;
Co) Provide a copy of all test results, surveys and reports prepared by their employees or
consultants evaluating the conditions present on the Property to Owners as soon as
reasonably possible following final completion thereof.
(c) Dispose of all solid waste generated during the course of Mound's sampling
activities and other work on the Property in accordance with applicable federal, state
JBD-188247vl
MU200-85
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
and local laws, rules and regulations.
Do the work in the shortest period time reasonably necessary to complete such
activities authorized under this Agreement as Mound, in its sole discretion, shall
elect to undertake;
Use the Property only for the purposes described herein and not park or store any
equipment on the Property, except during the limited periods of time when the work
on the Property which is contemplated by this Agreement is actually in progress;
Do no unnecessary damage to the Property and restore the Property to substantially
the same condition as the condition in which it was found by Mound at the time of
Mound's entry upon the Property pursuant to this Agreement.
Hold Minnetrista harmless from and indemnify it from any and all claims, damages,
judgments or obligations, including the cost of defense of suit, arising out of
damage to Property or arising out of injury to anyone incurred or alleged to have
been incurred in connection with or as a result of any work done pursuant to this
Right of Entry, or as a result of Mound's intentional torts or negligence.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, Mound shall not be responsible for the timeliness of
any submission or application for further investigation or feasibility analysis of the
proper methods of removal, treatment or disposal of any pollutants, contaminants or
hazardous substances present on the Property, it being the sole responsibility of
Minnetrista to perform these tasks if required;
Mound or its contractors or invitees which enter the Property pursuant to this
Agreement shall carry insurance during the time any work is done on the Property in
accordance with the following minimum requirements;
JBD- 188247v 1
MU200-85
(i)
Workers' Compensation Insurance with limits as provided by statute, with all
necessary statutory elections to provide coverage for and/or claims made by
any person doing work on the Property pursuant to this Right of Entry;
Employer's liability insurance (often included as coverage) (b) in the
Workers' Compensation policy) with limits of $100,000;
Comprehensive Auto (and truck) Liability Insurance with minimum
combined single limits of $1 million per occurrence;
Comprehensive General Liability Insurance (including coverage for
contractual liability, products and completed operations liability, liabilities
arising out of explosion, or underground related incidents) with minimum
combined single limits of $1 million per occurrence.
If Mound removes a sample or portion of the Property for
2.03.
the state of Minnesota.
2.04. Notices and Demands.
investigation,
monitoring or testing or obtains any data or issues any report, it must give
Minnetrista an equal amount of the sample or portion and a copy of any data or
report, and must permit the Minnetrista to perform an independent investigation,
monitoring, or testing of the sample or portion.
Governing Law. This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of
All notices, demands or other communications under this
Agreement shall be effective only if made in writing and shall be sufficiently given and deemed
given when delivered personally or mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, postage
prepaid, properly addressed as follows:
JBD-188247v 1
MU200-85
1. If to Minnetrista:
With a copy to:
If to Mound:
With Copy to:
John B. Dean, Esq.
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
470 Pillsbury Center
200 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Or to such other persons as the parties may from time to time designate in writing and
forward to the other persons entitled to receive notice as provided in this section.
2.05. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended by the parties hereto only by written
instrument executed with the same procedures and formality as were followed in the execution of
this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed in
their names and on their behalves on or as of the above date.
JBD-188247v 1
MU200-85
CITY OF MINNETRISTA:
By:
By:
CITY OF MOUND
By:
Kandis M. Hanson
City Manager
City Hall
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
JBD- 188247v 1
MU200-85
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY:
JBD- 188247v 1
MU200-85
December 7, 2000
Metropolitan Council
Phyllis Hanson
Mears Centre
230 East Fifth Street
St. Paul, MN 55101-1626
RE: Comprehensive Plan-Surface Water Management Requirement
Dear Ms. Hanson:
This letter is to provide the information necessary to complete the surface water management
requirement of the city's comprehensive plan. McCombs Frank Roos Associates is currently
under contract with the City to provide a surface water management plan. The City had
previously submitted a surface water management plan to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District for review. Upon further consideration, the City withdrew this plan and is preparing
additional study and information in an updated plan. The city expects completion by late
February, early March. Upon completion of the plan, a copy will be forwarded to the
Metropolitan Council for review and comment. It is our understanding that our comprehensive
plan can move forward with review and comments with the knowledge that the city is currently
preparing the surface water management plan. Copies of a resolution by the city council including
a date for completion of the plan and a signed contract with the consultant is enclosed for your
records.
Sincerely,
Kandis Hanson
City Manager
RESOLUTION 00-
A RESOLUTION INDICATING THE INTENT OF THE CITY OF MOUND
TO SUBMIT A SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN TO THE
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL UPON COMPLETION TO
COMPLY WITH STATE STATUTES
WHEREAS, the City of Mound adopted its comprehensive plan on April 11, 2000 for consistency
with Metropolitan Council policy plans; and,
WHEREAS, that plan was submitted to Metropolitan Council in a manner consistent with state
statutes for review and approval whereby, the surface water management component of the plan was
forwarded to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) for their review and approval; and,
WHEREAS, after consideration, the City asked the MCWD to withdraw the plan from further
consideration until additional study and information could be provided to better address local water
management issues in Mound; and
WHEREAS, it is the understanding of the City of Mound that the comprehensive plan is consistent
with regional policies absent the surface water management plan at this time; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Mound anticipates the updated surface water management plan will be
completed by late February, early March and will submit the plan to the Metropolitan Council upon its
completion; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Mound requests that the Metropolitan
Council approve the City of Mound Comprehensive Plan absent the surface water management plan. The
surface water management plan will be forwarded to Metropolitan Council upon its completion for review
and approval to keep the City in good standing with state statute provisions.
The motion for adoption of the foregoing resolution was introduced by
seconded by
and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
WHEREUPON said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Mayor
Clerk
Resolution No.
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)SS
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified of the City of Mound, County of Hennepin,
State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of
minutes of a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 22nd day of June, 1999, with the original
thereof on file in City Hall.
WITNESS MY HAND officially as such Kandis Hanson, City Manager/Acting City Clerk this
December, 2000.
day of
PETER W. JOHNSON
ATTORNEY AT LAW
230S COMMERC"'E I~,OULEVARD
MOUND, MINNESOTA ~5364
TELEPHONE (612) 495-1910
FACSIMILE (612)472
300 ANCHOR BANK BUILDING
lo55 KAST WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE ~00
WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391
TELEPHONE (612) 475-1515
FACSIMILE (612) 47f~0~11
EMAIL- PJOHNSONI~WAYZATAI~W.C'OM
DIRECT DIAL: (612) 275-7963
December 5, 2000
Ms. Kandis Hanson
Mound City Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
Re: Parking - The Pond Sports Center
Dear Ms. Hanson:
As you know, the Pond Arena has negotiated certain parking rights with Metro Plains
Development. However, those parking rights are quite limited. The Pond Arena's
Board of Directors believes that additional parking should be developed along Alder
Road as a public improvement.
On behalf of the Pond Arena, I request that the City investigate the possibility of
developing angle parking along Alder Road as a public improvement. We are aware
that such an improvement would result in an assessment to benefited landowners and
we are quite willing to make any land north of the Pond Arena available for development
of additional parking.
I have spoken briefly with some of the Board members from the Mound Evangelical
Free Church and they have indicated that the church would also be interested in
developing additional parking in the area.
Very_~uly yours, n
P bt~,dW. Johnson
PwJ/Pm
cc: Mound Evangelical Free Church
Metro Plains Development, LLC
Jerry Kohls
Mark Engebretson
C:Wly Documents'~apwjActive~°ond Arena~ansen.l.doc
RESOLUTION #00-
A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A WETLANDS CONSERVATION ACT
WETLANDS REPLACEMENT PLAN APPLICATION IN CONJUNCTION
WITH DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS "LANGDON BAY"
LOCATED AT 1000 ROBIN LANE
SWl/4 of SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP l17N, RANGE 24W
PID # 14-117-24 33 0001
PID # 14-117-24 34 0002
WHEREAS, the applicant, R.H. Development, has submitted a Wetlands Replacement Plan
Application to comply with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) in order to facilitate
single family residential development of the property; and,
WHEREAS, property is located within the R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District
which anticipates urban development. The proposed "Langdon Bay" development has received
preliminary plat and plan from the City, finding consistency with the land use goals and
requirements of the City Code; and,
WHEREAS, in granting preliminary approval, the City conditioned this approval pending
determination that the WCA approval and other outside agency approvals including Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District, Army Corps of Engineers, Minnesota Department of Health, Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Mound, as the Local Governmental Unit (LGU), has the authority
under the WCA to determine if an application is consistent with the intent and provisions of the act;
and,
WHEREAS, the staff and the applicant with the assistance and input of the Technical
Evaluation Panel (TEP), has conducted a thorough review of the applicable City and WCA
regulations with respect to the proposal and found it to be in substantial compliance with the WCA.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound,
Minnesota, as follows:
The City does hereby grant approval of the WCA Permit as recommended by Staff with the
following conditions:
a)
The applicant or subsequent owner (Rottlund Homes), shall provide the city with
Proof of Recording of Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for the replacement
wetlands and any areas public value credits are derived from.
b) [test Management Practices shall be adhered to for the duration of the project.
c)
Upon completion of the wetland replacement plan, the applicant will implement a wetl
and replacement monitoring plan as specified in 8420.0600 through 8420.0620. The
applicant will submit the first annual monitoring report to the city by
December 31,2001.
d) A wetland buffer monument (consistant with Minnehaha Creek Watershed), is
required at each lot line where it crosses a wetland buffer with a maximum spacing of
200 feet between monuments. The applicant shall propose a design and installation to
city staff for approval and the design shall be consistant throughout the project.
The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember
Councilmember
and seconded by
The following voted in the affnmative:
Ahrens, Brown, Hanus, Meisel and Weycker.
The following voted in the negative:
none.
Mayor
Attest: City Clerk
CITY OF MOUND
STAFF REPORT
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MN 55364-1687
PH: (952) 472-0600
FAX: (952) 472-0620
WEB: www. cityofrnound.com
DATE:
City Council Agenda of December 12, 2000
TO:
FROM:
City Council, Applicant and Staff
Jon Sutherland, Building Official, Kelly Bopray, MFRA, LPSS
SUBJECT: Wetlands Conservation Act (WCA), Replacement Plan/Findings of Fact
APPLICANT:
Peterson Environmental
1355 Mendota Heights Road
Suite 100
Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55120-1112
R.H. Development
Ron Helmer
2300 West 97th Street
Bloomington, Minnesota 55431
CASE #: Mound Zoning Case #00-22 (Rottlund Homes), MFRA Case #12754
LOCATION: SW1/4 of Section: 14, Township: 117N, Range: 24W (Rex Alwin Property)
BACKGROUND:
Wetlands in the city are regulated by Mound Zoning Code 350:1100 and as required by the
WCA of 1991 Minnesota rules 8420. The City is the Local Governing Unit (LGU), and I
administer the regulations with the assistance of Kelly Bopray of MFRA and the Technical
Evaluation Panel (TEP). The TEP members are listed on the attached notice of WCA impacts.
The proposed development will impact the existing wetlands and the WCA requires mitigation.
We have attached a portion of the WCA, LGU Procedural Guidelines for your information.
The applicant has delineated seven (7) wetlands on the site that have been reviewed and approve
by the TEP. The applicant has provided an on-site replacement plan, which will create new
wetlands and stormwater ponding as detailed in the report.
printed on recycled paper
COMMENT
City staff, with input from the TEP, has determined the proposed replacement plan is in
substantial accordance with requirements in 8420.0530 to 8420.0630.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the WCA Replacement Plan Application with the following
conditions:
1) The applicant or subsequent owner (Rottlund Homes), shall provide the city with Proof of
Recording of Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for the replacement wetlands and any
areas public value credits are derived from.
2) Best Management Practices shall be adhered to for the duration of the project.
3) Upon completion of the wetland replacement plan, the applicant will implement a wetland
replacement monitoring plan as specified in 8420.0600 through 8420.0620. The applicant will
submit the first annual monitoring report to the city by December 31,2001.
4) A wetland buffer monument (consistant with Minnehaha Creek Watershed), is required at
each lot line where it crosses a wetland buffer with a maximum spacing of 200 feet between
monuments. The applicant shall propose a design and installation to city staff for approval and
the design shall be consistant throughout the project.
DEC-04-2000 13:32 MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED 6124710682
/
Minnel]aha Creek District
Quali y ofWater, Quali{y of £ife
hursday, December 7~ BOARD OF MANAGERS
~r~-~ Managers Presiden t Para BI
Minnetonka Community Center
14600 Minnetonka Blvd.
Minnetonka, MN
Minnetonka Mills Room
Vice President Malcolm Reid
Secretary Lance Fisher
Treasurer Monica Grcss
Managers James Calkins,
Scott Thomas,
Robert Schroeder
P.02/05
Note: Indicated times are estimates; actual times may vary considerably. Individuals with Ifems on the
Agenda or who wish to speak to the Board are encouraged to be in attendance when the meeting is
called to order.
I. Board Meeting Call to Order and Roll Call
il.
Matters from the Floor
Anyone wishing to address the Boarrl of Managers on an item not on the a~enda or an
item on the consent a~enda may come forward at this time. Comments are limited to two
minutes.
i11. Approval of Agenda
Additions/Corrections/Deletions
IV.
Consent Agenda
The consent agenda is considered as one item of business. It" ' "-
.OhS/St., cf routine administrative
items or items not requiring discussion. Items can be moved from the ccnsent agenda to the
regular agenda at the request of a Board member.
Ao
Consent Permits *
Permit.~ Applicant Permit TYpe Citw
00-387 Kurt FlerrdJlg Mir'..netor2<a
Kurt Flerrung has applied for a preservation of floodplain storage permit for sub-dividing hi~
propcrey located at 12801 DoLittlc Drive in the City' of Mi.n.n:toaka.
* At~aclunent$ cnclo.~ed
:*A?t~c,t~'nesrs to be ~.q[ tinder sepera:¢ cover.
DEC-~4-20~8 15:55 MINNEHAHR CREEK WATERSHED 612471~6:32 P.04×05
Permit Application No.: 00-342 Rule:., B, D, N
Applicant: R.H. Development Received: 10/02/00
Project: Single-family housing development Complete: 11/16/00
Location: Near County 1S and Robin Lane~ Mound Mailing Date: 11/28/00
Recommendation:
Approval. Permit should not be issued until the following conditions are met:
1. Sureties of $6,900 for'erosion con~'ol, $40,000 for stormwater ponds, and $5,575 for
wetland alteration must be received.
2. A maintenance agreement for the wet detention ponds, sump catch basins, and street
sweeping must be executed and recorded.
3. A declaration for preservation of the wetland buffers mu,st be executed and recorded.
4. A declaration for preservation of the vegetated swales must be executed and recorded.
5. Rule J fees must be paid.
Background:
The proposed project is the construction of 74 single-family homes on a 27-acre property'.
Wetland impacts will take place in conjunction with th.is project. Mound is ',,he LOU for the
administration of WCA. The project has received approval from the City cf Mound Rules B,
D, and N apply.
Rule B
The erosion control plan meets Rule B requixemcnts and includes silt fence where necess~?
tlu'oughout the project, a rock construction entrance, and sediment protection around catch
basins. All disturbed areas will be seeded and mulched within two weeks of completion of
grading. A surety of $6,900 is required.
Rule D
Seven wetlands are located on site and one DN'R wetland is adjacent to the
:,.e. Mo'~nd is the
LGU for the admirfixtration of WCA and is responsible for deternfi.nations on ~ue sequencing of
wetland impacts and the wetland replacement plan for wetland fill i.n an5' UTe of wetland and
excavation in Type 3, 4, or 5 wetlands. Therefore, Staff review did not focu~ on sequencing
information or wetland replacement, but focused on buffer issues. Wetland excavation for this
project is in a Type 4 wetland and is regulated by WCA. All of the wet~azd~,
impacted by filling or excavation. Three oft2~e smaller wetlands; all Type i, ~(ii be .:ompletely
filled and all other wetlands wSll be filled in some sections. Vv"etl~d irnpa:.:.~ include fill a.nd
excavation of a total of 25,121 square feet. Mitigation is required at 2:1, ~: -2 ret. al of 50,2,12
square feet for this project. Total mitigation provided is 51,043 square fee~ a_nd meets
requirement. The project provides 25,227 square.feet of New Wetland Credit --nd 25,8
feet of Public Value Credit from stormwater ponds and buffer areas. Required buffers a.re
feet on wetlands A and B, 20 feet on wetland C and F, and 35 feet on wetland H. Provided
buffers are 20 feet on A, B, C, and F and 35 feet on wetland H. The applicant offered to
physicalty monument the buffers on all wetlands because on some of the lc.t_~
T:\0185\Ol\I5 I\APPO0 342
t 1/30!00
DEC-04-2000 13:33 MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED 61_P4?1068_P P.OSz05
~ A.~ peFrr~ ............... _~ .......
/ Permit t~ Annhcant ~ermit Type_ City
' - ' ' Mound
[ 00-342 R.H. Development
~ ~ R.H. Development has applied for an erosion contxol, wctland pror:ction and stormwater
f ~ management permit for a housing development located in West Edge Road in thc City of Moun~,)
Et,. Authorize the Board President to sign an amendment to the Lake Nokomis
Gooperative Agreement related to installation of Grit Chamber by the City
of Minneapolis '
C. Authorize the Board President to sign a cooperative agreement with the
SHPO & GOE regardincj mitigation of impact to historical resources
caused by the construction of the Lake Nokomis Project '
D. EOR presentation on GIS component of H&H project and its future
applications
E. H&H Contract approval '
F. Authorize amendment to H&H contract to include land cover classification
data acquisition *
G. Select a principal engineering firm and name firms '.c the District's
engineering pool **
H. St Louis Park WRMP **
I, Increase the Not to Exceed Amount of a contract with Robbin B. Sotir &
Associated by $2,570.02 '
J. Renew Joel Carlson's contract for legislative liaison services *
Vi. Discussion / Information Items
VII, Adjournment
* Att~ch.rnenls enclosed.
'*Altachmen~-~ [o br sent under seperate cover.
Permit Application No.: 00-342 Rule: B, D, N
Applicant: R.H. Development Received.: 10/02/00
Project: Single-family housing development Complete: 11/16/00
Location: Near County 15 and Robin Lane, Mound Mailing Date: 11/28/00
Recommendation:
Approval.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Permit should not be issued until the following conditions are met:
Sureties of $6,900 for'erosion control, $40,000 for stormwater ponds, and $5,575 for
wetland alteration must be received.
A maintenance agreement for the wet detention ponds, sump catch basins, and street
sweeping must be executed and recorded.
A declaration for preservation of the wetland bufr'ers mu. st be executed and recorded.
A declaration for preservation oft. he vegetated swales must be executed and recorded.
Rule J fees must be paid.
Background:
The proposed project is the construction of 74 single-family homes on a 27-acre
Wetland impacr, s v,4.ll take place in conjunction with tkis projkct. Mound is the I~OU for the
admin/stration of WCA. The project has received approval from the City cf Mound Rules B,
D, and N apply.
Rule B
The erosion control plan meets Rule B requiremcnts and includes silt fence ,,'.'here necess--'?'
ttu'oughout the project, a rock construction entrance, and sediment protection a.round catch
basins. All disturbed areas will be seeded and mulched within two weeks of completion of
grading. A surety of $6,900 is required.
Rule D
Seven wetlands are located on site and one DNT, wetland is adjacent to the .4ce. Mound is the
LGU for the administration of WCA and is responsible for determinations on the sequencing of
wetland impacts and the wetland replacement plan for wetland fill in any r?'pe of wetland and
excavation in Type 3, 4, or 5 wetlands. Therefore, Staff review did not focus on sequencing
information or wetland replacement, but focused on buffer issues. Wetland exca~'ation for this
project is in a Type 4 wetland and is regulated by WCA. Ail oft. he ,,vetla,~_d_, o: site ~411 be
impacted by filling or excavation. Tb~ree oftA~e smaller '.vetlartds, ali T?-pe ~, ~52i be completely
filled and all other wetlands will be filled in some sections. Wetland i.rnpa::._= include fill a.nd
excavation ora total of 25,121 square feet. blitigation is required at 2:1, o: --. total of 50,242
square feet for this project. Total mitigation provided is 51,043 square fee.: z.,,.d meets ~,~e
requirement. The project provides 25,227 square.feet of New Wetland Credit ,_nd 25,816 square
feet of Public Value Credit from stormwater ponds and buff, er areas. Required buffers me 16.5
feet on wetlands A and B, 20 feet on wetland C and F, and 35 feet on wetDmd H. Provided
buf-l"ers are 20 feet on A, B, C, and F and 35 feet on wetland H. The applicant offered to
physically monument the buffers on ali wetlands because on some of the lots tj-,¢ buffer is ve:-y
T:\0185',01 \ 15 I'~APP00 342
11/30/00
DEC-04-2000 15:S4 MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED ~1E~?10607 P.05/06
close to the house pad. Signs stating "Wetland Buffer- No mowing or disturbance beyond this
point" will be placed every 200 feet or at turning points along buffer areas. The trail indicated
adjacent to the DNR wetland is not to be approved as part of this project.
Mitigation summary:
Square Feet Type of Wetland
Current Wetland 10,148 1
52,049 3
8,102 4
Fill Impact 9,139 1
7,§80 3
6,352 4
Excavation Impact 1,750 4
Required Mitigation 50,242
New Wetland Credit 25227 3
Public Value Credit 21,102 Stormwater ponds
5,114 Buffer
Rule N
This project requires BNfPs, rate control, and water quality control. BMPs proposed for the
project include sump catch basins, street sweeping, and vegetated swales. Rate control ~:md water
quality control are provided by four wet detention ponds. Rates of runoff off the site are reduced
by about 60% for the 100-year event and about I5% for the 1-year event. All of the street runoff
is collected in the ponds for treatment prior to discharge into any wetlands or oITsi~e. About 7
acres oft. he site area, consisting mostly of yards and buffers, arc not treated in ponds. PondNet
modeling showed phosphorus reduction between 56% and 65% tbr each of the wer detention
ponds.
Attachments:
1. Application received 10/02/00
2. Site location map
3. Grading and Erosion Control PI~ sheet 1, 2, and 3 revised 10/3
4. Wetland Impacta,,~/!itigation Plan revised 10/23/00
~Lisa A. Tilman
Date
T:\0185\01\I5 ILA. PP00 342
11/30/00
TOTAL P.OS
Langdon Bay Residential Development
R.H. Development
WCA Findings of Fact and Recommendation to City Council
Applicant
Peterson Environmental
1355 Mendota Heights Road
Suite 100
Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55120-1112
R.H. Development
Ron Helmer
2300 West 97th Street
Bloomington, Minnesota 55431
Documents Submitted by Applicant
WCA Replacement Plan and Section 404 Permit Application. Langdon Bay Residential
Development, Mound, Minnesota. Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc.', October 19,
2000.
Grading and Erosion Control Plans Langdon Bay, Mound, Minnesota. Pioneer Engineering,
Revision date October 31, 2000.
Wetland Impact/Mitigation (Plan Sheet) Langdon Bay. Pioneer Engineering, Revision date
October 23, 2000.
MFRA memo to Jon Sutherland, City of Mound. Review of Application for Completeness,
October 25, 2000.
Response to MFRA comment on WCA Replacement Plan, Langdon Bay Residential
Development. Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc., November 3, 2000.
WCA Application Process Timeline
8/8/O0
10/20/00
11/7/00
11/15/00
11/30/00
12/6/00
12/12/00
12/--/00
TEP conducted on-site review of wetlands, recommended approval of
delineation with minor adjustments to some wetland boundaries.
Received original WCA application, determined not to be complete.
Received amended WCA application, determined to be complete
Notice of WCA application for impacts > 10,000 square feet
Comment Period Ends
Staff recommendation in favor of approval of the project
City Council action: denial/approval/approval with conditions
15 day appeals window ends
Project Summary
The Langdon Bay Residential Development is located in the SW1/4 of Sec. 14, T117N, R24W,
City of Mound, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Mississippi (Metro #20) Watershed,
Hennepin County, Minnesota. Rottlund Homes Planned Unit Development will create 74 single-
family houses and the associated infrastructure and ponding facilities on a 27.41-acre parcel. The
development is located within the R-1 Zoning District. All lots exceed the minimum 10,000
square foot requirement. The proposal is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan and the
existing land use in the area. Seven (7) wetlands totaling 1.61 acres were identified on the site.
The TEP has reviewed and approved the wetland delineation. The proposed development will
impact 0.58 acres of wetlands. The applicant has provided information on alternatives analysis
and an on-site replacement plan. The replacement plan will create 0.58 acres of new wetland
(Type 3/4) adjacent to and existing natural wetland and stormwater pond. The stormwater ponds
will generate 0.48 acres of public value credit. Upland buffer adjacent to the replacement area
will generate 0.16 acres of public value credit. In addition, an upland buffer around all of the
remaining wetland areas is incorporated into the site plan.
Determination of Wetland Impact Sequencing: 8420.0520
The applicant provided two alternative scenarios and written arguments as to why they were not
reasonable and prudent alternatives to the proposed project. The purpose of the project is to
develop this specific site in a manor consistent with the City of Mound's land use guidance for
the property. A no-build alternative is inconsistent with the City's land use guidance and would
defeat the reasonable, investment-backed expectations of the applicant. An alternative site
design that avoided all wetland impacts was described as an unreal or mythical alternative for a
couple of reasons. First, the access road from the north (Robin Lane) is a platted road, which
currently serves as a driveway. With wetlands on both sides of the driveway, Robin Lane could
not be upgraded to City street standards without impacting some wetlands. Second, several of the
small isolated wetlands are Type 1, surface water fed and dependent on overland flow from the
immediate watershed in order to exhibit wetland characteristics. Grading necessary for
infrastructure would divert the source water for these wetlands to the required stormwater
ponding facilities. Even if the wetland basins could be physically avoided, they might not persist
due to a lack of water.
City staff, with input from the TEP, determined the alternatives above were good faith efforts
and that in accordance with 8420.0520 Supb. 3, there are no reasonable and prudent alternatives
to the proposed project that would avoid impacts to wetlands.
The applicant has made changes to the site plan at the City's and TEP's recommendation in order
to minimize wetland impacts. Structural setbacks from wetlands, bluffs, and roads dictate the site
design. The street width was narrowed and front yard setbacks were reduced from 30 to 25 feet
in order to minimize imPacts to wetlands, bluff lines, and trees. The number of lots was reduced
from 80 (Concept Plan) to the current 74 to reduce impacts on the site resources. The trail along
the east side of the site was moved from the wetland in the existing right-of-way to the uplands
on several lots. The impacts to the Type 1, surface water fed wetlands could not be minimized.
The remaining proposed wetland impacts are confined to the fringes or periphery of a partially
drained wetland dominated by reed canary grass.
City staff, with input from the TEP, determined the applicant has demonstrated wetland impact
minimization in accordance with 8420.0520 Subp. 4.
City staff, with input from the TEP, determined the impact rectification 8420.0520 Subp. 5 was
not applicable because none of the wetland impacts are temporary.
City staff, with input from the TEP, determined that Best Management Practices (BMP)
implemented during construction, stormwater ponding facilities, and the upland buffers around
all of the wetlands will reduce or eliminate further wetland impacts (8420.0520 Subp. 6).
The applicant has proposed on-site wetland replacement. The unavoidable wetland impacts
include 0.58 acres of Type 1, 3, and 4 wetlands. The minimum required wetland replacement is
1.16 acres (2:1).
The applicant's replacement plan consists of a 2 cell stormwater pond designed to meet the
criteria in 8420.0540 Subp. 2.E. expansion of existing wetlands, and upland buffers around the
mitigation basins. Wetland mitigation Area 1 will expand the north end of Wetland C by 6,026
square feet in the vicinity of Lots 6, 7, 20, 23, and 24, Block 1, to create New Wetland Credits
(NWC). Wetland mitigation Area 2 will expand Wetland B by 849 square feet in the vicinity of
Lots 25 and 26, Block 1, to create NWC. The south end of Wetland C will be expanded by
18,352 square feet in the vicinity of Lots 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 17, Block 1, to create the second
cell ofa 2 cell stormwater pond (NWC). These three basins provide 0.58 acres of NWC (1:1
ratio).
Public Value Credit (PVC) is proposed to meet the full (2:1) required replacement ratio. Parts of
the four (4) stormwater ponds created in upland areas (28,134 square feet) are eligible under
WCA State Statute 103G.2242 Subd. 12 (4) for PVC at a 75 percent rate (28,134 square feet x
0.75) for 21,101 square feet PVC. One upland buffer area (6,818 square feet) at the north end of
Wetland C is proposed for PVC. Under 8420.0540 Subp. 2.D (5) this buffer area is eligible for
6,818 square feet PVC (note: applicant requested 5,114 square feet PVC from 6,818 square foot
area). The upland buffers around the other wetlands would also be eligible for PVC up to a
maximum of 0.44 acres PVC. The total PVC provided in the replacement plan is 27,919 square
feet or 0.64 acres.
The NWC (0.58 acres) and PVC (0.64 acres) exceeds the required 2:1 replacement ratio (1.16
acres). City staff, with input from the TEP, determined the proposed replacement plan is in
substantial accordance with requirements in 8420.0530 to 8420.0630.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends the following conditions be applied to the WCA Replacement Plan Approval
by the City Council;
1) The applicant will need to provide the City staff with Proof of Recording of Declaration of
Restrictions and Covenants for the replacement wetlands and any areas public value credits are
derived from.
2) Best Management Practices shall be adhered to for the duration of the project.
3) Upon completion of the wetland replacement plan, the applicant will implement a wetland
replacement monitoring plan as submitted in 8420.0600. The applicant will submit the first
annual monitoring report to the city by December 31, 2001.
4)
Wetland Buffer Monuments are required (consistent with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District), at each lot line where it crosses a wetland buffer with a maximum spacing of 200
feet between monuments. The applicant shall propose a design and installation of the
monuments to city staff. The staff shall review and approve and may modify the design.
The design and installation shall be consistent throughout the development.
s:hnain:'d~lou12754:LReports\wcafindings: Kelly Bopray/Jon Sutherland
£GU:
Project Name
Project Location
WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT
REPLACEMENT PLAN DETERMINATIONg
LGU PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES CHECKLIST
o¢'
Oate Replaceraent Plan Submitted:
Oate neplacement Plan Complete:
INITIAL CONTACT WITH PROaECT PROPONENT
Yes No
)<' Pre-application meeting
IK Site Visit (including other agencies)
Evaluation via TEP (if deemed necessary)
REPLACEMENT PLAN COMPONENTS
Yes No
~ Postal address of applicant(s)
~ If Company, name of principle Officers, parent companies, owners/partners,
subsidiaries, managing agents, involved consultants
Statement of replacement prior to or concurrent with impact
Recent aerial photo or accurate map of impact site
Location of impact by County, watershed, and quarter section
Size of impacted wetland and replacement wetland
Wetland Type (circular #39 or Cowardin)
List of dominant vegetation at impact and replacement site
Soils map showing substrate and type for impact and replacement site (where
available)
~{ Location of inlets into and outlets from both the impacted and replacement wetlands
p( Nature of proposal, areal extent, with detailed description of impacts
Pc Evidence of ownership or rights to affected areas, incl. legal description
pq List of all other local, state, and federal permits required
1~ Scale drawings of replacement plan, profile views, and fixed photo point
~<' Statement indicating replacement wetland was not previously restored or created for
other regulatory purposes.
)<' Statement indicating the replacement wetland was not drained or filled under an
exemption during previous l0 years
~ Statement indicating replacement not conducted using funds of another unless paid
back by landowner.
P( Statement indicating replacement wetland was not restored with funds from public
conservation programs
Y,. Monitoring plan
/K' Other information considered necessary by LGU '
Note: If any of the above items are checked "No ", the application is not complete, and should not be
considered for decision by the LGU until the information is submitted. When submitted, record the date to
indicate that the replacement plan is now complete.
.K
******Within I0 days of receipt of complete application, Notice of Application must be mailed ***** .*
SEOUENCING PROCESS
Yes No N/A
Formal replacement plan received and deemed complete or application for
replacement initiated.
Avoidance alternatives provided by applicant.
Alternatives evaluated for feasibility by LGU.
Minimization steps taken by applicant.
Impact rectification is initiated by applicant.
Impact reduction or elimination over time by applicant.
Replacement of unavoidable impacts by applicant.
On-site sequencing conducted.
Sequencing flexibility applied.
REPLACEMENT PLAN EVALUATION
Yes
No N/A
Sequencing completed
Evaluation of Functions and Values completed (replacement and impacted wetland)
Type of Replacement identified (i.e., restoration, creation)
Proposed action is eligible to serve as replacement
Timing of replacement is concurrent with or prior to impact
Location of replacement is acceptable
Size of replacement is sufficient
Special considerations listed in 8420.0540 have been considered
WETLAND REPLACEMENT STANDARDS
Yes No N/A
X, Are the replacement plans goals supported by plan specifications?
)~, Is a control structure involved and does it need a dam safety permit by MDNR?
)~ ~ Ek:~/,l £ ?t~.l"~re site perimeter Best Management Practices (BMPs)included in the plan'?
- J Does the replacement plan discuss revegetation by planting if deemed necessary'?
~ Have reasonable steps to control invasion by exotic species been included?
~ Is an erosion control plan included?
X Is placement of organic substrate necessa~?
~ ~, Sideslopes of 5:1 or greater and a undulating bottom contour is included
REPLACEMENT PLAN APPROVAL
Note: This section follows review of a COMPLETE replacement plan application. If any of the items
below are checked "No ". the replacement plan approval may not be finalized, and no work may begin on
the project until this information is submitted.
Yes
No N/A
4 Has evidence of title for land containing replacement wetland been reviewed?
Has proof of recording of Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for
replacement wetland been received?
~ Has completed Application for Withdrawal of Wetland Credits been received?
*****Within 10 days of decision, Notice of Decision must be mailed
a:ch~cklst (S~pt~.mber, 1999)
SEQUENCING FINDINGS OF FACT
WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT
a) Are the 2 alternatives considered good faith efforts? ,)~ yes
Why or why not?
b) Have all feasibi~ and ~ alternatives available tlmt would avoid impacts to wetlands been
considered? ~ yes __ no
3) Iz Sequencing Flexibility being invoked? ~ yes IX~ no
H. DETERMINATION OF IMPACT MINIMIZATION
1) Has the applicant demomtmted an effort to minimize impacts to wetlands by considering modification of the
project?
Size: V,~ Yes __ No Not Feasible
Scope: ~ Y __N NF
Configuration: ~ Y N NF
Density: ~. ~/ N NF
2) ff any are answered no, explain objections
(A~,lknn~ hn* ~0 da~ to mcdify pro~nl tf ~mm~t, or i~ is dmind)
HI. DETERMINATION OF IMPACT RECTIFICATION
1) An activity may qualify for a no-loss determination if all of the questions below are answered yes.
a) Will all of the physical characleristics of the affected wetland be restored to pre-project conditions?
__ yes ~, no
b) Will the physical characteristics of the wetland be restored witlfin 6 months?
__yes N no
c) Has the applicant provided a performance bend sufficient to cover costs of restoring the wetland?
~yes ~ no
IV. DETERMINATION OF REDUCTION OR ELIMINATION OF IMPACTS OVER TIME
1) Will additiomd wetland impacts be reduced/eliminated through sound project operation and maintenance?
ff~' yes ~ no
2) Will best mnnagement practices be used to pro~ct wetlnnd functions and values? ~ yes ~ no
V. UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
1) Will unavoidable wetland impacts be replaced? )K' yes ~
nO
Conclusion - Based on the information above:
A: ~lfof.m*t (April, 1~7)
~ No
Dam
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYVVOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
NOTICE OF WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT
APPLICATION FOR IMPACTS> 10,000 SQUARE FEET
APPLICANT:
Peterson Environmental
1355 Mendota Heights Road
Suite 100
Mendota Heights, MN 55120-1112
R.H. Development
Ron Helmer
2300 West 97th Street
Bloomington, MN 55431
APPLICATION NUMBER:
DATE OF APPLICATION: November 6, 2000
TYPE OF APPLICATION (check all that apply):
Exemption __ No Loss
~,?eplacement Plan Banking Plan
LOCATION OF PROJECT: T-117N r-24W S-14 SW %
UMT Coordinates: X: 446854 Y: 4976098
SUMMARY OF PROJECT:
The Langdon Bay residential development is located in the SW ¼ of Sec 14 T117N, P-,24W,
City of Mound, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Mississippi (Metro #20) Watershed,
Hennepin County, Minnesota. Rottlund Homes Planned Unit Development will create 74
single-family houses and the associated infrastructure and ponding facilities on a 27.41-acre
parcel. The development is located within the R-1 Zoning District. All lots exceed the
minimum 10,000 square foot requirement. The proposal is consistent withi the City
Comprehensive Plan and the existing land use in the area. Seven (7) wetlands totaling 1.61
acres were identified on the site. The TEP has reviewed and approved the wetland
delineation. The proposed development will impact 0.58 acres of wetlands. The applicant
has provided information on alternatives analysis and an on-site replacement plan. The
replacement plan will create 0.58 acres of new wetland (type %) adjacent to and existing
natural wetland and storm water pond. The storm water ponds will generate 0.48 acres of
public value credit. Upland buffer adjacent to the replacement area will generate 0.16 acres
of public value credit. In addition an upland buffer around all of the remaining wetland areas
is incorporated into the site plan.
printed on recycled paper
Landowner:
R.H. Development
2300 West 97th Street
Bloomington, MN 5543'1
Technical Evaluation Panel:
Doug Snyder
BWSR
One West Water Street
Suite 200
St. Paul, MN 55107
Dave Thill
HCD
10801 Wayzata Blvd
Suite 240
Minnetonka, MN 55305
Watershed District:
Jim Hafner
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
Gray Freshwater Center
2500 Shadywood Road
Excelsior, MN 55831
Department of Natural Resources:
Joe Richter
MNDNR
1200 Warner Road
St. Paul, MN 55106
Interested Parties:
Wayne Barsted
MNDNR
Ecological Services Section
500 LayfayetteRoad, Box 25
St. Paul, MN 55155
Joe Yanta
Army Corp of Engineers
ATTN: CO-R
190 Fifth Street East
St. Paul, MN 55101
Ronald Peterson
1355 Medota Heights Road
Suite 100
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
R.H. Development
Ron Helmer
2300 West 97th Street
Bloomington, MN 55431
Jon Sutherland
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Kelly Bopray
MFRA
15050 23"~ Avenue
Plymouth, MN 55447
You are hereby notified that the above referenced application was made on
the date stated above. A copy of the application is attached. Comments will
be accepted on this application until 10:00 A.M., November 30~, 2000.
DATE OF MAILING OF THIS NOTICE:
It '"'[ 5 ,200~)
CITY OF MOUND
BY: ~
0el, 25, 2000 I:lfiPM MCCOMBS PRANK R00S
, FRA,,
No 4390 _~'P 2/3'
Engineering · Plan,,,,'~9 · Sur~,uy,ng
RECEIVED
OCT 2 6 2000
ME M 0 R A ND UM
DATE:
October 25, 2000
TO:
3on Sutherland, City of Mound
FROM:
Kelly J. Bopray, MFRA
SUBJECT:
City of Mound
Langdon Bay Residential Development
lvl~P~ #12754
On October 20, 2000, the City received a WCA replacement plan and Soction 404 permit application
for Langdon Bay Residential Development, Mound, Minnesota. The plan was prepared by Peterson
Environmental Consulting, Inc. on behalfofR.H. Development (the applicant).
At this time, the application is incomplete, because it does not include the following two items as
required under WCA 8420.0530:
1. evidence of ownership or rights to affected areas, including legal description; and
2. scale drawing of profile views and fixed photo points in the replacement wetlands.
In addition a preliminary review of the application identi£ed the following items that need to bc
further explained or revised in order for a favorable decision to be made by the City:
Ao
The "Total Avoidance Alternatives" is almost solely based on economic considerations.
WCA 8420.0520 subpart 3.C.(2)(e) states, "Economic consideration alone do not make an
alterative not feasible and prudent," Additional discussion should be provided for the City's
file covering (but not limited to); stormwater ponding r~uirements would effectively drain
some wetland even at a significantly reduced scope of development, therefore a no impact
alternative is not a valid alternative that could be deemed r~asonabl¢ and prudent. The
existing driveway is a platted mad, and the logical and most environmental sensitive access
to the site.
15050 23rd Ave~;ue Norfh · P~ymouth, Miflnesoza · 55447
pt;one 753/476-6010 . fax 763/476-8532
e-mail: mfra~mfra.com
Oct, 25, 2000 i:i6PM MCCOMBS
Ion Sutherland, City of Mound
October 25, 2000
Page 2
FRANK ROOS
CC:
Wetland minimization in regard to Wetland C. Although the impacts arc relatively small
(5,633 square feet) .and the impact areas are dominated by reed canary grass, the discussion
provided emphasized the efforts to mitigate the impacts. The proposed impacts arc generally
a result of filling for back yard areas, and does not document that the impacts are
unavoidable or have been minimized. Further discussion of the constraints imposed by bluff
setbacks, wetland buffers, variances applied for, approved, or den/ed, reducing the building
pad size and/or, possible reduction in number of lots needs to be provided for the City's fiI¢.
The replacement area is described as having an undulating bottom in the application, but this
is not reflected on the gradin§ plan. Additionally, the revegetation plans and specifications in
the application must bc incoq~orated into the development plans in order to assure they are
implemented during construction.
The portion of storrnwater pond 2, which is excavated into Wetland F, is not eligible for
Public Value Credits (WCA 8,i20.0540 Subpart 2.E.(2)). The application should show this
reduction in proposed PVC.
The central wetland/stormwater pond complex may in effect be a two-cell ponding system.
Further review needs to be done to determine if the eriter/a under WCA 8420.0540 Subpart
2.E.(3)(c) need to be, or have been met.
Proof of recording of Declaration of Restrictions and Covenmats for the replacement wedand
must be provided upon plan approval.
Ron Peterson, Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc.
Ron Helmet, R.H. Development
s:\mai~:h'~ou1275~:~correspon~Ience~sutherland 10-25
RECEIVED
MOUND TM ,,,,,t. li ,¢
PETERSON
E×VIROX, MENTAL
CONSULTING, [NC,
November 3, 2000
Mr. Jon Sutherland
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364-1627
Subject:
Responses to MFRA Comments on WCA Replacement Plan
Langdon Bay Residential Development
Mound, Minnesota
PEC Project No. 2000-018
Dear Mr. Sutherland:
This letter is in response to the October 25, 2000 comment memo supplied to us by Kelly
Bopray regarding the Wetland Replacement Plan application for the Langdon Bay
residential development. I will respond to each item in mm.
(1) Evidence of ownership or rights to affected areas, including legal description.
The applicant is supplying these items directly to you in the form of a copy of the
purchase agreement for the property.
(2) Cross-sections of mitigation areas and fixed photo reference points.
The project engineer has modified the plans for the project to include these items. I have
enclosed 1 full sized copy and 6 reductions of these revised plans. Please advise if you
need additional copies.
(3) Total avoidance alternatives
The comment memo indicates that our analysis of total avoidance alternatives is "almost
solely based on economic considerations" and then goes on to cite the WCA rule
language that states that economic considerations alone do not make an alternative
infeasible or imprudent. The cited total avoidance alternatives are not entirely based on
economics. Even if our analysis were "mostly" based on economics, it does not
contravene the cited rule as long as non-economic reasons are also cited. As stated in the
application, the only feasible access to the site is the existing driveway with widening to
Mr. Jon Sutherland
November 3, 2000
Page 2
PEC Project No. 2000-047
City street standards. Even if all other aspects of the project could be accomplished
without wetland impacts, access to the site cannot be accomplished without some wetland
fill. As indicated in the comment memo, the existing driveway is a platted city street.
Any other access route east or west of the current entrance would entail more impacts to
wetlands, tress and steep slopes than the proposed access. Due to the topography of the
site, any development will require substantial cuts and fills to construct streets and
provide stormwater management facilities. As stated in the original application, the
wetlands affected by the project are surface water fed and are dependent on overland flow
to have wetland hydrology. The grade changes associated with the necessary
infrastructure will make it impossible to maintain the existing catchments of the affected
wetlands. Even if infrastructure improvements were designed to avoid direct wetland
encroachment, the changes in catchment that some of the wetlands on the site will incur
would will adversely affect their size and jurisdictional status.
The applicant cited two reasons why the no-build alternative is infeasible and imprudent.
The first reason is indeed economic. To not construct the project would defeat the
reasonable, investment-backed expectations of the applicant. Also, development of the
property is necessary to pay the taxes currently being assessed against it. The other
reason cited by the applicant is not economic. The City has not guided the subject
property as green space or a conservation area but rather for low-density residential use.
The no-build alternative is inconsistent with the City's land use guidance for the property,
which in itself makes this alternative imprudent.
(3) Avoidance and Minimization of Fills for Lots
The city has asked for more documentation as to why the small back yard fills associated
with Lots 8, 9, 17, 18, 19 and 20 of Block 1 cannot be avoided or further minimized. As
shown on Sheet 2 of the Grading and Erosion Control Plan, the severe topography east
and west of Robin Lane is what drives the need for back yard fills along the east side of
Wetland C. Robin Lane has been sited as far the east as possible, while still allowing the
street to have lots on both sides and respect constraints posed by the steep bluff
overlooking DNR Wetland 951W. The Mound Shoreland Ordinance requires a 30-foot
structure setback from the top of a bluff. The front yard setback required under the
property's zoning classification is also 30 feet. The alignment of Robin Lane has been
established to allow lots on its east side to minimally meet these setback requirements.
The lots west of the road have also been designed to meet the required 30-foot front yard
setback and have the shallowest possible yards and building pad footprints. Despite these
efforts to minimize the depth of the buildable area of these lots, the topography drops
away sharply to the west requiring one to "chase the slope" down to the edge of Wetland
C. The applicant has used the steepest allowable slopes in this area but still cannot avoid
some wetland fill. Elimination of the fill along the east side of Wetland C would require
the removal at least three lots and would leave Robin Lane single-loaded for about 220
feet. The applicant submits that the minimal wetland impact being generated by these
Mr. Jon Sutherland
November 3, 2000
Page 3
PEC Project No. 2000-047
lots and the poor quality of the affected wetland fringe do not warrant the elimination of
these lots.
To the west of Wetland C, Lots 8 and 9 would also require a minor fill. The positions of
these lots are dictated by the alignment of C Street, which in turn is dictated by the
topography in this area. Lots 8 and 9 have been designed to have the minimum allowable
front yard setbacks, the shallowest possible back yard areas and the wetland buffer
required by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). The MCWD wetland
ordinance requires a 20-foot wetland buffer around wetlands 1 to 2.5 acres in size.
Again, both of these lots would need to be eliminated to avoid the impact to the west
edge of Wetland C. Again, the applicant submits that the minimal wetland impact being
generated by these lots and the poor quality of wetland affected do not warrant the
elimination of these lots.
It would not be feasible for the applicant to totally avoid these lot impacts by seeking
variances from setback and wetland buffer requirements. The topographic constraints of
these lots are such that wetland encroachments would still be required even if variances
from one or more of these requirements could be obtained.
(4) Replacement Area Design Features
The bottom contours have been designed to approximate the amount of undulation
present in the adjoining natural wetlands. The cross-sections provided on the revised
plans illustrate the variation in bottom contours across these areas. The planting
specifications contained in the Wetland Replacement Plan are referenced on Sheet 3 of
the Grading and Erosion Control Plan for the project.
(5) Portion of Wetland F Converted to Stormwater Pond Not Eligible for PVC
The amount of PVC credit being ascribed to Pond 2 has been reduced from 10,826 to
7,874 square feet. The mitigation totals on the plans have been revised to reflect this
correction. Also, I am enclosing a revised Wetland Replacement Plan application form
reflecting this change. The plan provides adequate mitigation even after this reduction.
(6) Two-cell pond system criteria for central wetland/stormwater pond complex
The project engineers have evaluated the central wetland/stormwater pond complex and
have determined that it meets the design criteria for a two-cell ponding system under
Minn. Rules 8420.0540, Subpart 2.E.(2). The upper cell has been designed to meet
National Urban Runoff Program criteria and, hence, meets the required criteria for an
upper cell. The down gradient mitigation area will incur a 1.2 foot bounce in a 1 O-year
storm, which is less than the 2 feet allowed under the rules.
Mr. Jon Sutherland
November 3, 2000
Page 4
PEC Project No. 2000-047
(7) Proof of recording of Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants
The applicant will supply proof of recording immediately upon plan approval.
I hope this response adequately addresses all of the issues cited by the City of Mound.
Please let us know if you need additional information or further elaboration on any of the
points set forth above. It is our understanding that, with this submission, the Wetland
Replacement Plan application for Langdon Bay is now complete and that permit
processing will move forward. Please advise us promptly if this is not the case.
Very truly yours,
Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc.
President
Professional Wetland Scientist No. 1118
Enclosures
cc. Ron Helmer - R.H. Development
Richard Palmiter - Rottlund Homes
Kelly Bopray - MFRA
Nick Polta - Pioneer Engineering
Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act
WETLAND REPLACEMENT PLAN APPLICATION
APPLICANT INFORMATION
R. H. Development (Attn: Ron Helmet)
Name(s) of Applicant
2300 West 97m S~xeet
Street Address
Bloomington. MN 55431
City, State, Zip Code
(952) 831-3830
Telephone. (Daytime)
(Evening)
Peterson Envtl. Consulfin8, Inc. Coned P. Per.son)
Nme(s) Au~o~z~ Ag~t
1355 Mendom Hei~ Roa~ S~te 100
S~eet Ad~s
M~dom Hei~, ~ 55120
Ci~, State, Zip Code
(651) 6864151 ff~: 651486-0369)
Tel~hone ~a~me) ~v~g)
PROPOSED IMPACTED WETLAND INFORMATION
Location:T 117 N R 24W S 14
UTM Coordinates: X: 446854 Y: 4976098
1/4 SW IA 1/4
Count~ Name/Numb~ Henn~in
Major Watershed Name/Number: 20 Mississippi River (Metro)
Wetland type: Circular 39 1, 3 & 4; NWl PEMA, PEMC &PUBFx
Topographic setting (check one):
Shoreland Riverine
Floodplain Flowthrough
Tributary.~ Isolated X
Size of entire wetland: 1.61 acres (8 indiv, basins)
Check one: [] <50% [] 50%-80% or [] > 80%
Check one: [] Agricultural land; [] Non-ag. land
Minimum replacement ratio(check one): [] 1:1 [] 2:1
Size oftotal wetland impact: 0.58 acresor 25,121 sqfi. Minimum replacement needed: 1.16 acresor 50,242 sqft.
Estimated size of surface water drainage into wetland: varies Acres
If the wetland is within a shoreland wetland protection zone or the floodplain of a watercourse, list the distance and direction to
the waterbody or watercourse: approx. 600 feet in a northerly direction from Langdon Lake
List the dominant vegetation and land use in the impacted wetland area (ex. willows, cattails, grass, sedges, open water/pasture,
row crop, etc.) see wetland delineation report (Appendix A of accompanying narrative)
Attach the following information:
(1) A recem aerial photograph or accurate maP of the imPacted wetland area showing:
a. the location, extent, and purpose of the proposed wetland fill or drainage;
b. the location of any surface inlets or outlets draining into or out of the wetland;
c. the land use within the immediate watershed within one mile of the impacted wetland. Or, include a written
description that notes the presence and location, if any, of wetland preservation regions and areas, wetland
development avoidance regions and areas, and wetland deficient regions and areas as identified in the
comPrehensive water plan;
(2) A soils map of the site;
(3) Evidence of ownership or rights to the affected area (or otherwise demonstrate to the LGU);
(4) A description of the avoidance and minimization alternatives considered; and
(5) Any other information required by the LGU, e.g. delineation report.
PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Describe the nature and purpose of the proposed project: see attached narrative (attach additional pages if needed)
Timetable: project willbegin on 11 / 1 / 2000 (mo/clay/yr) and will be completed by 11 / 1 / 2001
Page 1 of 4
PROPOSED MITIGATION INFORMATION
Mitigation will be accomplished as follows (check one):
[] Project-specific replacement only. Complete all information below.
[] Purchase of Wetland Banking Credits only. Attach Application for Withdrawal of Wetland Credits 0Exhibit J); do not
complete project-specific information below, and skip to "Special Considerations" on Page 4.
[3 A combination of the project-specific replacement and purchase of banking credits. Complete information below for
project-specific mitigation, and attach Application for Withdrawal of Wetland Credits 0Exlfibit J) for credit
information.
[] Check here if excess credits are anticipated, from project-specific replacement above the required minimum mitigation ratio,
and those credits are to be deposited into the M~nnesota Wetland Bank, following 3aqnnesota Wetland Bank procedures.
Attach the following information:
(1) A recent aerial photograph or accurate map of the mitigation site showing:
a. The location of the mitigation site;
b. Thc location of any surface inlets or outlets draining into or out of the wetland;
c. The land use of the mediate watershed within one mile of the mitigation wetland;
Or include a written description that also notes the presence and location, if any, of wetland preservation regions
and areas, wetland development avoidance regions and areas, and wetland deficient regions 'and areas as
identified in the comprehensive water plan;
(2) Scale drawings of the replacement wetland showing plan and profile views and fixed photo-reference points for
monitoring purposes;
(3) Evidence of ownership or rights to the land affected by the proposed mitigation wetland, which includes, but is not
limited to, the following; title to the land, fee owner, marital status, mortgages, and other interests in the land;
(4) A soils map of the mitigation site;
(5) A monitoring plan; and
(6) Any other information required by the LGU.
Provide the following information:
Describe how the replacement wetland shall be constructed, for example, excavation or restoration by blocking an existing
tile; the type, size, and specifications of outlet smactures; elevations, relative to Mean Sea Level or established bench
mark, of key features, for example, sill, emergency overflow, and structure height; and best management practices that
will be implemented to prevent erosion or site degradation; see narrative
(8) For created wetlands only, list additional soils information sufficient to determine the capability of the site to produce
and maintain wetland characteristics see narrative
(9) List all other local,, state, and federal permits and approvals required for the activity.
Corps Section 404 Permit: MN Dept of Health Water Main Extension Permit;. MPCA Sanitary Sewer
Extension Pcamit, NPDES Stormwater Permit and Section 410 Certification; City of Mound local governmental approvals.
Page 2 of 4
PROPOSED PROJECT-SPECIfIC MITIGATION INFORMATION
Location:T 117 N R 24W S 14 1/4 SW % 1/4 __
UTM Coordinates: X: 446854 Y: 4976098
County Name/Number: Hennepin
Major Watershed Nme/Number: 20 Mississippi River (Metro)
Check one: [] <50% [] 50%-80% or [] > 80%
Pre-e.,dsting Wetland (if any): N/A Acres of Type (Circular 39)
(Complete table below for credits resulting from successful construction.)
Replacement ratio:
Topographic setting (check one): Minimum: 2 to 1
Shoreland ' Riverine +Om-of-kind: 0
Floodplain Flowthrough X +Topo. Setting:. 0
Tn'butary Isolated +Local Public Value: 0
=Required Ratio: 2 to 1
Estimated size of surface water drainage into proposed mitigation wetland:
Acres
If the mitigation wetland is within a shoreland wetland protection zone or the floodplain of a watercourse, list the distance and
direction to the waterbody or watercourse: approx. 600 feet in a northerly direction of Langdon Lake .
List the dominant vegetation and land use in the proposed mitigation wetland area (ex. willows, cat~ails, grass, sedges, open
water/pasture, row crop, etc.) see narrative
CREDITS THAT WILL RESULT
FROM SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF REPLACEMENT PLAN
Credit NWC PVC Wetland Type:
Sub-Group~ Acres or Sq. FI_ Acres or Sq. Ft.
Topo. Setting~ Restoration or
Creation
A. 25,227 s..f. 3/4 flow-through creation
B. 21,102 si N/A N/A w.q. treatment ponds
C. 6,818 s.f. N/A N/A upland buffer
Totals: 25,227 s..f. 27,920 s.f.
[-[Check here if additional credit sub-groups are part of this replacement plan and are listed on an attachment to this document.
lA separate credit sub-group shall be established for each wetland or wetland area that has different wetland characteristics.
2Circular 39 types: 1, IL, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, B, U.
3Topographic setting types: shoreland, riverine, floodplain, flow-through, tributary, isolated.
Page 3 of 4
Special Considerations
To the best of the applicant's knowledge, are any of the following factors applicable at the impact or replacement site? Note
whether present or notby indicating as follows: Impact Site (I), Replacement Site (R), Both 03), Neither (lq).
1. Federal or state-listed endangered spedes, lq
2. Rare natural communities N
3. Special fish and wildlife resotwces including:
a~ Fish passage and spawning areas N
b. Colonial waterbird nesting colonies N
c. IVligxatory waterfowl concentration areas N
cl. Deer wintering areas N
e. Wildlife travel corridors N
4. Archaeological or historic sites N
5. Ground water sensitive areas N
6. Sensitive surface waters (e.g., DNR designated trout waters), lq
7. Educational or research sites N
8. Waste disposal sites N
9. Is the project consistent with local plans (e.g., watershed management plans, land use plans, zoning and master plans)~B
10. istheprojectpartofapollutanttradingagreementwiththeMPCA? .Yes X No
Replacement Assurance and Sworn Statements
Ron Helmer for IL H. Development (Applicant) states by signature below that:
1. The wetland will be replaced before or concurrent with the actual draining or filling of a wetland, OR; an irrevocable bank
letter of credit or other security acceptable to the local government unit has been provided to guarantee the successful
completion of the wetland value replacement; AND,
2. The replacement wetland was not previously restored or created under a prior approved replacement plan; AND,
3. The replacement wetland Was not drained or filled under an exemption during the previous ten years; AND,
4. The replacement wetland was not restored with financial assislance from public conservation programs, unless the
replacement wetland qualifies under Minn. Rules Chapter 8420.0540, Subp.2D.(3) [El check here if applicable]; AND,
5. The replacement wetland was not restored using private fimds other than those of the landowner unless the funds are paid
back with interest to the individual or organization that funded the restoration and the individual or organization notifies the
local government unit in writing that the restored wetland may be considered for replacement [El check here if applicable];
AND,
6. The Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for the replacement wetland will be recorded,, or Application for
Withdrawal of WeOand Credits will be completed, prior to any work to impact any wetlands,.
I hereby affn'm that the information above is. correct and la~thful to the best of my knowledge.
(applicant signature) (date)
Note: Any approval is not Off entire until all conditions above are satisfied and signatures below are complete. No work may
begin until the 15-day appeal window has lapsed, or, in the event of an appeal, until the appeal has been finalized.
FOR LGIJ USE ONLY
A.) Replacement Plan is (check one): [] Approved [] Approved with Conditions (Attach conditions) [] Denied
(LGU Official Signature) (Date)
B.) LGU has received evidence of title and proof of recording of Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants:
(County'where recorded) (Date recorded) (Document # assigned by recorder)
(LGU Official Signature)
a:replcapp.for (November. 1998)
(Date)
Page 4 of 4
,
. ,,~_ , , ,1~- Z
~ ~ : : . , I ~ , IIII /
~~:,~~¢~~'::~~"'~/;~ e~ 3~ ~~;3"¢' ~ ~, ~2'- 4-~/'~, ~ ~-~.~-:~7/I,{,,///K ~ - ~o
~/ / / /, ,,,.. _ .
SHEET 31
~ ~5" '~ rtl
'. ~' :. ~ ~, .
I
LANGDON BAY
,,-., ~ '
~ ISEE SHEET lJ
[;r ~ J~ ,il
~i ~. J'.~
/ '7/ r
~ ~,~ .... r. zu~ i~llii
I,~
. _ ,,
z
~~ ~l,.u. I~J;'Ifil '
[SEE SHEET 21
ir- \ J,
/
! ! ! I
I [ I I I [
\
\
\
/
/
REPLACEMENT PLAN DETERMINATIONS
LGU PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES
INTRODUCTION
The l~nnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) provides that no person shall
drain or fill a wetland, wholly or partially, without first having a wetland
replacement plan approved by the local governmental unit (LGU) administering the
WCA, or the lead local government unit designated by the BWSR, consistent with
parts 8420.0122 to 8420.0290 of the Rules, and provided that the activity is not
prohibited under the special considerations provisions in part 8420.0540, Subp. 9.
This section describes a step-by-step guide for the LGU to use in determining
when a wetland replacement plan is necessary and what components comprise a
replacement plan. In addition, this procedure will provide information on
evaluating wetland replacement proposals. These guidelines are an adaptation of
the rules as set forth in Chapter 8420. This part will not address replacement of
wetland impacts for public transportation projects. See Part IV of the manual for
information on these projects. Refer to a copy of the Rules in the Resource
Reference Section of this manual.
Ae
INITIAL CONTACT BETWEEN APPLICANT AND LGU
(8420.0510)
Determining whether a wetland replacement plan is necessary requires information
about the project (i.e., purpose, design, constraints) and the physical characteristics
of the project site. It is important to gather as much information as possible about
the project in order to ensure the proper regulatory pathway. Before considering
the preparation of a wetland value replacement plan we recommend the following
efforts to gather information:
A.1 Preapplication Meeting
The preapplication meeting provides a forum for the LGU and project sponsor to
exchange information concerning the project's limits and the regulatory implication
the project may trigger. Additionally, this meeting provides a chance for
discussion of sequencing requirements and replacement plan components. The
LGU may wish to invite other regulatory agencies with jurisdiction.
A.2 Site Visit
The site visit will provide a chance for the LGU to gather specific information
regarding the project's wetland impacts and regulatory jurisdictions. Additionally,
Part 111 - Replacement Plan Determinations
WCA Administration 111 - 3
April 1997
a site visit to the replacement area will be quite helpful when evaluating the
proposed replacement pla~ The LGU may want to conduct a joint ske visit with
other regulatory agencies.
A.3 Evaluation
As provided for in part 8420.0240, technical questions concerning the public
value, location, size and type of wetland shall be submitted to the technical
evaluation panel (TEP). Before allowing any proposed impacts, the LGU may
proactively use the TEP to determine public values, location, size and type of
wetlands under its jurisdiction for the purposes of administering the WCA. The
TEP shall confirm wetland boundaries using the methodologies in the United
States Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (January 1987) (87
Manual). Wetland types shall be classified in accordance with Classification of
Wetlands and Deepwater Habitat of the United States (Cowardin, et. al., 1979)
and according to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Circular No.39 (1971
edition) "Wetlands of the United States." The TEP shall provide its
determinations to the LGU for consideration. Refer to Part Ill - H of this manual
for further information on TEP procedures.
B. SEQUENCING (8420.0520)
Once the preapplication process has concluded and a formal application for
replacement is being considered or a prepared replacement plan has been received,
the sequencing process should be initiated. Sequencing is essentially a project
"needs test." This test uses a five step process (avoid, minimize, rectify, reduce,
and/or replace) to evaluate a the necessity ora project's altering wetland features,
functions, or values to fulfill its objective. The LGU may not consider or approve a
wetland replacement plan unless the project sponsor can demonstrate the following
sequencing principles have been followed:
B.1 Avoidance
Based upon the information provided, gathered, or both, the LGU shall conduct a
"wetland dependency determination" and "alternatives analysis." If the project is
deemed to be "wetland dependent" (requires wetland functions, features or values
to fulfill its purpose), then the project is relieved from completing the alternatives
analysis. Ir'the project is determined not to be "wetland dependent", then the
project sponsor shall provide at least two alternatives that avoid the impact.
Alternatives can include consideration of an alterative site; use of alternative
configurations; or not building the project at all. The LGU shall judge whether the
applicant made a "good faith effort" to avoid impacts via these alternatives or the
LGU may require a redraft of alternatives for consideration per part 8420.0520,
Subp. 3.
Part ~ - Replacement Plan Determinations
WCA Administration III - 4
April1997
When evaluating alternatives the LGIJ shall consider at least the
if the project could be accomplished by using one or more different sites in
the same general area that would avoid wetland impacts. (Note: An
alternative site may not be excluded solely because the applicant lacks
ownership);
the general suitability of alternative sites considered by the applicant;
if reasonable modification of the project size, scope, configuration, or
density would avoid impacts to wetlands;
if the applicant has made efforts to accommodate or remove constraints
imposed by zoning standards or requirements, including submitting all
needed requests for conditional use permits, variances, or planned unit
developments; and,
the physical, economic, and demographic requirements for the project
(Note: Economic considerations alone do not remove an alternative
from consideration by itself).
An alternative is judged feasible and prudent if:
it is capable of being done from an engineering standpoint;
it is in accordance with engineering standards and practices; and,
it is consistent with public health, safety, and welfare, and is
environmentally preferable.
If the LGU determines that a feasible and prudent alternative exists that would
avoid wetland impacts, it shall deny the replacement plan. If no feasible and
prudent avoidance alternative exists then the LGU shall evaluate the project for
compliance with the minimization, rectification, and replacement provisions of
WCA~
B.2 Minimization
Once an alternatives analysis concludes that no feasible and prudent alternatives
exist to avoid wetland impacts, the LGU shall review the project to determine if
the applicant has taken sufficient steps to minimize wetland impacts. When
evaluating whether sufficient minimization has occurred the LGU must consider at
least the following:
spatial requirements of the project;
Part rll - Replacement Plan Determinations
WCA Administration Ill - 5
April 1997
existence of structural or natural features that may dictate project
placement or configuration;
sens'~vity of design to accommodate natural features (i.e., topography,
hydrology, vegetation);
the value, function, and dism'bution of wetlands on the site;
individual and cumulative impacts; and,
the applicant's efforts to remove or accommodate site constraints whether
regulatory or physical in nature.
If the LGU finds that the applicant has not complied with the requirement to
minimize wetland impacts the LGU shall list in writing its objections and
provide the applicant $0 days to withdraw the project or indicate intent to
submit an amended projecL The statement of objections by the LGU shall
constitute a denial.
B.3 Impact Rectification
Ifa project will create temporary wetland impacts, these impacts must be rectified
by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected wetland. Activities causing
temporary impacts may qualify for a no-loss determination under part 8420.0220
of the roles by meeting all of the following:
the impacted physical characteristics of the wetland are restored to pre-
project conditions to ensure all pre-project functions and values are
recouped;
physical characteristics are restored within six months of the impacting
activities initiation; and,
the party undertaking the impacting activity posts a performance bond
sufficient to cover the estimated cost of restoration. The LGU shall return
the bond upon determination of satisfactory restoration.
Wetland impacts that do not meet the no=loss conditions listed above require
replacement under the criteria in parts 8420.0530 to 8420.0630 of the rules.
* Note: An applicant shall be granted a no-loss determination under these
conditions once in a ten-year period for s, particular site. Repairs to the
original project shall be allowed under the no-loss determination if determined
necessary by the LGU.
Part 111 - Replacement Plan Determinations
WCA Administration 111 - 6
April 1997
B.4 Impact Reduction or Elimination Over Time
Upon completion of an activity, further wetland impacts must be reduced or
eliminated by maintaining, operating, and managing the project to preserve the
remaining functions and values. The LGU must require implementation of best
management practices (BMPs) to accomplish protection.
B.5 Replacement of Unavoidable Impacts
Unavoidable wetland impacts that remain after efforts to avoid, minimize, rectify,
reduce, or eliminate must be replaced according to parts 8420.0530 to 8420.0630
of the rules.
B.6 Sequencing Flexibility (8420.0520, Subp. 7a)
Sequencing flexibility allows for flexibility in the application of the avoid,
minimize, rectify, or reduce criteria when evaluating a project under certain
circumstances. Sequencing flexibility provides for relaxation of these standards
provided that:
the applicant provides alternatives for consideration;
the replacement wetland is certain to provide equal or greater functions and
values as determined by a functional assessment conducted by the LGU and
reviewed by the technical evaluation panel (TEP);
the wetland to be impacted has been degraded to such an extent that the
LGU determines replacement of it would result in a certain gain of
functions and values;
preservation of the wetland would result in severe degradation of the
wetland's ability to function and provide public values, for example,
because of impacts from surrounding land uses, the wetland's ability to
function and provide public values cannot reasonably be maintained
through other land use controls or mechanisms;
the only feasible and prudent upland site available for replacement has a
greater ecosystem function or public value than the wetland (see rules
8420.0520 Subp. 7a for methods to demonsirate such);
alternatives are demonstrably cost prohibitive such that the projected cost
is substantially greater than costs normally associated with similar projects;
or,
the wetland is a site where human health and safety are a factor.
Part 111 - Replacement Plan Determinations
WCA Administration IH - 7
April1997
*** Note: Sequencing flexibility cannot be implemented unless the alternatives
have been considovd by the LGU and found not to be feasible or prudent.
Additionally, the proposed replacement must provide equal or greater functions
and public values than the impacted wetlantt The assessment of functions and
values shall be reviewed by the TEP using approved methodology!
C. OTHER SEQUENCING CONSIDERATIONS
C. 1 On-Site Sequencing/Application Options (8420.0520, Subp. 2)
For projects impacting areas less than 10,000 sq. ft. beyond the de minimis, the
LGU can provide on-site sequencing without written documentation from the
applicant, Applicants may either submit information required for sequencing
analysis as part ora replacement plan or apply for a preliminary sequencing
determination from the LGU before preparing a replacement plan. The LGU may
request additional information.
C.2 Wetlands on Cultivated Fields (8420.0520, Subp. 8)
Wetlands drained or filled in cultivated fields must have replacement accomplished
through restoration without regard to the sequencing requirements of Rules
8420.0520 Subp. 1. Wetlands drained or filled under this provision shall not be
converted to non-agricultural land for l0 years. The landowner must execute and
record a notice of such with the appropriate county recorder.
C.3 Calcareous Fens
Calcareous fens, as identified by the Commissioner of Natural Resources may not
be drained, filled or otherwise degraded, wholly or partially, by any action unless
approved by the Commissioner of Natural Resources under an approved
management plan (see 8420.1010 of the roles).
D. RgPLACEMF, NT PLAN COMPONENTS (8420.0530)
Prior to or upon completion of the sequencing process, projects that contain
unavoidable impacts to wetlands functions and public values require replacement
of those lost functions and values. The applicant shall provide the LGU with
necessary project documentation including any needed attachments on an
application form provided by the LGU, examples of which are included in the
appendix to this Part of the manual. The LGU must only consider for approval
those replacement plan applications which include the following components of a
replacement plan. Use of the WCA Replacement Plan application form, found in
the Part Ill Appendix, or the Combined Project Application (CPA) form, found in
Part 11I - Replacement Plan Determinations
WCA Administration III - 8
April1997
the Part X Appendix will satiff these requirements.
applicant's post office address;
if' application is bom a corporation, documentation shall include names of'
principal officers, any parent companies, owners, panners, joint ventures,
managing agents, subsidiaries (if applicable), consultant, and a designated
contact person;
name of managing agents, subsidiaries, or consultants that are or may be
involved with the wetland draining or filling project;
either a signed statemem confirming that wetland replacement will be
conducted concurrem with the actual impacts to a wetland or an
irrevocable bank letter of credit or other security acceptable to the LGU
guaranteeing successful replacement of the wetland functions and values
(refer to example of letter of credit in the Part III Appendix);
a recent aerial photograph or accurate map of the impacted wetland area
and the replacement site;
the location of the impacted and replacement sites, including county,
watershed name or number, and quarter section public land survey
description;
the size of the impacted wetland and replacement site in acres or square
feet;
,/
type(s) of impacted and proposed replacemem wetlands using USFWS
Circular #39 or National Wetland Inventory map conventions;
,/
a list of dominant vegetation in the impacted wetland area and the
proposed replacemem site;
a soils map of the site showing substrate and type of soil found in the
impacted wetland and replacement sites (where available);
estimated size of the watershed draining surface water into the impacted
wetland and replacement site and the land uses within the immediate
watersheds of both sites;
location of inlets and/or outlets to and/or from the affected wetland, natural
or man-made. If the affected wetland is within a shoreland protection
zone, floodplain of stream, river, or other watercourse, the distance and
direction to the watercourse;
Part HI - Replacement Plan Determinations
WCA Administration III - 9
April 1997
the nature of the proposed project, its areal extent, and a detailed
description of impacts to wetland;
evidence of ownership or rights tO the affected area for both the impacted
and replacement site. When two or more landowners are involved, a
contract or evidence of agreement signed by all and notarized must be
included. This agreement shall acknowledge covenant provisions to be
recorded on the deed of the replacement site property (see 8420.0530 Item
D, subitem (6) for details);
a list of all other federal, state, and local permits and approvals required for
this activit3r,
scale drawings showing plan and profile views of replacement wetland and
a fixed photo-reference point for monitoring purposes;
a description of how the replacement wetland shall be constructed and the
time table for replacement to occur;
a statement indicating the replacement wetland was not previously restored
or created for mitigation/replacement purposes, and that the replacement
wetland was not restored with financial assistance from a public
conservation program(s);
a statement that the replacement plan wetland was not drained or filled
during the previous ten years;
a statement indicating that the replacement was not conducted using funds
other than those of the applicant unless such funds are paid back with
interest to the individual or organization lending funds. The individual
and/or organization shall notify the LGU in writing that the wetland may be
considered for replacement;
a plan for monitoring the success of the replacement. Refer to Part III - I
of this manual for further guidance on monitoring requirements;
evidence indicating that the proper authorities have been contacted and
provided 90 days to object in the event of replacement proposed within a
pipeline easement;
any readily available information concerning the special considerations
listed in part 8420.0540 Subp.9 of the Rules, and discussed in Part III - E.8
of this manual.
Part 111 - Replacement Plan Determinations
WCA Administration llI- 10
April 1997
E. REPLACEMENT PLAN EVALUATION CRITERIA (8420.0540)
Once a replacement plan has been received and juc~ged complete by the L~}U, thc
evaluation process can begin. The following describes a basic evaluation process.
E.1 Sequencing (8420.0540, Subp. 1)
Before considering a replacement plan for approval, the LGU must ensure that the
applicant has exhausted all possibilities to avoid or minimize adverse wetland
impacts. The LGU should make sure that the sequencing process in part
8420.0520 of the Rules has been implemented. Refer to Part III - B for further
information regarding sequencing determinations.
E.2 Evaluation of Functions and Values (8420.0540, Subp. 10)
Replacement wetlands must replace functions and values lost from draining and
filling wetlands. Generally, a replacement wetland should replace the same
combination of function and values as provided by the impacted wetland. Wetland
functions and values may be replaced at more than one location. Determining if
adequate replacement is being proposed may be accomplished by conducting the
following techniques:
use of the relative functions and values index system found in part
8420.0540, Subp. 10, items D and E of the rules;
use of an approved alternative evaluation method such as: Minnesota
Routine Assessment Method for Evaluating Wetland Functions
~; Minnesota Wetland Evaluation Method (MnWEM- US Army
Corps of Engineers 1988); The Hydrogeomorphic Functional Assessment
Methodology (HGM-US Army Corps of Engineers 1993); Oregon
Freshwater Wetland Assessment Methodology (Oregon Division of State
Lands 1993); Method for the Comparative Evaluation of Non-Tidal
Wetlands of New Hampshire (New Hampshire Department of
Environmental Services 1991); or other methods, following BWSR
approval and publication in the Environmental Quality Board Monitor
(EQB).
When using an alternative analysis method, the replacement wetland must be
projected to have equal or greater functional values (as listed in part 8420.0103 of
the Rules) than the wetland being impacted. Additionally, the topographic setting
and local public value ratios, (as found in part 8420.0540, Subp. 10, items D and E
of the Rules) should be considered. Ifa replacement plan is judged to be
inadequate for replacing lost functions and values, it shall not be approved by the
LGU.
Part Ill - Replacement Plan Determinations
WCA Administration m - 11
April 1997
Type of Replacement (8420.0S40, Subp. 2)
The order of preference for replacement of wetlands impacted from draining or
filling is as follows:
Most preferred:
Least preferred:
Restoration
Creation
In considering potential restoration of a wetland for replacement purposes, the
WCA does not allow certain activities to qualify for replacement credits.
Modification or conversion of nondegraded wetlands from one type to another
does not constitute adequate replacement. In addition, wetlands drained or filled
under an exemption of the WCA may not be restored for replacement credit for 10
years. Finally, public waters and wetlands as identified by the Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources shall not be considered eligible for replacement
regardless of condition.
E.4 Actions Eligible for Replacement (8420.0540, Subp. 2, Items D and E)
In addition to restoration or creation of new wetlands, the actions described in this
section are eligible for replacement credit. Refer to Figure 1 for an illustration
using these options for potential credit.
Reestablishment of permanent vegetative cover on a wetland that was
annually seeded to crop in the past, or was in a pasture grass/legume
rotation. New wetland credit (NWC) shall not exceed 50 percent oftbe
total wetland area vegetatively restored.
Buffer areas of permanent vegetative cover established or maintained
on uplands adjacent to replacement wetlands provided the cover is
established at time of wetland replacement. Replacement credit for buffers
shall not exceed 75 percent oftbe total replacement wetland area for the
project. Credits are to be designated as public value credits (PVC) and only
used beyond a 1:1 replacement ratio.
Wetlands restored for conservation purposes under terminated
easements or contracts are eligible for replacement credit. The wetland
shall be eligible for new wetland credit for 75 percent of its area and
adjacent upland buffer areas reestablished to permanent cover shall be
eligible for PVC beyond the 1:1 ratio in an amount not to exceed 25
percent of restored wetland area.
Water quality treatment ponds constructed to pretreat storm water
runoff prior to discharge to wetlands, public waters, or other water bodies.
The water quality treatment ponds must be associated with an ongoing or
Pan HI - Replacement Plan Determinations
WCA Administration HI - 12
April 1997
proposed project that will impact wetlands. Credits shall not exceed 75
percent of the treatment pond area and can only be used as PVC beyond
the 1'1 ratio.
Storm water detention basins may be allowed as new wetland credit if
the basin is:
0
0
designed in a two-cell system with a 24-hour retention in the upper
cell for a 2-year event;
the downstream cell, designed for a maximum 12-inch bounce for a
10-year event;
designed to meet wetland replacement standards in part 8420.0550
of the Rules; and
designed as a palustrine emergent wetland.
Only the downstr~ wetland can be counted as credit; it must have a maintenance
plan. Use of this as credit precludes it from receiving an exemption in part
8420.0122 and are subject to parts 8420.0500 to 8420.0630 of the rules
* Note: Basins designedprimarily to control or treat storm water from
impervious surfaces or developed areas, not conforming to the criterion's list
above, will not be considered a wetland.
Credit for restoration of partially drained wetlands (8420.0540, Subp.
10, Item F) when fully restoring the hydrology of a wetland that has been
partially, but demonstrably, affected by drainage is determined in two parts.
The first is the NWC caused by the restoration. The second credit is for
the change in value of the wetland acres present prior to the' restoration.
This is the PVC and is equal to 50 percent of the acreage of the wetland
present prior to the restoration of the hydrology.
Calculation of partial restoration credits is explained by this example given
ia the Rules:
A partially drained 5 acre Type 1 (PEMA) wetland is restored to its former
state as a 10 acre Type 3 (PEMC) wetland.
NWC = 5 acres of Type 3 (PEMC) wetland
PVC = 2.5 acres of Type 3 (PEMC) wetland (50% of five acres of
prerestoration acreage)
For use of any of the above options, refer to Deed Restriction Form A (in
Part rll Appendix), Item 6 regarding the restrictions to the use of the
wetlands and any permanent vegetative cover established for replacement
credit.
Part rl'I - Replacement Plan Determinations
WCA Administration l~I - 13
July 1997
Figure 1 - Wetland Replacement Options - Example
DRAWING NOT TO SCALE
PARKING LOT
BUILDING SITE
DETENTH]N POND
. . 1.AC. RS -
~xl~i.~ *
'"' VETLAND ~'
VET. LAND. * UPLAND DIJF'F'£R
. E ACRE BUFFER-CAN rINLY
. ,. CLAIM .75 ACRE PVC
~ETLAND IMPACT (FILL)
.75 ACRES
.$ ACRES CREATION VETLAND D'IPACT (FILL)
.~ ACRES
· ES ACRES CREATION
CREATED WETLANg
FILLED WETLAND
TOTAL IMPACT = I ACRE
TOTAL MITIGATION = 2 ACRES
NWC = .75 ACRE CREATED W/L ADJACENT TO EXISTING W/L
.25 ACRE 2ND CELL STORMWATER TREATMENT POND
PVC = .25 ACRE UPLAND BUFFER ADJACENT TO NWC REPLACEMENT WETLAND
USED ,75 ACRE STORMWATER TREATMENT POND (UPSTREAM CELL)
2 ACRES
NOTE'
PER 8420.0540, Subp.2(D)(2), 75Z DF
REPLACEMENT WETLAND AREA MAY ]~E USED
FOR UPLAND BUFFER PVC ABOVE 1,l. IN THIS
EXAMPLE ONLY .25 ACRES WAS NEEDED FROM THE
.75 AVAILABLE (75% DF REPLACEMENT WETLAND (NWC) AREA).
THEREFORE, .5 ACRES DF UPLAND BUFFER PVC CREDITS
COULD BE BANKED.
Part III - P. eplacemem Plan Determinations
WCA Admini~afion Tn - 14
1997
7oA
E.5 Timing of Replacement (8420.0540, Subp. :t)
Replacement of wetland values must be completed before or concurrent with the
actual impact, unless an irrevocable letter of credit or other security accepted by
the LGU is submitted to the LGU to guarantee successful replacement. (Refer to
example letter of credit in the Part IH Appendix.) All wetlands to be restored or
created for replacement must be designated for replacement, through a
replacement plan or banking plan approval, before restoration or creation may take
place.
E.6 Location of Replacement (8420.0540, Subp. 4)
Replacement wetlands shall be located within the same watershed or county as the
impacted wetlands. When environmentally preferable, replacement should be
accomplished as close to the impacted wetland as possible with a preference of on-
site and.in-kind. Impacts to wetlands in greater than 80 percent areas may be
replaced in less than 50 percent areas. Refer to Figure 2 - WCA Wetland Area
Map, and Figure 3 - 81 Major Watersheds in MN.
E.7
Size of Replacement Wetland (8420.0540, Subp. 6 and Subp. 10, Items
C, D and E)
In-Kind Replacement: Wetlands must be of sufficient size to ensure that equal
or greater public value has been gained than was lost. When wetland functions lost
as a result of drainage or filling are replaced by restoring a wetland of the same
type, and having the same topographic setting, the replacement shall be considered
to be in-kind and the minimal replacement ratio shall be used to determine the
necessary size of the replacement wetland.
Out-of-Kind Replacement: If the wetlands lost as a result of drainage or filling
are to be replaced by creating a wetland or restoring a wetland of a different type
or in a different topographic setting than the impacted wetland, the replacement
shall be considered to be out-of-kind. The LGU must use the repla~cement ratios
described in Rules 8420.0540, Subp. 10, Item D (wetland type ratio, topographic
setting ratio, and local public value ratio) to determine the amount of replacement
wetland needed to replace the lost wetland. Refer to the Out-Of-Kind
Replacement Worksheet, located in the Part 111 ,appendix, to determine the
amount of replacement wetland required. Alternatively, the LGU may determine
out-of-kind replacement ratios using an approved method, as described in
8420.0540, Subp. 10, Item G of the Rules.
Part IH - Replacement Plan Determinations
WCA Administration IH - 15
April 1997
Minimum Replacement Ratios:
Wetlands impacted in non-agricultural settings must be replaced at a
minimum 2:1 ratio of acres. This does not apply to greater than 80% areas
where replacement may occur at a minimum 1'1 ratio.
Wetlands impacted in agricultural settings shall be replaced at a minimum
1:1 ratio of acres. However, no use of the impacted wetland for non-
agricultural purposes shall occur for 10 years unless future replacement to
achieve a 2:1 ratio occurs.
When replacing a drained or filled peatland, the replacemem site must be
revegetated with planted or naturally invading vegetation established within
three growing seasons (8420.0540, Subp.7).
Replacement of wetlands shall be conducted according to the landscape
ecology surrounding it. Replacement that would create an unnatural
wetland or wetland characteristics will not be approved (8420.0540,
Subp.8).
Determining Impacts of Partial Drainage: In cases where wetlands will be
partially or incompletely drained, the amount of wetland to be replaced is
determined in two parts. The wetland area where the hydrology is totally removed
must be replaced in its entirety. The area that is partially drained must be replaced
in an amount that is 50% of the acreage of the remaining wetland area.
Calculation of partial drainage is explained by the following example:
Partial drainage of a 10 acre Type 3 (PELVIC) wetland to a 5 acre Type 1
(P£MA) wetland would require replacing $ acres of Type 3 wetland for the
total loss of hydrology, plus 2.5 acres of Type 3 wetland for the partial loss
of the hydrology, for a total of 7.5 acres of Type :3 replacement wetland
required.
Part III - Replacemem Plan Determinations
WCA Administration 1II - 16
April 1997
Post-it* F~x Note 7671 1Da'e tZ~/~ I. :t. ·
: SPECIFICATIONS:
W MONUMENT
E CONSISTS OF A POST AND A WET.NO ~UFFER SIGN
· t
W~ND BUFFER SIGNS
L
PURCH~ED FROM THE COMMUNI~ O~ELOPMENT OEPT.
m ~ COST OF THE S{ONS IS $~.00 ~CH (PLUS TAX)
PAYABLE TO THE Ci~ OF PLYMOUTH
N MOUNTEO FLUSH WITH T~E TOP OF THE ;C~T5
O FASTENED WITH NON-REMOVABLE SCREWS
POST ~ATERIALS
U 4' X 47 SOUARE
m TR~TED WOOD OR OTHER CI~ APPrOvED MATERIAL
F POST INhALaTION
m MOUNTED TO A HEIGHT OF FOUR FEET
A~,~ GRADE
m 5ET AT L~ST 42 INCHES IN THE GROUND
INST~ED AT ~H LOT LiNE WHERE IT CROsSEs A
W~ND BUFFER. WITH A M~iMUM 5PACINO OF 200
FE~ BE~EEN SIGNS (IF NO BUFFER IS
THE MONUMENT SHALL. BE AT THE EDGE OF THE
W~ND)
P~C[ ADDtTIONAL FCST5 AS
TO FOLLOW BUFFER CONTOU~ LINE
0~ ~: STAND~D D~AILS 2-96
~PR~. ~: W~ND BUFFER MONUMENT :c~ ~L ~o.
OF PLYMOUTH DWi-SA
Post-it* F~x Note 7671
2415 Wilshire Blvd. Mound, Minnesota 55364
De..c.e. mbe...,~ 4 , ';000
Mou. n.d. Cid:y C ou. n. cM.~
5341 Mc~ywood Roa. d
Moccn.~ , Mrs. 55364
Pn.e..si~ e.~tt.
Mou.~l.d~ , Mt1.. 55364
DCa,c Citg O~,~ici. a~s ,
24 I 5 WILSHIRE
Bo u LEVARD
~v~OUND, ~V~N 55364
6 I 2/472-3555
FAX: 6 I 2/472-3775
moundfiredept~earthlink, net
GREGORY S. PEDER$ON
FIRE CHIEF
DAVID .BoYD
ASSISTANT CHIEF
~V~ICHAEL PALH
FIRE MARSHAL
HISTORY 5,-BACKGROUND
THE MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT WA~ ESTABLISHED IN 1923 TO
SERVE THE GROWING .COMMUNIT~ AND SURROUNDING AREA. OVER ~Fl-lE
YEARS, THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE MFD SERVES. AND PROTECTS HAS GROWN
TO APPROXIMATELY 29,000 iN i999. MFD HAS'A PROUD TRADITION OF
EXCEi I ~NCE IN SERVICE .AND ACTIVITY AMONG THE COMMUNITIES IN OUR
FIRE SERVICE AREA.
CURRENTLY THERE ARE 37 ACTIVE FIREFIGHTERS ON 'rile MFD, WITH
SEVERAL A~PUCANTS FOR ANY POSITIONS THAT MIGHT OPEN OR BE ADDED.
AMONG.THE FIREFIGHTERS CURRENTLY IN FORCE THERE IS A COMBINED
347 YEARS OF SERVICE AND EXPERIENCE TO THE MOUND FIRE SERVICE
THE PEOPLE DEDICATED TO GIVING THEIR TIME A~ FIREFIGHTERS INVEST A
LARGE PORTION OF THEIR UVES TO THE RESPONSIBILITY OF PROTECTING
THEIR cOMMuNITY. ALL MEMBERS OF THE MFD:HAVE PRIMARY
OCCUPATIONS OUTSIDE THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, YET THEY. 'SPEND AH
AVERAGE OF 7-5 HOURS EACH MONTH IN FIRE SERVICE, DRILIc~ AND
TRAINING, AND MAINTENANCE OF THE APPARATUS AND STATION.
MED PROVIDES NOT ONLY FIREFIGHTING, BUT ALSO.MEDICAL RESCUE
RESPONSE, AUTO EXTRICATION, WATER AND ICE RESCUE, AND FIRE
PREVENTION. INCLUDED IN THE OCCUPATIONS OF OUR VOLUNTEER
PERSONNEL ARE TWO PARAMEDICS, ONE EMERGENCY .ROOM PHYSICIAN, AND
A NURSE. ' MFD IS ALSO.KEEPING PACE WITH THE NEW OSHA
REOUlREMENTS FOR TRAINING AND PHYSICAL FITNESS.
INSURANCE SERVICES ORGANIZATION, THE COMPANY THAT RATES FIRE
DEPARTMENTS BASED ON THEIR TRAINING, APPARATUS, WATER SUPPLY, AND
MARKET VALUE OF THE FIRE SERVICE AREA, HAS GIVEN IviED A~ RATING OF
4. ISO RATES DEPARTMENTS FROM I TO I O; THE LOWER THE RATING THE
MORE CAPABLE THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. THiS 'RATING AFFECTS THE FIRE
INSURANCE PREMIUMS PAID BY HOMEOWNERS AND BUSINESSES; THE
PRIEMIUH DECREASE FOR BUSINESSES IS VERY SIGNIFICANT FOR EACH
RATING LEVEL. MFD HAS THE LOWEST, AND THEREFORE THE BEST, ISO
RATING'AJvlONG THE SEVEN FIRE DEPARTMEI4T~ USED IN THE ATrACHED
COMPARISON CHARTS.
FOR OVER 75 YEARS, MOUND-FIRE DEPARTMENT HA~ PROVIDED
'EXCEPTIONAL SERVICE :TO THE COMMUNITIES IT ASSISTS. - FINDING AND
KEEPING QUALITY FIREFIGHTERS ON A VOLUNTEER BA~IS HAS PROVED TO
BE DIFFICULT AT BEST FOR HOST DEPAR'rM~ HOWEVER MFD
CONTINUES TO STAY IN STRIDE WITH THE GRO~rH AND DE~/ELOPNENT OF ITS
FIRE' SERVICE AREA DUE TO THE HIGH LEVEL OF DEDICATION AMONG ITS
MEMBERS.
MOUND FIRE DEPA.KTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
December 31, 1999
Note 4 PENSION PLAN
A. PLAN DESCRIPTION
Thc Mound Fire DeparUnent P, elief Association is thc adminisuator of a single employer Public
Employee Retirement System (PERS) established to provide benefits for members of the Mound
Fire Department.
Reti~ and beneficiaries receiving
benefits -.. '" 30
Retired members entitled to benefits,
but have not received them ?
Cturent Members:
Fully Vested (20 years or more) -
Nonvested (less than 20 years) 34
Total 71
Plan provisions are established and may be amended by the Relief Association's Board of
Trustees withi~ the guidelines of the State of Minnesota statutes.
BENEFIT PROVISIONS
Twenty Year Service Pension
Each membex Who is at.least $0 years of age; has retired from the Mound_ Fire Department, has
served at least twenty (20) years of active servicc with such department before retirement; and, has
been a member of the Association in good standing at least 20 years prior to such retirement; shall
be entitled to a monthly pension for the remainder of thcir natural life (currently $$10.00 per
month). Survivor benefits are paid in the event of a member's dcath. The Association bylaws do
not provide for any partial vesting for members who completc less than 20 years of service. A
severance payment from the General Fund is paid to members who complete at least 10 years of
service.
Co
Funeral Benefit
Upon the death of an Association member, the sum of $1,500 shall be appropriated to the
designated beneficiary or estate to defray funeral costs.
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS
Minnesota Statutes 69.772 specifies minimum contributions required on an annual basis. The
minimum Contribution from the City of Mound is determined as follows:
Normal Cost
+ Amortization Payment on Unfunded Actuarial Liability Prior to Any Change
+ Amortization Contn~oution on Unfunded Actuarial Liability Atlxibuted to any Change
+ Atimini~trafive expense
- Anticipated State Aid
- Projected Investment Earnings ~ 5%
Total Contn'outiou Reouired
Plan members are volunteers with no contribution requirements.
14
MOUND A $OClATION
SPECIAL FUND - PIiIXlSION TKUb~':FUND
REQUIRED SUPPr-~-MENTARy INFORMATION
SCHEDULE OF FLrNDING PROGRESs
1995 through 1999
(Unaudited)
Exhibit 1
F~cal
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
Asscts in
Excess of/
(U~dcd).
Accrued
Liability
$ (532,209)
1~393,77~,. 1,990,081 ..- (596,307)
1~56~13' 2~78,458 (721,545)
1~75;121 2;833,180
(1,258,059)
Assets in
Excess of/
Actuarial Actuarial .. Actuarial COnfundcd)
Valuation Valuc of Accrued Accrued Funded
Date Assets . Liability Liability Ratio
12/31/95 $' 1,860,822 $ 2,374,736 $ (513,914) 78.4%
12/31/96 2,106,099 2,570,414 (464,315) 81.9
12/31/97 2,478,000 2,666,028 (188,028) 92.9
12/31/98 2,712,188 2,955,814 (243,626) 91.8
12/31/99 3,086,189 3,339,161 (252,972) 92.4
Pension
Benefit
Per Month
$ 425
460
460
510
510
Thc Association is comprised of voluntr~; therefore, there arc no payroll expenditures (Lc., there are no covered
payroll amounts 'or percentage calculate).
MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT I~RI.~ ASSOCIATION Exhibit 3
SPECIAL FUND - PENSION TRUST FUND
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
SCHEDULE OF CONTRIBUTIONS FROM EMPLOYER AND OTHEK CONTRIBUTING EN'ITrIES
(Unaudited)
Year Annual Required Contribution
Ended City State Percentage
December 31, Contribution Contribution Total Conm'buted
1995 $ 80,500 $ 48,685 $129,185 100.0%
1996 85,394 64,108 ..1491502' 100.0
1997 88,810 63,4n 152,222 100.0
1998 92,360 64,712 157,072 100.0
1999 96,050 66,128 162,178 100.0
The information presented in the required.supplementary schedules was determined as part of the actuarial
valuations at the dates indicate& Additional information as of the latest actuarial valuation folio{rs:
Valuation date
Actuarial cost method
Amortization method
12/31/99
Entry Age Normal
Level dollar
Remaining amortization period:
· Normal cost
Prior service cost
Asset valuation method
Actuarial assumptions:
Investment rate of return
Projected salary increases
Includes inflation at
Cost-of-living adjnsm:ents
20 years
10 years
Market
5%
N/A
N/A
None
18
Mound Fire Dept.
Account Review
as of August 31, 2000
Account
Account
Total
Total Command
Total Managed
Total Assets
*Returns as of 08/31/20(X)
~ of Total Net Worth
65% $
9% $ 73Z4b0.~
7% $ 227,947.36
5%
Time Weighted
7.32%
8.68%
7.38%
0.00%
$ 147,785.00
100~ 7.30% $ 3,Z02,758.93
$ 2,094,566.21
$ 3.,108,192.72
$ 3,202,758__q3 '
Allocation TaMe
Equities Small/Mid Cap 6.64%
International 15.33%
Equities Large Cap 43.55%
Bonds/Bond Funds 30.29%
C~sh and Equivalents 1.22%
speda~ty
Total 100.00%
Indems
S~P~0 [
Dow Jones Industrial Ave.
Russell 2000
EAFE
LB IntermecUate Bond
5al (50% S~P/50% LBC, C)
CPI [
Cash and Specialty
3%
Equivalents
1%
Bonds/Bond
Funds
30%
Equities
Small/Mid Cap
7%
International
15%
Large
Cap
44%
· Equities Small/Mid Cap · International [] Equities Large Cap
[] Bonds/Bond Funds · Cash and Equivalents · Specialty
Irfforrnaion contained on this page is believed to be reliable. It has not been vmf~d for accuracy or compkleness by ~ SectJities Incorporated or
MKTG:
MARKET INDEX RATES OF RETURN
EQUITY INDICES
S&P 500
DOW 3ONES INDUSTRIALS
NYSE COMPOSITE
AMEX COMPOSITE
NASDAQ COMPOSITE
VALUE LINE
WILSHIRE 5000
RUSSELL 1000
RUSSELL 1000 GROWTH
RUSSELL 1000 VALUE
RUSSELL 2000
RUSSELL 2000 GROWTH
RUSSELL 2000 VALUE
RUSSELL 3000
MSCI EAFE
MSCI WORLD
PSI LARGE-CAP VALUE
PSI MID-CAP VALUE
PSI.SMALL-CAP VALUE
PSI LARGE-CAP GROWTH
PSI MID-CAP GROWTH
PSI SMALL-CAP GROWTH
TOP MENU DN IMSD 7.1 053 1/3
08/18/98 BY 00-00 ON 09/13 AT 07:10
PERIODS ENDED AUGUST 31, 2000
1 MTH 3MTH YTD 1YR 3YR 5YR iOYR
6.21% 7.13%
6.72% 6.85%
5.36% 4.94%
4.09% 4.26%
11.66% 23.68%
6.35% 6.46%
4.11%
-1.59%
4.13%
7.58%
3.36%
1.00%
7.26% 9.62% - 4.11%
7.40% 8.31% 6.44%
9.05% 12.42% 8.92%
5.56% 2.00% 2.36%
7.63% 13.25% 7.32%
10.52% 14.10% 2.29%
4.47% 11.10% 14.25%
7.42% 8.64% 6.52%
0.89% 0.48% -7.13%
3.27% 3.77% -2.06%
6.58% 3.64% 2.50%
6.97% 6.29% 7.60%
6.88% 10.16% 6.58%
9.13% 15.18% 10.80%
12.90% 14.11% 10.52%
7.35% 17.65% 7.42%
16.32% 20.69% 24.03% 19.49%
5.03% 15.59% 21.67% 18.48%
10.91% 13.49% 18~32% 15.42%
21.67% 13.21% 12.03% 11.30%
53.53% 38.38% 32.76% 27.14%
0.53% -0.58% 5.96% 7.62%
19.92% 19.57% 22.43% 19.14%
20.13% 21.11% 23.93% 19.84%
33.44% 28.92% 28.73% 21.97%
4.16% 12.08% 18.22% 17.19%
27;15% 9.57% 13.46% 16.30%
39.08% 13.68% 14.04% 15.70%
13.68% 4.52% 11.96% 16.03%
20.63% 20.02% 22.91% 19.45%
9.84% 11.50% 10.40% 8.86%
13.45% 16.40% 16.99% 13.19%
0.02% 9.77% 17.53% 16.68%
4.07% 3.15% 11.45% 16.53%
3.56% -0.03% 9.80% 15.79%
44.50% 33.17% 30.01% 23.18%
52.71% 21.49% 19.57% 20.93%
37.43% 11.90% 14.14% 16.59%
PERIODS ENDED AUGUST 31, 2000.
FIXED INCOME INDICES
LB AGGR
LB CORPORATE
LB GOVT
LB GOVT/CORP
LB INTERMEDIATE CORP
LB INTERMEDIATE GOVT
LB INT GOVT/CORP
LB LONG GOVERNMENT
LB MUNICIPALS
SALOMON BROAD
SALOMON CORP BOND
SALOMON NON-US BONDS
CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT
US 30-DAY T-BILLS
1 MTH 3 MTH YTD 1YR 3YR 5YR
iOYR
1.45% 4.50% 6.45% 7.55% 6.25% 6.55% 8.07%
1.30% 5.10% 5.27% 6.46% 5.49% 6.27% 8.50%
1.48% 4.29% 7.55% 7.75% 6.60% 6.55% 8.04%
1.41% 4.58% 6.75% 7.27% 6.23% 6.44% 8.13%
1.28% 4.34% 4.97% 6.41% 5.58% 6.17% 7.99%
1.12% 3.41% 5.34% 6.20% 5.87% 6.02% 7.23%
1.18% 3.74% 5.22% 6.25% 5.78% 6.03% 7.38%
2.32% -6.41% 13.19% 11.62% 8.62% 8.08% 10.34%
1.54% 5.68% 7.57% 6.78% 5.25% 6.04% 7.38%
1.43% 4.49% 6.37% 7.47% 6.20% 6.53% 8.10%
1.27% 5.06% 4.94% 6.12% 5.46% 6.25% 8.51%
-1.58% -1.65% -6.08% -5.85% 1.98% 1.80% 8.04%
0.56% 1.68% 4.22% 6.18% 5.72% 5.67% 4.94%
0.49% 1.34% 3.60% 5.14% 4.73% 4.85% 4.46%
SPECIALIZED INDICES
CONSUMER PRICE INDEX
BAL (50% S&P/50% LBGC)
PERIODS ENDED AUGUST 31, 2000
1 MTH 3 MTH YTD 1YR 3YR 5YR
0.10% 0.80% 2.61% 3.40% 2.39% 2.48%
3.81% 5.88% 5.60% 12.03% 13.65% 15.24%
iOYR
2.79%
13.89%
INFORMATION CONTAINED ON THIS PAGE IS BELIEVED TO BE RELIABLE. IT HAS NOT
BEEN VERIFIED FOR ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS BY PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES
T~CO~o9~ArE9 OR ANY OF ITS EMPLOYEES.
Mound Fire Dept.
Account Review as of October 31, 2000
d Account 103 00
Roxbury Account 22% -0.90% $ 667,915.00
Pru Value Managed Account 8% 8.90% $ 229,741.00
Fayez Sarofim Managed Acct. 5% 6.90% $ 157,144.00
Total
Total Command
Total Managed
Total Assets
*Returns as of 10/31/2000
100% 2.18% $ 3,028,903.00
$ 1,974,103.00
$ 1,054,800.00
$ 3,028,903.00
Allocation Table
Equities Small/Mid Cap 6.64%
International 15.33%
Equities Large Cap 43.55%
Bonds/Bond Funds 30.29%
Cash and Equivalents 1.22%
Specialty 2.97%
Total 100.00%
Dow Jones Industrial Ave.
EAFERUSsell 2000
LB Intermediate Bond
Bal (50% S&P/50% LBGC)
CPI [
Nlocation Chart
Specialty Equities
Cash and 3% Small/Mid Cap
Equivalents 7%
1%,. International
Bonds/Bond ~/"'~ ~ 15%
Funds
30%
Equities Large
Cap
44%
· Equities Small/Mid Cap · International [] Equities Large Cap
[] Bonds/Bond Funds · Cash and Equivalents [] Specialty
Information contained on this page is betieved to be rdiable. It has n(X been verified for accuracy or completeness by Prudential Securities Incorporated or
any of its employees.
MARKET INDEX RATES OF RETURN #
08/18/98 BY 00-00 ON 1!,'09 aT 13'33
PERIODS ENDED OCTOBER 31, 2000
EQUITY INDICES
S&P 500
DOW 3ONES INDUSTRIALS
NYSE COMPOSITE
AMEX COMPOSITE
NASDAQ COMPOSITE
VALUE LINE
WILSHIRE 5000
RUSSELL 1000
RUSSELL 1000 GROWTH
RUSSELL 1000 VALUE
RUSSELL 2000
RUSSELL 2000 GROWTH
RUSSELL 2000 VALUE
RUSSELL 3000
MSCI EAFE
MSCI WORLD
PSI LARGE-CAP VALUE
PSI MID-CAP VALUE
PSI SMALL-CAP VALUE
PSI LARGE-CAP GROWTH
PSI MID-CAP GROWTH
PSI SMALL-CAP GROWTH
1 MTH 3MTH Y'rD 1YR 3YR SYR 10YR
-0.42% 0.18% -1.80% 6.09% 17.60% 21.67% 19.44%
3.14% 4.70% -3.46% 3.68% 15.66% 20.35% 18.98%
0.49% 4.11% 2.89% ,7.14% 12.16% 17.42% 15.98%
-4.72% 0.32% 3.69% 13.55% 10.39% 11.75% 12.19%
-8.26% -10.55% -17.20% 13.57% 28.35% 26.60% 26.16%
-4.81% -1.05% -2.77% 5.27% 8.61%
-2.27% 0.23%
-2.12% 0.16% -2.78%
-1.21% 1.18% 0.28%
-4.73% -5.94% -6.04%
2.46% 9.15% 5.84%
-4.46% -0.19% -0.48%
-8.12% -3.50% -10.69%
-0.35% 3.51% 13.20%
-1.42% 1.10% 0.25%
-2.34% -6.25%-13.71%
-1.66% -3.84% -8.80%
3.08% 11.54% 7.27%
-3.19% 3.64% 4.25%
-0.25% 5.52%
-5.94% -8.27%
-6.57% -3.34%
-7.26% -6.53%
8.10% 15.96% 20.11% 19.16%
9.05% 17.92% 21.59% 19.81%
9.32% 22.29% 23.84% 20.80%
5.52% 12.20% 18.41% 18.33%
17.40% S.94% 12.39% 17.24%
16.16% 8.11% 11.65% 15.95%
17.28% 2.93% 12.33% 17.73%
9.64% 16.80% 20.72% 19.47%
-2.65% 9.71% 8.95% 8.11%
1.39% 13.70% 15.03% 12.63%
3.59% 10.68% 17.75%
5.22% 1.66% 10.88%
5.23% 10.03% -1.13% 10.64%
-6.87% 14.95% 25.69% 25.13%
-5.38% 24.20% 15.47% 15.98%
-6.46% 20.99% 6.36% 12.08%
17.73%
17.56%
17.64%
22.10%
20.57%
16.98%
PERIODS ENDED OCTOBER 31, 2000
FIXED INCOME INDICES
LB AGGR
LB CORPORATE
LB GOVT
LB GOVT/CORP
LB INTERMEDIATE CORP
LB INTERMEDIATE GOVT
LB INT GOVT/CORP
LB LONG GOVERNMENT
LB MUNICIPALS
SALOMON BROAD
SALOMON CORP BOND
SALOMON NON-US BONDS
CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT
US 30-DAY T-BILLS
1 MTH 3 MTH YTD 1YR 3YR
0.66% 2.76% 7.82%
0.10% 1.94% 5.94%
0.96% 2.74% 8.89%
0.63% 2.44% 7.83%
0.09% 2.35% 6.08%
0.69% 2.70% 6.99%
0.46% 2.57% 6.66%
1.59% 2.82% 13.74%
1.09% 2.11% 8.18%
0.64% 2.77% 7.78%
-0.01% 2.01% 5.71%
-2.11% -3.96% -8.35%
0.56% 1.67% 5.37%
0.49% 1.48% 4.61%
5YR 10YR
7.30% 5.67% 6.35% 7.99%
5.49% 4.66% 5.87% 8.47%
8.032 5.90% 6.29% 7.90%
7.11% 5.47% 6.13% 8.01%
5.96% 5.13% 5.95% 8.04%
6.73% 5.63% 5.97% 7.16%
6.44% 5.46% 5.93% 7.32%
11.32% 6.65% 7.19% 10.02%
8.51% 4.81% 5.72% 7.24%
7.28% 5.65% 6.33% 8.01%
5.42% 4.68% 5.89% 8.49%
-9.70% -0.39% 0.66% 6,89%
6.40% 5.78% 5.72% 4.93%
5.39% 4.82% 4.87% 4.44%
SPECIALIZED INDICES
CONSUMER PRICE INDEX
BAL (50% S&P/'50% LBGC)
PERIODS ENDED OCTOBER 31, 2000
1 MTH 3 MTH YTD 1YR 3YR 5YR 10YR
0.30% 0.90% 3.55% 3.66% 2.53% 2.54% 2.713
0.11% 1.37% 3.13% 6.89% 11.79% 13.97% 13.79%
INFORMATION CONTAINED ON THIS PAGE IS BELIEVED TO BE RELIABLE. IT HAS NOT
BEEN VERIFIED FOR ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS BY PRUDENTIAL SECURZTZES
INCORPORATED OR ~NY O= ITS EvPLOYEES.
I1
i
ii
I
I
I
I
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION, INC.
December 31, i999 Actuarial Valuation
Introduction and Actuarial Certification
Purposes of the valuation
This report presents the results of the December 31, 1999 actuarial valuation for the Mound Firefighters
Relief Association. Its primary purposes are:
· to develop the minimum obligation to the plan,
· to review the plan's funded status as of December 31, 1999.
Sources of data
The Mound Firefighters Volunteer Relief Association, Inc. supplied December 31, 1999 data for all plan
participants and supplied asset data for the trust as of December 31, 1999 and asset activity from January
1, 1998 through December 31, 1999. We have relied on that data in preparing the actuarial valuation of
the plan.
1
t
1
1
1
1
Changes from the prior Fear
The prior actuarial valuation of the plan was prepared as of December 31, 1997. The'actuarial
assumptions and methods are identical to those used last year.
I
I
I
I
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT KEL[EF ASSOCIATION
December 31, 1999 Actuarial Valuation
Actuarial certification
Introduction and Actuarial Certification (continued)
This valuation has been conducted in accordance with our understanding of Minnesota Statues governing
this plan.
Chapter 356.216 of Minnesota Statues requires than an actuarial valuation of the fund be conducted
periodically. An actuarial valuation is a calculation to determine the normal cost and accrued liability of
the fund and includes a determination of the payment necessary to amortize the unfi.mded liability over the
stated per/od and a determination of the payment necessary to keep the unfunded liability fro increasing.
The actuarial valuation is conducted according to a stated actuarial cost method, Entry Age Normal Cost,
and, as prescribed in Chapter 356.215, Subdivision 4(4), an interest assumption of 5% must be utilized.
The By-Laws of the Association Were amended August 25, 1999 to increase the monthly service pension
effective September 1, 1998 from $460.00 per month to $510.00. The increase in the Unfunded L/ability
as of December 31, 1999 due to the' increase for 2000 was $296,836.
Membership
There were 35 active members, 6 deferred members and 22 retired members, 6 surviving spouses and 1
child of a member included in the actuarial costs. Member statistics axe shown on page 6.
James R. Bordewick, FSA
Consulting Actuary
Enrollment No. 99-1467
Brenda K. Hardy, ASA
Consulting Actuary
Enrollment No. 994885
April, 2000
I
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION, INC.
December 31, 1999.4ctuarial Valuation
I
Valuation of the Current Plan
A. Actuarial Accrued Liabili~. (AAL) as o_f December 3l 1. Active members
2. Vested terminated members
3. Retired members
4. Spouses receiving benefits
5. Children receiving benefits
6. Disabled members receiving benefits
7. Total actuarial accrued liability
B. Fund as of Januam. 1
C. Unfunded Accrued Liability
D. Amortization Payment
iF. Expenses
G. Annual Minimun Obl~ation 1. Payable December 31 (D. + E. + F.)
2. Interest to Year End
3. Annual obligation (1.+ 2.)
H. Actual Contributions
1. State Aid 1999
2. City contribution 1999
3. State Aid 2000*
4. City contribution 2000
* Estimated for 2000
1997 1999
$735,705
351,766
1,349,823
206,757
21,977
2,666,028
2,483,076
182,952
19,620
50,644
11,768
0
82,032
66,128
96,050
$824,086
421,617
1,794,890
284,135
14,433
3,339,161
2,950,888
388,273
34,120
56,095
22,426
112.641
112,641
70,000
$101,813
I. Actuarial Balance Sheet 1. Market value of current assets
2. Unfunded accrued liability
3. Present Value of Future normal costs
4. Total = present value of benefits
1997
$2,483,076
182,952
574,137
3,240,165
1999
$2,950,888
388,273
610,541
3,949,702
I
I
I
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIF~F ASSOCIATION, INC.
December 31, J 999 ,4ctuarial Valuation
4
Changes in the Unfunded Actuarial Liability
A. Expected un_funded actuarial accrued liability
1. Unfunded actuarial accrued liability (AAL) on December 31, 1997
a. Actuarial accrued liability
b. Actuarial value of assets
c. Unfunded actuarial accrued liability (a.-b.)
2. Total normal cost for the year ending December 31, 1998
3. Interest to December 31, 1998 on 1. and 2.
4. Total of 1., 2. and 3.
5. City and state contributions for the year ending December 31, 1998
6. Member contributions for the year ending December 31, 1998
7. Interest to December 31, 1998 on 5. and 6.
8. Sum of 5. through 7.
9. Expected unfunded AAL on December 31, 1998 (4. - 8.)
10. Total normal cost for the year ending December 31, 1999
11. Interest to December 31, 1999 on 9. and 10.
12. Total ofg., 10. and 11.
13. City and state contributions for the year ending December 31, 1999
14. Member contributions'for the year ending December 31, 1999
15. Interest to December 31, 1999 on 13. and 14.
16. Sum of 13. through 15.
17. Expected unfunded AAL on December 31, 1999 (12. - 16.)
B. Actual unfunded actuarial accrued liability 1. Actuarial accrued liability
2. Actuarial value of assets
3. Unfunded AAL on December 31, 1999 (1.~ 2.)
C. Changes in the unfunded actuarial accrued liabili~.
1. Expected unfunded AAL on December 31, 1997
2. Changes
a. Actuarial (gain) or loss
b. Changes in plan provisions
c. Changes in actuarial methods and assumptions
d. Total change
3. Unfunded AA.L on December 31, 1999
$2,666,028
2,483,076
182,952
50,644
11,680
245,276
159,072
0
2,456
161,528
83,748
53,176
6,846
143,770
162,178
0
2.632
164,810
(21,040)
3,339,161
2,950,888
388,273
(21,040)
112,477
296,836
409,313
388,273
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DErARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION
December 31, 1999Actuarial Valuation
Impact of Benefit Increases
It was requested that we determine the financial impact of benefit increases to active and inactive
members. The current benefit level is $510 a month.
For every $10 increase in the monthly benefit, the normal cost will increase $1,100 and the accrued
liability by $65,474. The increase in the accrued liability is amortized over 20 years by statute and a new
amortization period is determined for the entire unfunded accrued liability. The amortization period may
be extended depending on the size of the increase in the accrued liability.
In total, the required contribution will increase by $6,104 for every $10 increase in the monthly benefit.
The following example of the contribution requirement if the benefit level was changed from $510 to
$620. The unfunded accrued liability would increases by $720,214.
Current Increase
Normal Cost 56,095 12,100
Estimated 22,426
Expenses
Amortization 34,120 55,040
Payment
Total
68,195
22,426
89,160
112,641 67,140 179,781
I
I
I
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION, INC.
December 31, 1999 Actuarial Valuation
6
Accrued Benefit Liabilitie.
A. Actuarial vresent value of accumulated Man benefits (APVAB~
1. Vested benefits
a. Participants currently receiving payments
b. Other inactive participants .
c. Active employees
d. Total
2. Nonvested benefits
3. Total
4. Net assets available for benefits (market value)
5. Funded ratio
a. Based on vested benefits (4. + Id.)
b. Based on total accumulated benefits (4. + 3.)
December 31
1997
$660,580
137,232
1,836,898
2,634,710
351,86;3
2,986,573
0
94%
83%
B. Actuarial methods and assumptionc
The actuarial method we have used to determine the APVAB is the accrued benefit cost method.
The significant assumptions used to determine the APVAB include the following:
1999
$2,093,458
421,617
2,777,793
521,396
3,299,189
0
106%
89%
Expected investment return
Life expectancy of participants
Average assumed retirement age
1997
5.00%
1971 GAM
Age 53
or 20 years
1999
5.00%
1971 GAM
Age 53
or 20 years
7
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION, INC.
December $1, 1999 ,4ctuariaI Valuation
A. Active employees 1. Number
2. Average entry age
3. Average years of service
B. Vested terminated ernployees 1. Number
2. Total annual deferred benefits
3. Average annual benefit
C. Retirees
1. Number
2. Total annual benefits being paid'
3. Average annual benefit being paid
D. Widows 1. Number
2. Total annual benefits being paid
3. Average annual benefit being paid
E. Children 1. Number
2. Total annual benefits being paid
3. Average annual benefit being paid
Summary of Participant Data
December 31
1997
37
26.5
10.0
6
$33,120
5,520
19
$104,880
5,520
6
$24,$40
4,140
1
$5,520
5,520
1999
35
27.0
9.8
6
$36,720
6,120
22
$134,640
6,120
6
$29,070
4,845
1
$6,120
6,120
D. Total number of ptlrticipants (A. 1. + B. 1. + C. IO
69
70
8
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION, INC.
December 31, 1999 dctuarial Valuation
Summary_ of Changes in Membership
Terminated
Activ~ Vested Retired Widows
Children
Members on Janua~_ 1. 1998 '
changes in the member group
1. New active members
2. Retirements
3. Separation with deferred annuity
4. Separation, not vested
5. Separation with disability benefit
6. Deaths
7. Widow benefit fi:om Member Death
8. Corrections
9. Total changes
C. Members on Janua~. 1. 2000
37 6 19 6 1
4
(1) (2)
(2) 2
(2)
0)
(2) 0 3
35 6 22
(1)
1
0
6
I
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION
December 31, 1999 Actuarial Valuation
10
.Summary of Plan Provisions
A. Plan t~rovisions as of December 3L 199.°
1. Eligibili _ty:
(a) Members covered: Members of the Mound Volunteer Fire Department Relief
Association, Inc. after having served a one year probationary period. Minimmn age is age
18.
2..Retirement dates:
(a) Normal retirement:
The later of age 50 or after completion of 20 years of service.
3. Pension Amounts:
(a) Monthly Service Pension: $510 per month effective September 1, 1998. Prior to this
date the monthly amount was $460.
(b) Deferred Service Pension: Termination prior to age 50 with 20 years of service. The
deferred monthly pension is payable at age 50 and is $510.
5. Death and Survivor Benefits, If an active, deferred, or retired member dies, the following
benefits are available:
(a) Funeral Benefit: $1,500
Co) Widows and Children's benefits: Widow receives 75% of member's mOnthly pension
for life or until marriage.
Surviving children receive 25% of members monthly pension until age 18 or marriage.
If the event of death of member and wife, children receive $510 per month until age 18 or
marriage.
The maximum family benefit is $510 per month.
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION
December 31, 1999 Actuarial Valuation
SUmmary of Plan Provisions (continued)
11
B. Plan provisions effective after December 31, 1999
No future plan improvements beyond December 31, 1999 were recognized in determining the cash
contributions to the plan.
C. Changes in plan provisions since prior Fear
Benefits were mended to increase in year 1998 as outlined in the plan provisions.
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION
December 3!, J 999 Actuarial Valuation
12
Actuarial Assumptions & Methods
A. Economic Assumptions
Interest rate
5.00%
B. Demographic Assumptions
Mortality
1971 Group Annuity Mortality Table
Turnover
None
Retirement
Disability
Form of payment
The latest of age 53 or after 20 years of service.
Age retirement costs loaded 1%.
Life annuity.
I
I
I
MOUND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION
December 3I, i 999,~ctuariaI Valuation
13
I
!
4
Actuarial Assumptions & Methods (continued)
C. Actuarial Methods
Funding basis
· Normal Cost and Actuarial
Accrued Liability
The Entry Age Normal actuarial cost method. This actuarial
funding method is one of the projected benefit cost methods. The
normal cost for each active member is the annual mount required
from the member's entry date to retirement date so that the
accumulated contributions at termination or retirement will equal
the liability at that time. This cost is expressed as a level annual
mount.
Actuarial Value of Assets
Benefits Valued
The actuarial value of assets is equal to the market value of assets.
All benefits summarized in the plan provisions section of this
report.
The actuarial assumptions and methods used in this valuation are identical to those used last year.
z
ILl
n,
0
0
0
0
0
>
FUND HISTORY
C~'Ly Con~b~on~ 2%
1973
1974
1975
~976
~977
1978
1979
1980
1981
~982
83
84
1.985
1986
1987
1988
~989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
3.50
5.10
5.43
5.80
$ 6.00
6.50
$ 9743.00 $ 11,514.00
$ 7410.00 $ 15,090.00
$ 10,589.00 $ 12,443.00
$ 13,419~.00 $ 13,782.00
$ 13,158.00 $ 16,300.00
$ 20,808.00 $ 18,901.0.0
$ 25,421.00 $ 21,689.00
$ 9780.00 $ 23,906.00
$ 41,271.00 $ 26,244.00
.$ 32,880.00 $ 35,495.00
$ 33,000.00 $ 29,974.00
$ 36.300.00 $ 31,249.00
'$ 39,930.00 $ 34~021.00
$ 43,923.00 $ 39,620.00
$ 48,325.00 $' 42,194.00
$ 53,147.00 $ 44,857.00
$ 58,462.00 $ 45,818.00
$ 64,308.00 ~ 46,024.00
$'66,880.00 $ 46,041.00
$ 69,556.00 $ 45,725.00
$ 73,338.00 $ 42,738.00
$ 75,231.00 $ 45,541.00
$ 80,500.00 $ 48,685.00
$ 85,394.00 $ 64,108.00
$ 88,810.00 $ 63,412.00
$ 92,360.00 $. 64,712.00
$ 96,050.00 $ 66,128.00
$101,810.00 $ 68.--,.00
70.00
120.00
145.oo
185.00
21o.oo
240.00
2so.oo
290.00
350.00
395.00
425.00
$460.00
$ 51o.oo
December 12, 2000
RESOLUTION NO. 00-
RESOLUTION APPROVING INCREASE IN PENSION
BENEFIT FOR FIRE RELIEF ASSOCIATION
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2001
WHEREAS, the Fire Department Relief Association has had its
Actuarial Study done for the year ending 1999; and
WHEREAS, they are now requesting an increase in pension benefits
fi.om $510.00 per month to $ per month, effective January 1, 2001.
WHEREAS, there are adequate funds in this fund to allow these
increases; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Mound, Minnesota, does hereby approve the Fire Department Relief
Association's request to an increase in pension benefits as follows:
$ per month, effective January 1, 2001.
The foregoing Resolution was moved by Council Member
and seconded by Council Member
The following Council Members voted in the affirmative:
The following Council Members voted in the negative:
Attest: City Manager
Mayor
December 12, 2000
RESOLUTION NO. 00-
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL 2001 GENERAL FUND
BUDGET IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,266,340;
SETTING THE LEVY AT $2,065,800
LESS THE HOMESTEAD AGRICULTURAL CREDIT (HACA)
OF $502,920, RESULTING IN A FINAL
CERTIFIED LEVY OF $1,562,880;
APPROVING THE OVERALL BUDGET FOR 2001
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, does
hereby adopt the following 2001 General Fund Budget appropriations:
City Council
Promotions
Cable TV
City Manager/Clerk
Elections/Registration
Assessing
Finance
Computer
Legal
Police
Emergency Preparedness
Planning/Inspections
Street
City Property/Buildings
Parks
Recreation
Contingencies
Transfers
81,320
4,000
48,000
229,430
2,300
73,450
196,830
18,950
118,980
1,125,850
6,950
261,980
496,120
80 440
247,740
42260
25000
206,740
TOTAL GENERAL FUND 3,266,340
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound,
Minnesota, does hereby direct the County Auditor to levy the following taxes for collection in
2001:
December 12, 2000
SPECIAL LEVIES
Bonded Indebtedness
Unfunded Accrued Liability of Public Pension Funds
Total Special Levies
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUE LEVY
TOTAL TO BE LEVIED FOR 2001
Less Homestead Agricultural Credit Aid (HACA)
FINAL CERTIFIED LEVY
84,590
33,350
117,940
1,947,860
2,065,800
-502,920
1,562,880
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound,
Minnesota, does hereby adopt the final overall budget for 2001 as follows:
GENERAL FUND
As per above
3,266,340
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
Area Fire Service Fund
Capital Improvement Fund
Cemetery Fund
Dock Fund
TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
415,850
2,821,000
7,500
144,620
3,388,970
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
Storm Water Utility
Recycling Fund
Liquor Fund
Water Fund
Sewer Fund
TOTAL ENTERPRISE FUNDS
712,000
125,480
551,450
478,620
948,210
2,815,760
December 12, 2000
SUMMARY
General Fund
Special Revenue Funds
Enterprise Funds
3,266,340
3,388,970
2,815,760
TOTAL ALL FUNDS
9,471,070
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound,
Minnesota, held the Truth in Taxation Public Hearing on Monday, December 4, 2000, for
consideration of the 2001 Proposed Budget and determined that the Monday, December 11, 2000,
meeting was not necessary.
The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember
by Councilmember
, and seconded
The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative:
The following Councilmembers voted in the negative:
Mayor
Attest: City Manager
AMM FAX
NEWS
Association of
Metropolitan
Municipalities
Metropolitan hearings and
meetings regarding Housing
performance still scheduled
Despite a huadline and article
regarding the housing performance
proposed npdate (100 poi~ts) that
aopeared in tl~e Nov. 30, 2000 Minne-
apoli~ Star end Tribune. the MelroDo[i-
tan Council has flo~ ~aker~ any ~ct~on
on the Issuu. A~ r~po~cd ~n an ear';er
AMM F~, NEWS and c~r;es=c~denc~
from the Metropolitan Council the
propo3al will be subjecf to series of
public meetings and hearings that
begin with a public meeting on Der. em-
ber 18 in Minneapolis Rna could
conclude wlt~ Metropetan Council
action in March 2001.
AMM Housing Performance
Task Force Meets
The AMM board ha.. -t :~i' ':-''' - ' comptellensNe plans or the regional
Jworking group to r~.view ,he Dro-
posal The worklP,; g~uu'.,:' ~'~: i,~c!udes
representative3 of the metrCFc'ite.n
Counties. At its first meet(n; :; Friday,
Dec 1,2009 the gfou~ reviewed the
propos~ and after e discussion the
following concerns were tdentlfled;
· The proposal a~empts to link trans-
privation to housing, Several mem-
bers were not ce~ain if the link could
be established Ot~ers ~hOugh[ that
the ~ouslng link couid ~e tied to
~IMM ,~ws Fax is fa.v~d ta all 4 MM ciIy
manag~ and ad~nistrators, Icgislafi~
contuct~ attd Doard member- p/aa ~e share
tbis fn~ with yo~r ~yo~, council~,,tbc~
and ~ta~ to k~cp ~a~m abrea~r t~ i~or-
,~. Paul, M,~'
blueprint,
· If there will b~- housing petrol ~ance
crlt~ria, tl~e applica[fi, and not thc
service area shou!d be evalu_~ted
Thc prepos~{ doe~ ~ot fec0g~lze
hot~ing effo~s of cuunti~s that arc
oRen the applicant for tmnspor:afion
projects.
· The propoAal seems to assume that
the region ~as not provided a~rd
abl~ I~ousing. Thc region, however,
has provided and continues To
prowde affo~ablu housing,
· The proposal revi~s past
[~ance and doc~ not encourag~ new
housin9 pr~udion.
The task force wil~ meet again and
will attempt to develop a set of pnlicy
principles that cnuld be used In
developing shoA and long-term poli.
cles.
If you have any comments or
~ugoestions regarding the t~pic p~case
c~ntact Gene at the AMM.
T66 .t0 T66 a~cl
uosu~H s!pu~
Additional Meeting
Date for Housing
Performance Proposal
Considered
The Mettupotitan Council Livable
Communities will consider a staff
recommendation To add a public meet.
~r~g to discuss housing performance
criteria. The meeting could be held
December 20 after the M~tropolitan
COUnCil me,ting- An approximate
st~rtin9 time could be 6:00 p.r11.
State Agencies
Propose Amendments
to Tax Exempt Bond
Allocation Law
the Dep~C'.mcnt e, F'na ..
thc Minnesota Hou.~in¢ Finaf~ce
Aoc. ncy have develuped a proposal
that ~monds the existing bond allnca-
tion law. The propnsal wood Increase
th~. allocation for eligible uses (hou¢-
ing, manufacturing, and public fRo. iii-
tics) as the volume, cap increase~ as
~,thonzed by federal law. The
pfuposal would provide that som~. of
the manufacturing allocation could be
u.~ed for student Io~r', bonds end the
stat~ imposed limi~ on housing
bonds would be repealed. AS a result
of the repeal on I~ou~ing limits, there
wuuld be no priority for units with two
or more bedrooms. A Copy of the
proposal is avallabl~ by calling Laurie
at the AMM office (651) 215..4000
xK,[ O!A 6I:GT:C;I 066Z t,6 3aQ
Page 1 of 4
KandisHanson
From: "Barbara Olson" <olsonb(~westonka.k'12.mn.us>
To: <kandishanson@msn.com>;
Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 11:05 AM
Subject: westonka.news Vol. 1, No. 10
west0nka.news
Vol. 1, No. 10
December 8, 2000
The Westonka Public Schools' channel for direct electronic communication to interested
parents, staff, and community members, providing up-to-date information about education in
District 277. westonka.news publishes weekly.
Westonka Public Schools, 2450 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite A, Mound MN 55364;
http://www.westonka.k12.mn.us; tel: 952.491.8006; fax: 952.491.8043; e-mail:
welisten@westonka, kl 2. mn. us.
Contents
1. News Briefs
--New Classes Added at Mound Westonka High School for 2001-2002
--Highway 110 Upgrade by Hennepin County
--Thanksgiving Gift to Westonka Senior Citizens Foundation
2. Focus Topic: Community Education Wants Your Opinion
3. Upcoming Events
4. We Want to Hear from You
NEWS BRIEFS
**New Classes Added at Mound Westonka High School for 2001-2002'*
Three new Mound Westonka High School course offerings for 2001-2002 were approved at
the Special Study Session of the School Board on November 27. The new courses include:
Advanced Geology and Paleontology, Advanced Placement Government, and a Basic
Standards remediation course. The remediation course will be required for all 11th and 12th
graders who have not yet passed the basic standards test in math or reading.
**Highway 110 Upgrade by Hennepin County**
12/08/2000
Page 2 of 4
Business Manager Chuck Herdegen has learned from Hennepin County that the upgrade on
County Road 110, from the Mound line (at Eddie's Marine) north to the four-way stop will begin
this spring, and may continue into the fall. This will include significant grading, including
eliminating the rolling hills, and installing a stoplight and left-turn lane at Sunnyfield Road. At
this time, the County has not yet shared with the School District the County's plans for
detouring traffic (including school buses).
**Gifts of Appreciation to Westonka Senior Citizens Foundation**
Several recent fundraising efforts within the Westonka Public Schools have raised thousands
of dollars for the Westonka Senior Citizens Foundation.
The Mound Westonka High School Student Senate spearheaded a buildingwide campaign that
resulted in a $1000 donation, presented on behalf of MWHS students and staff.
Individual school district employees, the Early Childhood Advisory Council, and Adventure
Club parents contributed $1128 over a two-week period in November.
Later this month, students and staff at Grandview Middle School have plans of their own to
raise money for the Senior Center by holding a schoolwide raffle, with the winner earning the
title "Principal for the Day."
The monies raised will help furnish the new Westonka Senior Center. The successful
fundraising efforts are directly related to the high level of appreciation school staff, parents,
and students have for the senior citizens of our community. For example, volunteers at the
Senior Center have cheerfully handled hundreds of thousands of pieces of bulk mail, stuffed
thousands of information packets for school orientations, made truckloads of buttons for school
events and referendum committees, and folded a forest of paper for school mailings. They
serve as volunteers in classrooms and for projects throughout the district. And they are some
of the Westonka community's best and most vocal advocates for strong public schools.
FOCUS TOPIC
**Community Education Wants Your Opinion**
A recent survey by a professional firm found a 99% satisfaction rate among Westonka
Community Education and Services customers. According to the same survey, 32% of local
households had members who used Community Education programs during the past year, one
of the highest participation rates in the metro area.
The staff and citizen members of the Westonka Community Education and Services Advisory
Council want to continue building what is clearly a strong program by updating its five-year
strategic plan. With leadership provided by the citizen-based Advisory Council, staff and
council members are gathering input from community education customers regarding
perceived strengths and weaknesses of the program.
In order to develop an on-target strategic plan, they need your help.
12~08/2000
,
Page 3 of 4
If you would be willing to share your thoughts, please take a minute to answer the following
three questions:
1) What do you think are the current strengths of Westonka Community Education? (Example:
quality of class offerings, convenient locations.)
2) What do you find are current weaknesses of Westonka Community Education? (Example:
inadequate gym space.)
3) What should Westonka Community Education do in the future that it's not doing now?
(Example: create a resource library for instructors and coaches.)
Please choose whichever reply option works best for you:
--e-mail your comments to Mike Gilbertson, Advisory Council member,
i nventurer@earthlink.net
-e-mail your comments to welisten@westonka, k12.mn, us
--fax your comments to 952.491.8043, attention Lori Jenkins
--call the District Feedback Line at 952.491.8260
Thanks for taking a few moments to share your opinions.
UPCOMING EVENTS
--Westonka School Board meeting, December 11, 7 p.m. Share the Success, 7:30 Regular
Meeting, Focus Topic: School Start Times will start at approximately 8 p.m.; Media Center,
Shirley Hills Primary.
--Grade 5 Band Concert, December 12, 7 p.m., free admission. Grandview Middle School,
1881 Commerce Boulevard, Mound.
--Mound Westonka High School Holiday Choir Concert, December 14, 7:30 p.m., $3 admission
at the door. Mound Westonka High School, 5905 Sunnyfield Road East, Minnetrista.
WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU!
We would like to hear your feedback on any of the topics above, or anything other school-
related issue. Use whichever way works best for you: send an e-mail message to
<welisten@westonka.k12.mn.us>; call the District Feedback Line at 952.491.8260; or mail
your comments to Barbara Olson, Community Relations Coordinator, Westonka Public
Schools, 2450 Wilshire Blvd., Suite A, Mound MN 55364
Westonka Public Schools
2450 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite A
12/08/2000
LEN HARRELL
Chief of Police
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MOUND POLICE
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Telephone 472-0621
Dispatch 525-6210
Fax 472-0656
EMERGENCY 911
Kandis Hanson
ChiefLen Harrell
Monthly Report for November, 2000
STATISTICS
The police department responded to 835 calls for service during the month
of November. There were 35 Part I offenses reported. Those offenses
included 2 aggravated, 4 burglary, 2 arson, 1 vehicle theft, and 26
larcenies.
There were 72 Part II offenses reported. Those offenses 4 child abuse, 2
forgery/NSF check, 7 criminal damage to property, 8 narcotics, 13 liquor
law violations, 7 DUI's, 10 domestics (2 with assaults), 7 harassment, and
14 other offenses.
The patrol division issued 95 adult. Parking violations accounted for an
additional 70 tickets. Warnings were issued to 71 individuals for a variety
of violations.
There were 3 adults and 1 juvenile arrested for felonies and 30 adults and
13 juveniles arrested for misdemeanors. There were 2 felony and 9
misdemeanor adult warrant arrests and 2 misdemeanor juvenile arrests.
The departmem assisted in 13 vehicle accidents; 1 with injuries. There
were 29medical emergencies and 40 animal complaints. Mound assisted
other agencies on 18 occasions in November and requested assistance 6
times.
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
MONTHLY REPORT - November, 2000
II.
III.
IV.
INVESTIGATIONS
The Investigators worked on 7 child protection issues and 1 criminal
sexual conduct ease in November. Other eases included burglary, assault,
theft, narcotics, absenting, malicious punishment of a child, possession of
stolen property, fleeing a police officer, counterfeit money issue, -domestic
assault, damage to property, harassment, vehicle theft, and NSF checks.
Formal complaints were issued for malicious punishment of a child, 2na
and 3~ degree assaults, theft, littering, gross misdemeanor DWI, DWI
refusal to test, and trespass.
PERSONNEL/STAFFING
The department used approximately 63 hours of overtime during the
month of November. Officers used 22 hours of comp-time, 137 hours of
sick time, 24 holidays, and 82 hours of vacation. Officers worked 80
hours at double time during the holiday weekend. Officers earned 12
hours of comp time.
Officer Ewald continues to recover from shoulder surgery and will be out
at least two more months. Sgt. Truax continues at the SWMDTF fulfilling
our commitment to provide a coordinator vacated when Sgt. Grand retired.
TRAINING
Officers Swensen and I attended the International Association of Chiefs of
Police conference in San Diego and received the ITT/IACP Community
Policing Award on behalf of the department. Officer Swensen made an
excellent presentation on our behalf. Seminars attended included
Leadership & Ethics, Community Policing Initiatives, Media Relations,
and Organizational Change Issues.
Several officers attended the PTAC course on search and seizure update
and Officer Nelson attended Interview and Interrogation in preparation for
entering investigation after the first of the year.
COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER
CSO Salter had 321 calls for service; 22 animal complaints, 50 ordinance
violations, and 247 miscellaneous contacts.
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
MONTHLY REPORT- November, 2000
VI. RESERVES
The reserves donated 101 hours of community service in the month of
November. The officers continue to work sporting events for the school
district and braved the cold weather to assist with the tree lighting
ceremony. The unit consists of seven members currently.