The URL can be used to link to this page

2001-06-12PLEASE TURN OFF AT CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS, AGENDA MOUND CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, JUNE 12, 2001 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. OPEN MEETING - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVE AGENDA, WITH ANY AMENDMENTS *CONSENT AGENDA *A. APPROVE MINUTES: *B. *C. *D. *E. *F. *G. *H. MAY 22, 2001 MAY 29, 2001 APPROVE PAYMENT OF CLAIMS APPROVE FINAL PAYMENT TO DIAMOND 5 FOR COAST TO COAST DEMOLITION APPROVE IMPREST FUND FOR PET LICENSING PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS RANDY MORIARITY: 4536 DENBIGH ROAD CASE #00-69: MINOR SUBDIVISION CASE #00-79: VARIANCE APPROVE VERIZON WIRELESS LEASE AGREEMENT: CHATEAU LANE WATERTOWER APPROVE SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING: RH DEVELOPMENT CASE #01-20: SLOPE EASEMENT VACATION & CASE #01-03: BUTTERNUT ROAD VACATION: JUNE 26 APPROVE PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT: JOHN & LINDA VERKENNES - 4771 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT ON ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA. (LIMIT TO 3 MINUTES PER SPEAKER.) PAGE 7591-7595 7596 7597-7619 7620-7623 7624-7625 7626-7658 7659-7679 7680-7692 PLEASE TURN OFF AT CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. o 10. 11. ACTION ON LANGDON BAY FINAL PLAT REVISIONS: RI-I DEVELOPMENT ACTION APPROVING RECOMMENDATION TO REJECT BID FOR WESTEDGE BOULEVARD STREET IMPROVEMENTS ACTION AUTHORIZING SALE OF BONDS FOR 2001 BONDING PROJECTS ACTION ON EDC SUGGESTION TO SUNSET ECONOMIC COMMISSION ACTION ACCEPTING COMMISION RESIGNATIONS BILL VOSS: PLANNING COMMISSION MARK BREWER: EDC SET SPECIAL MEETING WORKSHOPS A. APPROVE AMENDED DATE/TIME TO DISCUSS DOCKS AND COMMONS PROGRAM AND FEES B. APPROVE DATE/TIME TO MEET WITH LANGDON LANE NEIGHBORHOOD ON SEWER BACKUP CLAIMS C. APPROVE DATE/TIME FOR PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATION OF MUELLER-LANSING PROPOSAL, WITH OPTIONS D. APPROVE DATE/TIME TO GIVE STAFF 2002 BUDGET DIRECTION INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS 7693 7694-7696 7697-7738 7739-7742 7743-7744 7745 A. LMC correspondence 7746-7752 B. AMM Fax News 7753 C. LMCD communications 7754-7780 D. Westonka Schools communications 7781-7788 E. Retirement notice: Jerry Henke 7789 F. LMC correspondence on Polsten et al law suit 7790-7791 G. Senior Center newsletter 7792 H. Acknowledge charitable gambling donations 7793-7796 I. Article: Institutional Integrity 7797 J. Mound Police Department monthly report: May 2001 7798-7799 K. Lake Minnetonka Association request for contribution 7800-7801 L. FYI: Comp Plan amendment approval 7802-7813 12. ADJOURN 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. cit);qfmound, com. MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 22, 2001 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday, May 22, 2001, at 7:30 p.m. in the council chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City. ~ Councilmembers Present: Mayor Meisel, Councilmembers Bob Brown, Mark Hanus, Klm Anderson and Peter Meyer. Others Present: City Attorney, John Dean; City Manager, Kandis Hanson; Acting City Clerk, Bonnie Ritter; City Engineer, john Cameron; City Planners Loren Gordon and Bruce Chamberlain; Parks Director, Jim Fackler; Bob Lindahl; Mike Conlan of Gramercy; Steve McDonald; Bill and Dorothy Netka, Ken Berres, Bob Polston, Lorrie Ham, Jo Longpre, Bruce and Patti Dodds, Rhonda Eurich, Christine Valerius, Mike Mueller, Phil lansing, Paula Larson, Sally Custer, Sharon & Phil Baumel, Jackie and Wayne Davis, Lisa martin, John Babler, Dale and Becky Simon, Karl Weisenborn, Byron and Gloria Petersen, Keith Brown, Rick and Susan Bloomquist, Jeff Hanratty, Robed and Elsie Beadle, Peter Johnson, Michael Gardner, Susan Gardner, Carol Lindgren. Consent Agenda: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine in nature by the Council and will be enacted by a roil carl vote. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a Councilmember or citizen so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence. 1. OPEN MEETING AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Meisel called the meeting to order at 7:38 p.m. and the Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 2. APPROVE AGENDA City Manager Kandis Hanson requested that item 5 be removed from the agenda at the request of the applicant, and that item Sa, MetroPlains Cell Tower, be added. MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Brown to approve the agenda as amended. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 3. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Brown, seconded by Anderson to approve the consent agenda. All voted in favor. Motion carried. A. Approval of minutes: May 8, 2001. B. Approve payment of claims in the amount of $159,914.48 C. Approve Licenses and Permits - contingent upon all required forms, insurance and fees, etc. being submitted, (1) American Legion Memorial Day Parade -7591 - Mound City Council Minutes - May 22, 2001 (2) Fire (3) City (4) Department City Employee Recognition Event Temporary On-Sale 3.2 Beer Temporary one-day Set-ups Days Permits Carnival, Craft Show & Concessions, Fireworks, Public Gathering, Parade, Dance, On-Sale 3.2 Beer (for dance at . Pond Arena & music at Mound Bay Park), Set-ups, Live Musical Concert. Liquor License Renewals Club On-Sale: VFW Post 5113 and American Legion Sunday Sales: VFW Post 5113 and American Legion On-Sale Wine: Al & Alma's Supper Club and House of Moy 3.2 Beer On-Sale: Al & Alma's and House of Moy Off-Sale 3.2 Beer: By the Way Snack Shop, Mainstreet Market, PDQ Food Store, and SuperAmerica D. Planning Commission Recommendations: RESOLUTION NO. 01-45: RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A SIDEYARD SETBACK FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4711 CUMBERLAND ROAD, P & Z CASE #01-14. RESOLUTION NO. 01-46: RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A STREET SETBACK VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4525 DENBIGH ROAD, P & Z CASE #01-15. RESOLUTION NO. 01-47: RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A HARDCOVER VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4957 EDGEWATER DRIVE, P & Z CASE NO. 01-16. E. Extention for reconsideration of wetlands conservation act no-loss request by Timothy Becker, Lots 5-8, Block 4, Harrison Shores Development- XXXX Three Points Boulevard - Extension being from May 22, 2001, to August 24, 2001. 4. COMMENTS FROM CITIZENS Residents from Langdon Lane addressed the Council regarding sewer back-up that occurred on April 24. After discussion it was decided that after input is received from the adjusters, the Council, Metro Waste Commission and residents sit down and resolve this issue. Sa. METROPLAINS CELL TOWER Loren Gordon informed the Council that Qwest and MetroPlains have agreed on a location for the cell tower. One of the issues with this location is the setback from the property line of parcel 11, which would need to be addressed through the variance process. MetroPlains has indicated that they will be submitted a variance application. 2 -7592- Mound City Council Minutes - May 22, 2001 6. 2001 BONDING PROJECTS Jim Prosser of Ehlers & Associates, reviewed the basic framework of the proposed three bond issues. Meyer stated that he cannot support the liquor store bond sale because of the Haddorf Field issue and because MetroPlains is tied in with the new liquor store building. Anderson expressed similar feelings, but stated that she realizes the importance of the liquor store revenues to the City. MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Brown to adopt the following resolution. All voted in favor. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 01-48: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1,605,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION UTILITY REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2001A AN AMOUNT NOT OT EXCEED $780,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2001C MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Brown to adopt the following resolution. Ayes: Brown, Hanus, Meisel and Anderson. Nayes: Meyer. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 01-49: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF AN AMOUNT NOT OT EXCEED $1,155,000 LIQUOR STORE REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2001B 7. GRAMERCY CORPORATION Discussion on this item was held concurrent with the HRA meeting. Mayor Meisel stepped down during this discussion due to the perceived conflict of interest and Mark Hanus took over as Mayor. Mike Conlan, President of Gramercy Corporation, reviewed initial concept plans for the Lake Langdon site. H.e is preparing to get comments from the public, have an informational meeting with plans to hand out, give a visual presentation, etc. he does not want to ram through planning this project without getting the public's comments. He is interested in what people think of the plan and wants to know what they want and like. Mayor Meisel returned to preside over the balance of the meeting. 8. ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT BY INDEPENDENT AUDITORS Finance Director Gino Businaro introduced Steve McDonald of Arbo, Arbo, Eick & Meyers, LLP, who presented the auditor's report to the Council. This report is available at the public library for the public's review. MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Anderson to accept the auditor's report and financial audit as presented. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 3 -7593- Mound City Council Minutes - May 22, 2001 9. GUIDELINES FOR PROPERTY OWNERS OF PRIVATELY DEDICATED COMMONS John Dean presented recommendations for guidelines for facilitating dialogue between property owners in subdivisions containing privately dedicated commons. MOTION by Brown, seconded bY Hanus to accept these guidelines as presented. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 10. AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO CSAH 15 AND 110 Bob Lindahl, with Kennedy & Graven, reviewed the agreement for right of way acquisition and the schedule of tasks to be completed. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus to approve this agreement and submit it to the County Board for their approval. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 11. JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR USE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus to adopt the following resolution. All voted in favor. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 01.50: RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR USE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT OF JULY 1, 2001 12. TASK FORCE FOR ISLAND PARK FACILITY Suggestions for a Task Force on the Island Park facility were discusSed along with whom should serve on this task force. An ad will be run in The Laker, asking for interested parties for this Task Force, along with others coming from the designated groups. It was decided that a representative from community facilities, as stated in the guidelines, will not be included at this time. Consideration will be given to this group after results from the Laker ad are received. 13. PARK AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS Ao Naming of Parks and Public Facilities and Providing Memorials to Parks MOTION by Brown, seconded by Anderson to accept the guidelines for naming of parks and public facilities and providing memorials to parks. All ayes. Fishing Access in Designated Areas Councilmember Hanus informed the Council that the Docks Commission wishes to get the Council's input on the concept of having additional designated fishing areas. Discussion followed regarding where these areas could be located, the liability of designating areas, etc. Hanus suggested that this item be referred to the Parks Commission for input as to where fishing areas could be located, parking availability, accessibility, etc. Jim Fackler will get input from the LMCD in reference to this subject. 4 -7594- Mound City Council Minutes - May 22, 2001 This item will be placed on the Dock Commission's agenda for their consideration. 14. SET SPECIAL MEETING WORKSHOPS A. June 13, 2001, at 6:30 p.m. is set for a special meeting with the Planning Commission for discussion on the nuisance abatement ordinances. B. June 25, 2001, at 6:30 p.m. is set for a special meeting to discuss the docks program and fees. 15. EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING POLSTON, ET AL, LAW SUIT Upon returning from Executive Session, which ran concurrent with the HRA meeting, City Attorney John Dean explained that the HRA and Council received report and direction from Sue Sager, legal counsel with the League of Minnesota Cities, regarding the subject litigation. 16. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS A. LMC Friday Fax B. LMCD communication C. FYI: Administrative approval for street closing: Fire Dept. Fish Fry D. AMM call for members to Policy Committee E. Financial Reports: April 2001 F. AMM Bill Tracking Report; May 11,200t G. Westonka Healthy Community Collaborative Communication H. AMM Fax news I. Article: What Makes A Leader? J. Westonka Schools correspondence 17. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Brown, seconded by Anderson to adjourn the meeting at 11:19 p.m. Brown, Hanus, Meisel and Anderson. Nayes: Meyer. Motion carried. Ayes: Attest: Acting City Clerk Mayor 5 -7595- MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING OF MAY 29, 2001 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in special session on Tuesday, May 29, 2001, at 6:30 p.m. in the council chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City. Councilmembers present: Mayor Meisel, Councilmembers Bob Brown, Mark Hanus, Klm Anderson and Peter Meyer. Planning Commission Members Present: Geoff Michael, Jerry Clapsaddle, Cklair Hasse, Orvin Buma, Mike Mueller and Frank Weiland. Park Commission Members Present: Ron Motyka, Susan Taylor, John Beise, Norm Domholt, Derrick Hentz, and Gene Hostetler. Dock and Commons Commission Members Present: Jim Funk, Greg Eurich, Gerald Jones, and Frank Ahrens. Economic Development Commission Members Present: Suzanne Claywell and Stan Drahos. Others Present: City Manager, Kandis Hanson; and Acting City Clerk, Bonnie Ritter. Mayor Meisel called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. POLICY RELATING TO APPOINTMENTS TO COMMISSIONS Discussion took place among the commissions and council regarding the policy relating to appointments to commissions, as stated in Resolution No. 01-15. The State Statutes will be researched, as well as questions answered on the interview process (number of questions, and if questions must all be the same for all candidates), and clarification of the selection procedures. ETHICS GUIDELINES City Manager, Kandis. Hanson stated that the ethics guidelines are basically used to identify potential conflicts of interest on issues being considered. Questions were raised as to the legality of the disclosure statement and if the guidelines should be different for elected and appointed officials. Most in attendance indicated that they agree with the guidelines, but without the financial disclosure portion. The State Statutes will be researched regarding these guidelines and financial statement request. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Michael to adjourn at 8:56 p.m. Attest: Acting City Clerk Mayor -7596- PAGE 1 P U R C H A S E J O U R N A L AP-C02-O1 CITY OF MOUND , 8- 800-3130 1,040.00 THRU 12-31-00 AUDIT SERVICES 81-4350-3130 '~ A0270 010528 AMERICAN EXPRESS VENDOR TOTAL 226.63 494.42 04-23-01 ST. CLOUD, KELLY INN 01-4140-4110 A03~9 00013253 50.00 SPRING EMERG VEHICLE OPERAT 22-4170-4110 A0380 K63409313 6/12/01 6/12/01 6/12/01 6112/01 18.65 THRU 05-14-01 PAGER 18.65 JRNL-CD 214.12 JRNL-CD 01-4140-3950 101 101 ~'. A0404 16160 A0432 010526 6/12101 6/12101 6/12/01 6112/01 6/12/01 6/12/01 80.16 JRNL-CD 282.05 31.66 31.66 MOUND BAY PARK PORTABLE TOILET THRU 05-24-01 952-250-0429 JRNL-CD 295.50 JRNL-CD 101 01-4340-3900 01-4040-3220 10~ 10] -7597- PAGE 2 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L AP-C02-01 CITY OF MOUND' : i"~i"i~. !:.:i' ~,::~: :~UE.! :, ',L :: i~;. ,i~:i i i:.,:i ~i i;.i..:~:i;:;i~,!: ~:,:!~:'i: ~!'~ ~i~ii:i!:i:~: :'; ,'' 6/12/01 6/12/01 988.50 JRNL-CD :'!i 21453300 2,566.80 LIQUOR ~ 71-7100-9510 ~'~ 6/12/01 6/12/01 2,566.80 JRNL-CD 101 COFFEE COFFEE ' BO600 10090879 31.66 05-01 GARBAGE PICKUP #CM40120 01-4280-3750 31.66 05-01 GARBAGE PICKUP #CM40120 73-7300-3750 .~',[~. 6/~2/0[ 6/~2/0~ 67.0~ JRNL-CD ~0~ .:B0603 ~0084612 289.14 ROLL-OFF 22-4170-3750 ; B0631 91740452 157.45 BULBS--PARTIAL 01-4320-2300 ~ 6/12/01 6/~2/0% I57.~5 JRNL-CD :'::~ 9~B-Z ~,~3Z.23 SEARCH EXPENSES 0~-A~90-3~00 C0859 D8986~ ~.7~ B~T 0~-42~0-2250 -7598- PAGE 3 AP-C02-O~ 6/12101 6/12101 CHAMPION AUTO VENDOR TOTAL CHEMSEARCH VENDOR TOTAL PURCHASE CITY OF MOUND 1.77 BIT 5.31 JRNL-CD 96.99 166.35 JOURNAL 78-7800-2250 6112/01 6/12101 4.60 952-472-0607/14 LONG DISTANCE 4.33 952-472-0610 LONG DISTANCE 2.14 952-472-0611 LONG DISTANCE 811.02 JRNL-CD 01-4190-3220 01-4040-3220 01-4340-3220 101 6112/01 6112/01 869.90 JRNL-CD 101 C0940 V372408 ']<!!! C0970 64915121 67296178 6112/01 6/12/01 6/12/01 6/12/01 6/12/01 6/12/01 31.30 COFFEE CUPS 265.54 MIX 265.54 JRNL-CD 110.84 MIX 110.84 JRNL-CD 90.00 JRNL-CD 01-4020-4120 71-7100-9540 71-7100-9540 10~ 10¸ -7599- PAGE 4 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L AP-C02-OZ CITY OF MOUND CON-WAY CENTRAL EXPRESS VENDOR TOTAL 6/12/0i 6/12/01 90.00 238.00 JRNL-CD 10' 6112101 6112101 510.00 JRNL-CD 6/12/01 6/12/01 3Q7.00 JRNL-CD lO! 6/12/01 6/12/01 ii 345597 ,:~'i D^NKO EMERGEN£Y E~IUIPMENT VENDOR TOTAL ~::" 136736 '-:: 6/12/01 6/12/01 1,242.27 JRNL-CD 226.95 HOSE ASSEMBLY, ETC. 76.82 HELMET FRONT 2004.49 16.90 MISCELLANEOUS 16.90 JRNL-CD 101 22-4170-2270 22-4170-2200 71-7100-9550 101 137451 6/12/01 6/12/01 35.30 MIX 35.30 JRNL-CD 71-7100-9540 10] -7600- PAGE 5 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L AP-C02-OI CITY OF MOUND ~(!i DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES VENDOR TOTAL ~0o.00 '~" D1300 033935 5.81 D1350 010526 41.00 ' ~/12/01 6/1.2/01 41.00 6/12/01 6/12/01 94.00 6/12/01 6/12/01 53.70 NAME PLATES (2) THRU 05-26-01 LP GAS CHARGES JRNL-CD JRNL-CD JRNL-CD 01-4340-2200 01-4280-2210 101 101 101 6112101 6/12101 1,867.70 JRNL-CD 101 E1472 10912 J E 1515 236 8 6/12/01 6/12/01 396.00 7,525.00 7,525.00 JULY-DEC 2001 SIREN MAINTENANC 05-01 CURBSIDE RECYCLING JRNL-CD 01-4150-3260 70-4270-4200 b/12/O1 6/12/01 348.30 JRNL-CD -7601 - PAGE 6 P U R C H A S E J O U R N A L AP-C02-O1 CITY OF MOUND FIRSTAR TRUST COMPANY VENDOR TOTAL 348.30 F1719 0~0604 75.00 2001 BOOT ALLOWANCE 01-4280-2240 i;'i F1732 15360 357.50 THRU 04-t6-01 PROFESSIONAL SER 01-4190-3100 ~ '~ 6/12/01 6/12/01 357.50 JRNL-CD :~*:} J 27.28 05-15-01 {JNIFORMS 73-7300-22~0 . :'~ ~ 27.28 05-Z5-0~ UNIFORMS 78-7800-2240 :~-'~ [ 639399 40.66 05-15-01 MATS 22-4170-2230 ~,i 654237 25.98 05-29-01 MATS 71-7100-42~0 "~ 27.28 05-22-01 UN[FORNS 78-?800-2240 ,; 13.67 05-22-0Z MATS ~:4 654234 27.28 05-29-0~ UNIFORNS 01-4280-2240 ~'~ 27.28 05-29-01 UNIFORMS 73-7300-2240 '~ ............... 6~1'2/01 6/12/01 131.87 JRNL-CD 6/iZ/oi 6/iz/oi .i.84 JRNL-CD -7602- PAGE 7 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L AP-C02-OZ CITY OF MOUND SERVICES VENDOR TOTAL 577.99 6/12/01 6/12/01 244.98 JRNL-CD 101 ~ GME CONSULTANTS INC 51545 VENDOR TOTAL 6/12/01 6/12/01 520.60 688177 688.77 REAR STABLIZER JRNL-CD 73-7300-3810 101 GARY'S DIESEL SERVICE VENDOR TOTAL 879.27 G1890 0105 1 34.99 04-01 WATER #32345800 22-4170-2200 6/12101 6/12101 49.56 JRNL-CD 101 G1936 18875 6/12/01 6/12/01 2.84 2 .~4 455.00 455.00 05-01 WATER #5158502 05-01 WATER #5158502 RESCUE BOAT JRNL-CD 73-7300-2200 78-7800-2200 22-4170-4100 6/12/01 6/12/01 128.05 JRNL-CD -7603- PAGE 8 P U R C H A S E J O U R N A L AP-C02-01 CITY OF MOUND 378520 153.04 WINE 71-7100 0 6/12/01 6/12/01 153.04 JP, NL-CD ~01 381477 385022 712.45 WINE 7i-7100-9520 6/12/01 6/12/01 712.45 · JRNL-CD 10~ 6/12/01 6/12/01 88.92 LIQUOR 71-7100-9510 88.92 JRNL-CD 10~ GRIGGS COOPER & COMPANY VENDOR TOTAL 4598.68 H2061 350723 933.[7 CHLORINE ~ HYDROCLUOSICIC 73-7300-2260 '!i H2080 30593 11.72 PIPE FITTINGS 01-4280-231( 6/12/01 6/12/01 11.72 JRNL-CD lC :~ ~ 50.00 DOCUMENTS ORDERED RITTER, BONN 75-7500-3100 ~;~ H2151 514 ~::~ H2230 010531 494.16 UTILITY BILLS 73-7300-212{ 494.15 UTILITY BILLS 78-7800-212u I2309 239227 111.76 05-24-01 THRU 06-24-01 COPIER 01-4140-214( 0/12/01 6/12/01 111.76 JRNL-CD 1~, -7604- PA6E 9 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L AP-C02-01 CITY OF MOLJND ~ON OFFICE SOLUTIONJ VENDOR T:AL ~ ~ ~ >' INFRATE[H VENOOR TOTAL 23.34 :6/12/01 6/12/01 6/12/01 6/12/01 6/12/01 6/12/01 25.86 JRNL-CD 25.86 JRNL-CD 25.86 JRNL-CD 101 10t 101 6/12/01 6/12/01 191.95 JRNL-CD 101 ~" J R APPLIANCE DISPOSAL INC VENDOR TOTAL 2706.00 1255935 6/12/01 6/12/01 1,563.B0 WINE 1,563.80 JRNL-CD 1258535 6/12/01 6112/01 2,001.40 WINE 2,001.40 JRNL-CD JOHNSON BROTHERS LI@UOR VENDOR TOTAL 7666.73 71-7100-9520 10] 71-7100-9520 -7605- PAGE 10 !:, P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L AP=C02-01 ~' CITY OF HOUND 32610 010518 , ~ 50.34 RECYCLE DAY LUNCH 70-4270 0 v6/12/01 6/12/01 50.34 JRNL-CD ~01 6112101 6/12/01 40.20 RECYCLE DAY LUNCH 40.20 JRNL-CD 70-4270-4210 10! VENDOR TOTAL 172.59 ~: 6/12/01 6/12/01 1,293.20 JRNL-CD ~ 6/12/01 6/12/01 222.08 JRNL-CD ';:,' ~ 6/ZZ/01 6/1Z/01 114.00 JRNL-CD ~ 6/12/01 6/12/01 258.00 JRNL-CD '"~ 6/12/01 6/i2/01 312.00 JRNL-CD 101 ~,~ 6/12/01 6/12/01 1.050.00 JRNL-CD 10] LAKE MINNETONKA COHMUNICA,I: VENDOR TOTAL 24Z99.26 -7606- PAGE il P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L AP-C02-O1 CITY OF HOUND 775 0003183 12.~ 05-16-01~MEMB~RSHIP MEETING 01-4040-4Z20 L 2~811 12025 84.14 COPIES 6/12/01 6/12/01 84.14 JRNL-CD 6/12/01 6112/01 50.19 JRNL-CD 01-4140-2120 101 101 L2930 5-8752i 37.99 WIRE SET !:. LOWELL'S AUTOHOTIVE/ZITCO* VENDOR TOTAL 70.04 01-4140-3810 9264 ; 13.60 05-07-01 DELIVERY CHARGE /12/01 6/12/01 13.60 JRNL-CD 9297 i4.40 05-14-01 DELIVERY CHARGE 6/12/01 6/I2/01 14.40 JRNL-CD 9325 6/12/01 6/12/01 10.40 05-21-01 DELIVERY CHARGE 10.40 JRNL-CD 71-7100-9600 101 71-7!00-9600 t01 71-7100-9600 10~ 9362 ~6/12/01 6112/01 5112/01 6/12/01 16.80 05-28-01 DELIVERY CHARGE 16.80 JRNL-CD 3.988.85 JRNL-CD 71-7100-9600 10] -7607- PAGE 12 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L AP-C02-01 CITY OF MOUND 280301 241.75 MISCELLANEOUS 71-7100' 6/12/01 6/12/01 241.75 JRNL-CD 285263 2,668.45 BEER 71-7100-9530 6/12/01 6/12/01 2,668.45 JRNL-CD 101 MARK VII DISTRIBUTQ~ VENDOR TOTAL 9009.15 M3082 0~0605 256.4i REIMBURSE SPIAA CONFERENCE 0i-4i40-41~0 M3150 7528 I 397.48 STORAGE CASE 22-4170-2270 6/~/01 6/12/01 397.48 JRNL-CD 101 '~ ~80.00 04-OZ INSPECTIONS 0Z-4~90-3~00 ':': 8~0.00 05-0~ INSPECTIONS 0~-4~90-3100 ,~o~ M3206 68925MB 64.76 FINE M~X 27-5800-234C ~' ; 6/12/0i 6/~2/0i 64.76 JRNL-CD ,:~.:~,, ].;~::;: ~'. '~j 6/12/01 6/12/01 350.00 JRNL-CD 10~ '~ ~.~ ~ :0 ~ b6:~: :": ": '~:":' '::' ::'. ~: ~::~: :': ':-~';:-::: ~' ~ ~::~.LO~i~''' ~:~'i: :~'r,-,~. ~:; ~! ~:~' ::~ ::~: ;.~;~: ~:~ :' : 5~'~'~ ~e, ,:'j?MN DEPT OF HEALTH VENDOR TOTAL 4195.00 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENC VENDOR TOTAL 23.00 -7608- PAGE 13 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L AP-C02-Oi CITY OF HOUND ~ 6/i2/0i 6/12/0i 72.50 JRNL-CD lOi '"; 6/~2/01 6/12/01 3,451.80 JRNL-CD lO~ . i M3489 010515 17.71 04-0 WATER AND SEWER 71-7100-3740 ·. 010607 7,956.25 05-01 SALARIES 22-4170-1390 720.00 05-01 DRILLS 22-~+~70-1380 H3500 010601 ~ 8,823.33 06-01 FIRE RELIEF 95-9500-1400 N3675 1284 100.00 CITY CLEAN UP' 70-4270-4210 : 6/12/01 6/12/01 lO0.O0 JRNL-CD 101 6/12/01 6/12/01 891.99 JRNL-CD 10] ~i NAT !i~:i 37.86 05-01 #18 HARDINA, DAMON 78-7800-3220 :::~ 37.86 05-01 #19 KIVISTO, SCOTT 78-7800-3220 26.32 612-221-6812 SKINNER, GREG 73-7300-3220 12.62 612-221-6822 NELSON, JOYCE 01-4280-3220 12.62 612-221-6822 NELSON, JOYCE 73-7300-3220 -7609- PAGE 14 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L AP-C02-01 CITY Of MOUND :~E-N:DQ: ': :::: :: ::::::t::N:::::::::::(:::DUE.':'," :,~HO~D ': :::;::: :: ..:::::::::: :: :::::.::': '::::::: :::: :: :::." ::: 54.08 612-221-8385 JAYKO, BRAD 01-4340- 58.57 612-221-6813 NEW PHONE 81-4350-3220 76.29 ACTIVIATION 01-4340-3220 : .'::: . : : ~:: ::::: N3740 TI-0067850 664.56 POSTS 01-4280-2360 6/12/01 6/12/01 664.56 JRNL-CD i01 ::. ~:. ::: :, '~ 29.76 ALEMITE 73-7300-2250 ~ 29.77 ALEMITE 78-7800-2250 :::::::::::::::::::::::: i'::: i: :: ?: :: ::::::::: ?:: ::: :::?:: ::: :::::: :?: :::::: :::: ::::: :: ::: :?:?::: ?:: ::::: :::: :::: :::::: :~:~::~ii:: ': :: :::~:~: ?~:::i~:::::: :' :i:i':::: :i! ::::: ::: :? :??: ::::<:::'::: ::::?: 74.11 ANTI-FREEZE 78-7800-2250 6/12/01 6/12/01 222.33 JRNL-CD 101 6/12/01 6/12/01 643.00 JRNL-CD 101 66448216 :i! P4005 1555 66.56 MIX 71-7100-9540 6/12/01 6112/01 117.99 BOAT COVER 117.99 JRNL-CD 22-4170-2200 6/12/01 6/12/01 67.15 JRNL-CD 101 6/12/01 6/12/01 165.00 JRNL-CD -7610- PAGE 15 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L AP-C02-OZ CITY OF MOUND 6/12101 6112/01 425.85 LIgUOR 425.85 JRNL-CD 71-7100--9510 101 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS, ~ VENDOR TOTAL 6112101 6/12/01 P4049 899943 1046.30 811.08 JRNL-CD 38.90 MAY,JUNE,JULY 2001 101 71-7100-4200 '>'~' P4065 I053106-N 6/12/01 6/12/01 65.90 GUAGE5 (2) 65.90 JRNL-CD 73-7300-2300 101 6/12/01 6/12/01 2,801.24 JRNL-CD 101 6112/01 6/12101 6112101 6112/01 6/12/01 6/12/01 1,389.82 JRNL-CD 152.25 JRNL-CD 239.67 JRNL-CD 101 101 6/12/01 6/12/01 41.8i JRNL-CD 103 -7811 - PAGE 16 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L AP-C02-01 CITY OF MOUND ' ~UALITY WINE & SPIRITS VENDOR TOTAL I4462.Z5 6/12/01 511210~ 22.45 JRNL-CD R.C. ELECTRIC, INC. VENDOR ~OTAL 90.00 :t RANDY'S SANITATION VENDOR TOTAL ~ 4~440Y lY.O0 01-16-01 HARDINA~ D~ON TEST :'% 54349 02-2020020 18.22 CONTROL 01-4340-3820 :::'.: 6/12/01 6/12/01 18.22 JRNL-CD ::'L SCHARBER ~ SONS VENDOR TOTAL 45.11 '~ 6/1~/01 6/11101 ~Y9.25 JRNL-CD :~: 6112101 6117101 ]?2.75 JRNL-CD 10: 62919 135.10 FACILITY PROJECT 22-4170-2140 -7612- PAGE 17 AP-C02-O1 6112101 6/12/01 PURCHASE CITY OF MOUND 135.10 JRNL-CD JOURNAL lol SOUTHERN MINNESOTA CONSTR* VENDOR TOTAL 10000.00 225850.1 219.11 6/12/01 6/12/01 219.11 6/12/01 6/12/01 1,042.60 BOOKING FILM 01-4340-2100 JRNL-CD IO! JRNL-CD 6/12/01 6/12/01 527.14 JRNL-CD 101 101 ' SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA LLC VENDOR TOTAL 1362.33 SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA LLC VENDOR TOTAL 157.17 S/,,63_.3 Ol~6LZ ~ ~1 I~"'13 .... '3~L Y~JJI~'- ''-~ 255.22 THRU 05-23-0i VEHICLE ~ll 78-7800-2210 1~4.36 THRU 05-23-01 VEHICLE ~16 01-4280-2210 211.70 THRU 05-23-0i VEHICLE #23 01-4280-2210 58.64 THRU 05-23-01 VEHICLE #24 01-4280-2210 SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA LLC VENDOR TOTAL 1741.83 -7613- PAGE 18 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L AP-C02-O1 CITY OF MOUND T4703 010425 25.00 04-01 ~/EB SITE 01-4320. 0 " T-CHEK SYSTEMS LLC VENDOR TOTAL 50.00 TAHO SPORTSWEAR VENDOR TOTAL 6112/01 6/12/01 534.50 100.t2 05-12-01 WESTEDGE BIDS 30-4280-3510 100.12 JRNL-CD 101 6/12/01 6/3.2/01 252.00 JRNL-CD 101. 6/12/01 6/12/01 37.65 JRNL-CD 101 ~, 6/12/01 6/12/01 25.10 JRNL-CD 101 ;.:~ 6/12/01 6/12/01 170.80 JRNL-CD T4790 43378 107.14 DRIVE ASSEMBLY, PULLEY 7~-7~00-~1(, T4801 00029 700.00 SPRING 2001 CITY CONTACT 01-4020-310[, ) 6/12/01 6/12/01 700.00 JRNL-CD 10' -7614- PAGE 19 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L AP-C02-O1 CITY OF MOUND M BUSSE VENDOR TOTAL 700.00 TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY VENDOR TOTAL 64.73 20040 280.93 0/]2/01 6/12/01 280.93 REPAIR DAILER 78-7800-3800 JRNL-CD 101 20059 254.00 6/12/0] 6/~2/0I 254.00 SEALING FLANGE 78-7800-3800 JRNL-CD 101 6/12/01 6/12/01 218.00 JRNL-CD 101 T4985 30128~ 7.44 EXACT VELL BRS 01-4040-2100 6/12/01 6/12/01 6.57 JRNL-CD 103 '~ 7102 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4090-2100 ~:~ 7.02 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4140-2100 4.32 M~SCELLANEOUS OFF~CE SUPPLIES 7S-7S00-2100 4.32 ~[SCELLANEOUS OFF]CE SUPPLIES 78-7800-~L00 -7615- PAGE 20 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L AP-'C02-01 CITY OF MOUND 6/12/01 6/12/01 4~.60 JRNL-CD O! 302382-0 .73 LETTER OPENER O1-40z~O-2100 6/12/0~ 6/~2/01 .73 JRNL=CD lO~ : .: .'~03'.3~.~,~0'' :,=~.>.:,~... ; .~ .. ~: ..~, ::.&' .~ ~F~W~'O~&~,~'/,C~R~.~'.:.!~ .~ -..~::~,'~ : ~ ~: ~' ~ ,.:; ~':.';. :';,~ ~; ~.~'0~.' ?.~'z~ ~; .:,:;: ~:~ ~:;, ~ ~;~,:O:'~?,:'j~:~,~B:,;~{~' . :~':~: .!~.~-' f ,? .:~:{ :~, ,:~?:'?;,~ ~u~ ,~:,..~? B02649-0 26.99 ~ISEELL&NEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES ~0.04 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES ~.;4 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 71-7100-2100 5.02 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 73-7;00-2100 6112101 6112101 174.44 JRNL-CD 10~ '¢; 6/12/01 6/12/01 70.24 JRNL-CD 10: " 4.09 M~SCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4340-2100 ' · i.36 MISCELLANEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4280-2100 '; 303959-0 24.44 CARD PROTECTOR 01-4040-2~00 :~..-. '. : '~?~: {??'~,: '; .~;:~..::'.?: .:..':'.. :~,.~..:..,d...: ~7¥.~.~.~:~E':' ~OJ.N~.:.~'~BOK:..~.".~";~.:.:??~,:..:'???;:?..~': ~';" TWIN CITY OFFICE SUPPLY CO VENDOR TOTAL 1813.92 7404586 873.70 GASKET, VALVES, ECT. 73-7300-2300 ) 6/12/01 6/~2/0I 873.70 JRNL-CD 10; -7616- PAGE 21 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L AP-C02-Oi CITY OF HOUND 'NO. INVO:]£E NMBR D~f~ DA~E STATU'S:' AMOUNT-. D~.SC:RtP'TION : ~:CC.OUNCT NDM:BEJ 7413835 496.46 MISCELLANEOUS CLAMPS ETC 73-7300-2300 US F I:'LYE:R VENDOR T~OTA'L U5050 74091 33.74 HAT BANDS, ETC. 22-4170-4100 6/12/0]. 6/12/01 33.?4 JRNL-CD 101 75820 88.35 SHIRTS 22-4170-4100 6/12/01 6/12/01 88.35 JRNL-CD 101 %?g.,05 UNIE0:RM$: H.AARST~D 6/1~.t~t '6/%2/01 1:79,D5 JRNL~{9 69827 15.98 SGT STRIPES, HART 01-4150-2240 6/12/01 6/12/01 15.98 JRNL-CD !01 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED ~ENDOR. TOTAL 6/12/01 6/12101 149.06 JRNL-CD WARNING LITES OF MINNESOTA VENDOR TOTAL 276.70 6/12/0t 6/12/01 132.06 JRNL-CD 10] · ~, f- W..A__T.E._BT_O. WJi_.__P__A.B__T_5 C.E~JT_E=R~ ..... VED. DLD_O_B TO__T_AL ........... ~ . "i ~$45,0 204:03 . $75.00 12~O't~0i0 TflRU .05-3~I~.01 54-5600'~:~?L2.0 ~: ,.:" './ELLS FARGO VENDOR TOTAL 375.00 ' 110.05 06-01 CLEANING 78-7800-4200 '~ ?/12t01 7/1Z/01 1,650.75 JRNL-CD ~0 6/12/01 6/12/01 9.75 JRNL-CD 10 -7617- .... PAGE 22 ,AP-C02-OZ PURCHASE CITY OF MOUND JOURNAL ~' ~ wESTONKA MECHANICAL CONTR'~ VENDOR TOTAL 9.75 ..' ' W5630 4321 1,120.O0 04-22-01 BREAK AT 110 . ~'~ ................................. __6_/_2. Z/~O~__6J-.l_2-LO_i .......... Z_..12_O__OJZ~. JR~ C D 4354 864.50 05-08-01 REPAIRED SEWER 4359 1,532.50 05-18-01 GATE VALVE 110/3 PTS ................ _6~/_.1.2J_01._ _(:L/_iZ.Z._~ 1 ................... 1_._5.Z2~.3~0 .... J. RN~ED 73-7300-3800 78-7800-3800 73-7300-3800 4099 936.00 02-13-01 BREAK AT 3 PTS ';" ~,'~ X5695 010612 5,045.99 6/12/01 6/12/01 5,045.99 ~ .. 6/I2/01 6/12/01 26.68 · ':!~!]__Z, EE_J~J~j).I_C, AL_._S_E~/_I._CE_F~.OII?AN.__V_F_NDJ2R TO~.L ..... 26,_6.8. ? Z58~'0, ~?'88~09;~. 5:9; 05-01 #0542-505-000-001 JRNL-CD JRNL-CD 59.02 6/12/01 6/12/0i 177.04 6/12/01 6/~2/01 49.94 JRNL-CD GRIP-ALL, ETC. JRNL-CD 73-7300-3800 01-4280-37!0 101 101 78-7800-2250 10J HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE VENDOR TOTAL 370.00 -7618- PAGE 23 P U R C H A S E J 0 U R N A L AP~C02-O1 CITY OF MOUND 792 010525 20.00 05-22-01 HRA MEETING 01-4030-3100 Z6803 010605 5,854.50 ~EMO COAST TO COAST 55-588~-5000 6/12/01 6/12/01 5,854.50 JRNL-CD 101 b/12/01 6/12/01 18.97 JRNL-CD 101 Z694.?' INV 51~06'~0 INV511392 :=~ Z6948 01925 _ 6/12/01 6/12/01 124.53 ERASERS 22-4170-2280 229.50 COMHORATIVE AWARDS 01-4140-2240 22~.50 JRNL-CD 101 .._ 6/12/01 6/12/01 310.88 JRNL-CD 10~ '' ~UDSON MAP COMPANY VENDOR TOTAL ] _ ..-', GREYSTONE PUBLISHERS, INC. VENDOR TOTAL }' : Z6957 010501 - '.~,:., TOTAL ALL VENDORS 36.70 1,650.00 6033 CHERRYWOOD REPAIRS 249,622.00 78-7800-4200 -7619- Engineering · Planning · Surveying June 5,2001 Ms. Kandis Hanson, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 SUBJECT: City of Mound Municipal Parking Lot Building Demolition and Parking Lot Construction Final Payment Request MFRA #12544 Dear Kandis: Enclosed is Diamond 5's Final Payment Request for work on the subject project. The amount of this payment request is $5,854.50 We have reviewed the project and find that the work was completed in general conformance with the plans and specifications. It is our recommendation that the Contractor be paid in full for this project. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me. Sincerely, MFRA John Cameron, City Engineer JC:pry Enclosure cc: Gino Businaro, Finance Director, City of Mound s:\main:\Mou 125445specsXhanson6-4 -7620- 15050 23rd Avenue North · Plymouth, Minnesota · 55447 phone 763/476-6010 · fax 763/476-8532 e-mai/: mfra@mfra.com -7621 - -7622- 0 9~99 -- ~ ~ ~ m> 9 999~ 0 0000 ~ 0 o ~ 0 Z Z -7623- CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-062O To: Mayor and City Council From: Gino Businaro Re: Imprest Fund Date: May 25, 2001 Earlier this year it was decided that the Police Depart will process dog and cat licenses instead of the Finance Department. Shirley and Jeanne have been assigned the task of issuing the licenses. While most people pay the established fee with a check, others pay cash and we need to have money available to make change. It is quite inconvenient for the police department to use the cash drawer located at the third floor. Therefore, Jeanne DeBord and the Police Chief have requested to have $50.00 issued to them for the purpose of making change when processing dog and cat licenses. State statutes allow the council to establish one or more imprest funds or change funds and we are requesting that such a fund be established in the Police Department in the amount of $50.00. It is our intention to monitor the use of the fund and to instruct the clerk of the related responsibilities. To meet auditing practices, the Finance Department will review petty cash accounts when replenishments are processed and will count the cash as deemed necessary. If you need more information on this matter or you have questions, please call me at 472- 0608. Thank you. Cc: Len Harrell, Police Chief Shirley Hawks Jeanne DeBord ~rinted on r~c. yclecl paper -7624- TO: BILL ~ CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD · MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 · (612) 472-0600 VENDOR ADDRESS I-" '--I PURCHASE ORDER .o. 16871; DATE REQUESTED O^TE P^,o CHECK NO. AUOUNT OF C.ECK Cash ~ UNIT AMOUNT CODE TO: QUANTITY DESCRIPTION PRICE Cash for Do~ and Cat Licenses Cash Box ~50.00 TOTAL While-Vendor Copy Yellow. Depl. Copy Plmk. Hecelvlng Oopy GoldemrOd.A¢¢ounilng Oopy -7625- RESOLUTION # 01- * RESOLUTION TO DENY A MINOR SUBDIVISION AND VARIANCE ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4536 DENBIGH ROAD P & Z CASE #00-69 AND 00-70 Wlt~.REAS, the applicant, has requested a minor subdivision of property that would require a variance to lot area and bluff setbacks to build two new residences. The lot area variance is indicated below: Lot Area (Tract B) Existm_WProposed Required Variance 5980 sf 6000 sf 20 sf ; and, WI~.REAS, the property is located within the R-lA Single Family Residential District which requires a lot area of 6,000 square feet, a 20 feet front yard setback, a 10 feet side yards, and 50 feet lake side setbacks for non-lots of record. Hardcover meet the 30 percent requirement.; and, Wl~F. REAS, the applicant has demonstrated that tract A can meet the minimum lot area requirement but tract B falls short of the minimum as proposed; and, wmv~REAS, the area is defined as a bluff and would require a variance to the Shoreland Management Ordinance to build the proposed residences; and, w-m~,REAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and recommended that the Council deny the variance as requested by the applicant; and, NOW, TR'EREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: 1. 'The City does hereby deny the variance with the following findings: Tract B does not meet the meet the mimmum lot area standard for the R-lA zoning district. bo The property is located with in a bluff zone which does not allow the location of structures. -7626- ExcerptsM from MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY MAY 7, 200'1 CASE #00-69 CASE #00-70 MINOR SUBDIVISION VARIANCE RANDY MORIARTY 4536 DENBIGH ROAD The applicant was not present. Planner Gordon reminded the commission that, because of the 60 day rule, we need to move these cases to the City Council by June 1,2001. MOTION by Burma, seconded by Glister, to move Cases 00-69 and 00-70 to the end of tonight's agenda to allow the applicant time to appear. MOTION carried unanimously CASE #00-69 MINOR SUBDIVISION CASE #00-70 VARIANCE RANDY MORIARTY 4536 DENBIGH ROAD Planner Gordon recommends that the Planning Commission take some action on these cases tonight because of the applicant's attendance record. Weiland felt that it should be sent back to the applicant to make corrections. Planner Gordon agreed with Weiland except that this process started with Mr. Moriarty last fall and his response has been less than timely. If we let the time run out he gets an automatic approval. Glister said that recommendations have already been made and he hasn't responded. What other action can be taken? Mueller wanted to know if there is a difference between the first submittal and the what is in front of the Commission tonight. Planner Gordon said Randy had agreed to meet staff recommendations. The biggest issue was hardcover and he has revised his plans. He reduced house size. The lot area conforms. He agreed to meet 30% hardcover, the grading and retaining wall requirements, and provide a park dedication fee. Mueller brought up the issue of the work rules and the requirement that the applicant be present to act on their application. Planner Gordon explained the 60-day rule. After clarification of the work rules it was discovered that Planning Commission could -7627- Planning Commission Minutes May 7, 2(~ act upon an application wit~ t~e applicant or ~is representative being present. MOTION by Clapsaddle, seconded by Burma, recommended approval in accordance wit~ staff recommendation a~ requiring removal of t~e current residence. Voting for were Commissioners Clapsaddle and Burma. Voting against were Commissioners Glister, Mueller, Hasse, Weiland, and Anderson MOTION failed. MOTION by Clapsaddle, seconded by Mueller, to recommend denial of the application. Clapsaddle states as a finding of fact that there was lack of complete and firm information on what the exact proposal was. Gordon added that the parcel did not meet minimum size requirements and that it was building in a bluff. MOTION carries unanimously. 2 -7628- Excerpts from Minutes Mound Advisory Planning Commission Monday, April 23, 2001 BOARD OF APPEALS cASE #00-69 MINOR SUBmV~SION f. ASY. o~- VAmA~CE RANDY MORIARITY 4536 DENBIG]~ ROAD Sutherland offered to present the case even though Mr. Moriarity was not present. Mueller stated that the work rules, adopted in January, state that, if the applicant is not present at the meeting, the Planning Commission can table action until applicant is present. He feels it is a conflict of interest when the staff acts in the applicant's behalf when they aren't here. It jeopardizes the validity of our work rules. Clapsaddle is not comfortable with it either. It sets a bad precedence. MOTION by Commissioner Hasse, second by Weiland, to table consideration until the applicant is present or his designated representative. MOTION CARRIED unanimously. Weiland brought up an additional concern. He wanted to be sure that, if Planning Commission sends a recommendation to the Council, there would be a requirement that the other house be removed before a Certificate of Occupancy is issued. Sutherland was in agreement. -7629- PLANNING REPORT Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP DATE: April 9, 2001 SUBJECT: Minor Subdivision and Variances APPLICANT: Randy Moriarty CASE NUMBERS: 00-69 and 70 - Updated report HKG FILE NUMBER: 00-5 LOCATION: 4536 Denbigh Road ZONING: R-lA Single Family Residential COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Low Density Residential BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The City Council reviewed this ease at the March 27~h meeting and asked that it be sent back to the Planning Commission for further review. The applicant has redesigned the house to conform to Staff's recommendation which is for approval with the following conditions: 1. Submit updated lot area calculations. 2. Revise the survey to accurately indicate the property as a bluff. 3. Limit the hardcover on each parcel to 30%. 4. Pay park dedication fees as established by City Council resolution 10% land value or $500/unit. 5. All recommendations contained in the City Engineer's report dated February 21, 2001. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission should review the updated material and determine if there is reason to send a new recommendation to Council. As you remember the recommendation on March 12~ was for denial by a unanimous vote. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, M/nnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 -7630- CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR RANDY MORIARITY ........... . .......................... IN LOTS 4, 5, & 6, BLOCK 2, AVALON HENNEPIN couNTy, MINNESOT. A~ ....................... LAKE "~''~' '"' ~~a6 (oave~~ D~;,"/ N ;z ~'....., k~ ~ / .' / ~ .~-' ,"N%,, ,, ~ ~' , ~~~:' ,~ .' ..' / .~ ,' ~" N '% , ...' ,x .~ ,~ . . , ,. ...' :~ ~- ., ,'~,,. .. , - x. ,, ~ ~¢A.C.. T. . - ..... , "'"'. .... ~-'-, .,' _'~ ..' '"~"~ ',' Z, (~ .... ~ .... ~ ,, ' ,.,,..,.." ", 2~-'~ ' / "X~'" ~,~ " ......", ..'.,.,..',,.. ....... ,, ..... :%: .... , .....~: ,, ,, ~ EXISTING HOUSE (TO BE REMOVED) EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION : Lots 5 and 6, and the southwesterly 20.00 feet of Lot 4, Block 2, Avalon APR 5 PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS : Tract A : The southwesterly 20.00 feet of Lot 4, and that part of Lot 5, lying northeasterly of the southwesterly 10.20 feet of said lot .5, Block 2, Avalon. Tract [3 : Lot 6 and the southwesterly 10.20 feet of Lot 5. Block 2, Avalon. o : denotes iron marker (908.3): denotes existing spot devotion, mean sea level datum ---917 --- : denotes existing contour line, mean sea level datum Bearings shown ore based upon on assumed datum. This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, the location of on existing house, and proposed location of o proposed dividing line, and proposed house thereon. It does not purport to show on)/ other improvements or encroachments. COFFIN k GRONBERG, INC.[ COHSL,LTI'K} ENCII',[£RS, LAND SURVEY(::~qS, Sai£ PL^I,I~:RS 482 TAI~ARACK AVENUE, LONG LAKE. I,AN. 55356 952-473-414 ~ DATE I FI[RE:BY CERTICY THAT TFeS PLAN, SF~CIF'ICATION. O~ RE:PO~T WAS PREPARED BY Jl-29--01 J01-024 THAT I AM A DULY LIC[NS~D PRO~SSX:]NAL IrNGI~EER LAWS Or 11~ STAT[ Or ~N~)T& LAKE IN CERTIFICATE RANDY OF SURVEY FOR MORIARITY LOTS 4, 5, &: 6, BLOCK 2, AVALON HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA MINNETONKA ' '"'"'SURVEY ', L~qE / / / / / (631.1) HOUSE EXISTING HOUSE ~ (TO BE EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION : Lots 5 and 6, and the southwesterly 20.00 feet of Lot 4, Block 2, Avalon APR 5 PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS : Tract A : The southwesterly 20.00 feet of Lot 4, and that part of Lot 5, lying northeasterly of the southwesterly 10.20 feet of said lot 5, Block 2, Avalon. Tract B : Lot 6 and the southwesterly 10.20 feet of Lot 5, Block 2, Avalon. o : denotes iron marker (908.3): denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level datum 917 : denotes existing contour line, mean sea level datum Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum. This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, the location of an existing house, and proposed location of o proposed dividing line, and proposed house thereon. It does not purport to show ony other improvements or encroochments. J O~Sr"NED IREV~S~ONj DATE I OESC~PTION GCOFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. CONSULTI~ ENTERS, L^~ SLI~/[TORS, SITE PLA~RS 482 TAMARACK AVENUE, LONG LAKE, kiN. 55356 952-473-4141 m scALE I H[R~BY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SF~CI~CATION. OR ~TI " WAS PREPARED BY ~ OR ~[R MY T~T I AM A ~Y L~N~O P~ES~AL ENG~ER A~ LA~ I DATE ~Ym ~ T~ LA~ ~ ~ STATE ~ ~T~ Il 1-29~I I I01-024 01--024 I / · ! ,' I t ; -J I I t , i i l _.! ! ! t ; / ,,, .................... zl I I I i3 .~11 , Excerpts from Minutes March 12, 2001 Planning Commission CASE #00-69 CASE #00-70 MINOR SUBDIVISION VARIANCE RANDY MORIARTY 4536 DENBIGH ROAD Planner Gordon stated that Mr. Moriarty wants to divide his property into 2 lots and create 1 new home. Tract A is the existing home, Tract B would be the new home. Tract A home would be torn down later. The subdivision needs a number of variances. A 500 SF variance is needed on lot area. Each is in a bluff. Moriarty would like a 6 foot sideyard on Tract B which would typically be 10 feet. A 4 foot setback variance is needed. The hardcover on B is the major issue. He is over the 30% maximum. Staff feels we can recommend approval of this as long as we get within the 30% hardcover. The owner would need to reduce the building size, driveway and concrete walkway. Staff would require Moriarty to update the calculations, a survey recognizing the bluff, get the hardcover under 30% and submit park dedication fees in addition to John Cameron's recommendations. Discussion Weiland didn't think there was enough information to recommend approval. He felt it needs to be redrawn. After a site visit today, with all the snow, it was obvious why we don't want buildings to be closer to the street. Passage on the street was difficult. Glister felt the size of the house needs to shrink, that the grading will work to help the house and the hardcover needs to change. Clapsaddle thought that a timeframe for demolition of the house needed to be established. He sees no reason why this project should require a variance on the southwest side since the present house is being demolished. The contour is steep but buildable. Glister felt that the Planning Commission had allowed too many small parcels in the past. Gordon explained that the area below the 921 elevation cannot be considered in the lot area calculations. This is a 6,000 SF district and these parcels are similar to surrounding parcels in that a portion of the parcel is under the 921. These parcels are 7,500 SF as platted, but hardcover is figured only on buildable elevation, above the 921. Moriarty explained the house that is currently there is very close to the road and this project will eliminate that house. MOTION by Commissioner Clapsaddle to table the cases stating that the owner should bring back a clearer plan with changes made as recommended. Motion died for lack of a second. -7635- Burma commented that subdividing two undersized parcels and variance to build into a bluff is something that we haven't done in the past. Clapsaddle said he didn't want this project to go to City Council until it is designed the way it Ought to be. We should give it a table and let the owner come back with no variances except maybe one to allow consideration of the lower portion of the property in the total lot area, which isn't as objectionable as much as some other variances. Otherwise, an owner should understand that some development cannot be done on certain sized parcels and live with that fact. He also said that overbuilding is not appropriate. This will become a political issue if we send it on to Council as it is. Weiland indicated concern that we be very specific as to the requirements of the removal of the old residence and what will be allowed, possibly guaranteeing removal with a bond or other form of agreement. Also, he is very concerned with the fact that this construction is in a bluff area. He thinks lot size is extremely important. Moriarty reminded the Commission of their approval of building in a bluff zone that was done on this property about 2 ½ years ago in conjunction with the gray house in the same block. They never followed through with the plan. It was subdividing 40 of his lot with the parcel to the west. Michael stated there were two alternatives. The Commission could table action and give Moriarty a chance to bring back something else or mm it down and let it move to the City Council without a Planning Commission recommendation. Clapsaddle reiterated his desire to table the action and send Council something worth considering. Glister and Burma both felt the undersized lots are the primary issue and they couldn't vote for the project simply because of that. MOTION by Chairman Michael, seconded by Commissioner Clapsaddle, to deny the recommendation. Motion passed unanimously. -7636- ME M 0 R 14 ND UM DATE: February 21, 2001 TO: Jon Sutherland, Planning and Zoning FROM: John Cameron, City Engineer SUBJECT: City of Mound Minor Subdivision - Moriarty Property, 4536 Denbigh Road Case # 00-69 and 00-70 MFRA #11378 As requested we have reviewed the revised survey and house plan provided with the application for a minor subdivision of the Moriarty property on Denbigh Road, and have the following comments and recommendations: COMMENTS 1. The original plat of"Avalon" did not include drainage and utility easements; therefore, easements should be provided along all new lot lines. 2. This property is presently served with one sanitary sewer service and one water service as shown on the survey. Upon discussing this issue with Greg Skinner of public works, we are suggesting the following: Tract B a. b. A new water service be installed when the new home is constructed. The existing sewer service be replaced from the right-of-way line to the new home with a temporary connection provided for the service that enters the existing home. -7637- Mr. Jon Sutherland February 21, 2001 Page 2 Tract A ao The existing water service could be used for the new home after removal of the existing structure. A new line must be installed from the curb box. bo A new sanitary sewer service must be installed from the City main in Denbigh. When the existing house is removed the temporary connection made to the sewer for Tract B must be removed. If at time of construction, the applicant's utility contractor wants to handle these services different then we have suggested, approval must be granted by Public Works. The combination of these original lots was assessed one unit charge when the streets in this area were reconstructed in 1978. It is the City's policy to collect additional unit charges when property is subdivided creating additional building sites; therefore this property should be charged one additional unit or $1,170.90. A complete grading and drainage plan will need to be submitted for Tract A when the existing house is removed and application is made for a building permit. o The survey does not show the top or toe of the bluff using the definitions contained in the City Code. It appears the top of the bluffis at or very close to the curb line and the bottom is located at the 932 contour. This places the entire building area within the bluff which requires a variance from the shoreline ordinance. RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend the following conditions become part of the subdivision approval. Provide drainage and utility easements along all new lot lines, five feet wide on side lot lines and ten feet wide along both the front and rear lot lines. The new sanitary sewer and water services either be installed or some type of financial guarantee provided, such as cash escrow or performance bond. 3. One deficient street unit charge in the amount of $1,170.90 shall be paid. Final grading and drainage plan to be approved by the City Engineer at time of building permit application. Recognize the entire building area as a bluff and show bluff line on the survey submitted for a building permit. s :\main :\mou 1 137 8\correspondenceksutherland2 -20 -7638- Application for MINOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND City of Mound, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone: 472.0607, Fax: 472.0620 Commission Date: City Council Date: Distribution: ~/~ ¢/~o ~ Ik~l~ I1, ! Ci~:y Planner ///~j/~ DNR Public Works h///~//~rz) Parks City Engineer / ~ Other Case N0. ~ Application Fee: Escrow Deposit: Deficient Unit Charges? Delinquent Taxes? VARIANCE REQUIRED? $75.00 __ $1,000 Please type or print the following information: PROPERTY Subject.Address '~'~-'~ .~ INFORMATION EXISTING Lot Block Plat LEGAL DESCRIPTION Subdivision PID~ ZONING DISTRICT Circle: R-1 R-lA R-2 R-3 B-1 B-2 B-3 APPLICANT The appli~nt is: ~wner other: Address ~ OWNER Name (if other than applicant) Address Phone (H) (W). .(M). SURVEYO~ ENGINEER Address Phone (H) .(W). .(M). Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property? ( ) yes, ) no. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions. . the subject property, or an explanation given why this is not the case. Date Owner's Signature .' Date Revised 07-13-00 Revised 07-13-00 - 7639- VARIANCE APPLICATION CITY OF MOUND 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620 N OU 1 4 ZOO0 Applica~l lothY FOeFe ..MOI~IyJ~o.o( (FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) Planning Commission Date: City Council Date: Distribution: SUBJECT PROPERTY LEGAL DESC. PROPERTY OWNER APPLICANT (IF OTHER THAN OWNER) City Planner ////~/~' City Engineer Public Works Case No. (~0-70 Address ~/'.~ Block 7__-.- Subdivision PID# /~..--/[-/.~"~ -4...~[ ~-'~0~ ZONING DISTRICT R-1 ~ R-2 R-3 B~I Plat # =j--7 ?5'-0 B-2 B-3 Name Address Phone (H) Name Address Phone (H) (W) (M) DNR Other Has an application ever been made for zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning procedure for this property?~, ( ) no. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution number(s) and provide copies of resolutions. Detailed description of proposed construction or alteration (size, number of stories, type of use, etc.): (Rev.]Ill4197) - 7640- Do the existing structures co II area, height, bulk, and setback regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Y/~k~No (). If no, specify each non-conforming use (describe reason for variance request, i.e:e~ area,~j//~ .. SETBACKS: REQUIRED REQUESTED VARIANCE (or existing) Front Yard: Side Yard: Side Yard: Rear Yard: Lakeside: NSEW) NSEW) NSEW) NSEW) NSEW) : NSEW) ft. ft. ft. /O ft. ft. ft. ft. ~ ft. / ~ ft. ft. ft. ft. Street Frontage: /~ O ft. ft. Lot Size' /'~--~o sq ft sq ft Hardcover: //~-~__,) sq ft sq ft ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. sq ft .sq ft Does the present use of the property conform to all regulations for the zoning district in which it is located? Yes (), No (). If no, spec'~y each non-conforming use: Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of the uses permitted in that zoning district? Please ( ) too narrow ~af=~opography ( ) soil ( ) too small ( ) drainage A~t'existing situation ( ) too shallow ( ) shape ( ) other: specify (Rev. lll14197) - 7641 - Variance Application, P. 3 Was the hardship described above created by the action of anyone having property interests in the land after the zoning ordinance was adopted (1982)? Yes (), No~. If yes, explain: /-- Was the ha, rd/ship created by any other man-made change, such as the relocation of a road? Yes (), No'~l~). If yes, explain: /- described in this petition? Yes (), affected? Are the conditions of hardship for which you request a variance peculiar only to the property No ~)lf no, list some other properties which are similarly - ~ ~. v . ~ ~ ~_ . _ 9. Comments: I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such notices as may be required by law. Owner's Signature Applicant s Signaturl ~~~ ~' Date Date (Rev. 11/14/97) - 7642- CiTY OF MOUND HARDC.,DVER CALCULATION5 (IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE) PROPERTY ADDRESS: OWNER'S NAME: LOT AREA [~dr~ SQ. FT. X 30% LOT AREA SQ. FT. X 40% = (for Lots of Record*) ....... LOT AREA SQ. FT. X 15% = (for detached buildings only) *Existing Lots of Record may have 40 percent coverage provided that techniques are utilized, as outlined in Zoning Ordinance Section 350:1225,Subd. 6. B. 1. (see back). A plan must be submitted and approved by the Building Official. HOUSE LENGTH WIDTH SQ. FT X = BLDGS (GARAGE/SHED) DRIVEWAY, PARKING AREAS, SIDEWALKS, ETC. DECKS Open decks {1/4" min.- opening between boards) with a pervious surface under are not counted as hardcover OTHER X ~ TOTAL DETACHED BLDGS ................. X = X = X = TOTAL DRIVEWAY, ETC TOTAL DECK .......................... X = TOTAL OTHER ......................... May. 27, 1997 RESOLUTION #97.52 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE EXTEzNSION AND MODIFICATION TO RESOLUTION//96-116, RELATING TO THE MINOR SUBDIVISION AND VARIANCES OF 4536 & 4552 DENBIGH ROAD P[D'S 13-117-24 14 0008 & 0048 P&Z CASE//97-19 WHEREAS, the applicant Randy Moriarty requested and received from the City Council a minor subdivision and related variances for lots 5, 6, 7, 8 & Swly 1'/2 of Lot 4, Block 2, Avalon, address 4536 and 4552 Denbigh Road by Resolution g96-116, dated November 12, 1996, and WHEREAS, Resolution g96-116 allows for the subdivision of three tracts known as A, B and C, and tracts B and C contain existing homes and the home on Tract C is in very poor condition and will be removed, and WHEREAS, the Resolution further states the home on Tract C will be removed prior to release of resolution for filing at the County, and WHEREAS, the granting of a lot subdivision must be recorded at Hennepin County within 180 days following the adoption of the resolution, and WHEREAS, by letter dated April 11, 1997, Mr. Moriarty, has requested a six month extension and a modification of Resolution ~6-116, item If, to allow the house on Tract C to be removed prior to the issuance of a building permit for the new house on Tract A, or maintain the requirement that the house be removed prior to the filing of the resolution and extend the time limit to one year, and; WHEREAS, item If, of Resolution g96-116 states, "The house and garage located on the proposed Tract C shall be removed prior to release of this resolution for filing (note: this resolution must be filed within 180 days). A demolition permit is required.", and WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting the above statement to be amended to state 'the house on Tract C will be removed before a building permit be issued for the house on Tract A, if the extension is only granted for six months, and WHEREAS, the Staff recommends tto extend the time for the minor subdivision for another 12 months and that resolution provision 1.f. remain as currently worded. WHEREAS, the Planning Cornmission at its Nlay 12, 1997 meeting voted by a 6-1, with Hanus voting nay, to recommend denial of the extension and modification. This recommendation was consistent with their original recommendation to deny the development in 1996. WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the Planning Commission recommendations and determined, through careful consideration of the positive effects of the proposal and its relationship to the neighboring properties, and therefore approved the applicant's -7644- May 27, /9~7 request to extend and modify item lf, with conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows; .. To approve a 12 month extension on Resolution //96-116 and maintain the requirement that the house be removed prior to the filing of the resolution. The City Clerk is authorized to deliver a certified copy of this resolution to the applicant upon compliance with all conditions contained herein. The applicant shall have the responsibility of filing this resolution in the office of the Register of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles of Hennepin County sro show compliance with the subdivision regulations of the City. The applicant shall also have the responsibility to pay all costs associated with such recording. o Said 12 month extension in lieu of any other time period provided for, in the City's Subdivision Ordinance. The foregoing resolution was moved by Mayor Polston and seconded by Councilmember Hanus. The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: Hanus, Polston and Weycker. The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Jensen. Councilmember Ahrens was absent and excused. 1 Mayor' ,[ttest: City Clerk " I.-.::3.'"& 7~ 83 - 7645- MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 27, 1997 1.9 CASE 97-19: EXTENSION/MODWICATION OF SUBDMSION, RANDY MORIARTY, 4536 & 4552 DE~¥BIGH ROAD, LOTS 5, 6, 7, 9 & SWLY ~/~ OF LOT 4, BLOCK 2, AVALON, 13- 117-24 14 0008 & 0048. Councilmember Sensen stated that since she voted against this subdivision originally, she will ag~ffn have to vote no. The Building Official explained that in the original approval resolution, item number 1.f. conflicts with the time that we would be extending the applicants request. The request for an extension is for one year and the resolution states 180 days. The City Attorney suggested the following language be added to the proposed extension resolution after the Now, Therefore, Be it Resolved, add "3. Said 12 month extension is in lieu of any other time period provided for, in the City's Subdivision Ordinance." NIOTION by Polston, seconded by Hanus to add the language suggested by the City Attorney to the proposed extension resolution. The vote was 3 in favor with Jensen voting nay. Motion carried. Polston moved and Hanus seconded the following resolution: 288 MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 27, 1997 RESOLUTION//97-52 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A ONE (1) YEAR EXTF_aNSION AND MODIFICATION TO RESOLUTION//96-116, RELATD~'G TO THE MINOR SUBDIVISION A_ND VAKIAaNCES OF 4536 & 4552 DENBIGH ROAD, PIX) #'S 13-11%24 14 0008 & 0048, P & Z CASE //97-19 - RANDY MORIARTY The vote was 3 in favor with Jensen voting nay. Motion carried. -7646- November 12, 1996 RESOLUTION g96-116 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A MINOR SUBDMSION AND VARIANCES FOR LOTS 5, 6, 7, 8, & SWLY 1/2 OF LOT 4, BLOCK 2, AVALON 4536 & 4552 DEN-BIGH ROAD PID'S 13-117-24 14 0008 & 0048 P&Z CASE g96-31 WI-IEREAS, the owners of the subject property, as listed below, have submitted a request for a Minor Subdivision in the manner required by Mound City Code Section 320 and Minnesota State Statute Chapter 462, and all proceedings have been duly conducted thereunder: Lot 5 & Swly 1/2 of Lot 4 - Randy Moriarty, 4536 Denbigh Road Lots 6, 7, & 8 - Robert Baumgarten, 4552 Denbigh Road WI-IEREAS, the subject property is located within the R-lA Single Family Residential Zoning District, which according to City Code requires a minimum lot area of 6,000 square feet, a 20 foot front yard setback, 10 foot side yard setbacks, a 15 foot rear yard setback, a 50 foot setback to the ordinary, high water, and a 10 foot setback from the top of a bluff, and; WI-IEREAS, the subdivision establishes three Tracts labeled A, B and C. Tracts B and C contain existing homes. The home on Tract C will be eventually removed and replaced with a new residence, and; WHEREAS, all three tracts comply with side yard setback requirements and hardcover restrictions for non-lots of record, and; WHEREAS, the following variances are involved with this request: A variance from the bluff setback provisions for each lot. A front yard setback for the existing home on Tract B of 15.28 feet. WHEREAS, all three of the proposed Tracts are in an area of very steep topography, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and recommended denial with 7 in favor and 1 opposed, and; WHEREAS, the City Council has determined a practical difficulty exists and the proposal is in substantial compliance with the Zoning Ordinance, it is desirable to have the house on Tract C removed, and the minor subdivision and proposed new dwellings are consistent with the development in the surrounding neighborhood, and; WHEREAS, the majority of the properties on Denbigh are similarly situated as far as impacting the bluff. - ~_.~._...--~ -7647- l~e~ob~o~ #~6-I ! 6 ~o~ follows: 1. o NOW, Tlql~REFOKE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Mi.unesota, as The City does hereby approve the mluor subdivision as shown on the attached Exhibit 'A', and subject to the following conditions: A park dedication fee of $500.00 for the one new parcel being created shall be paid prior to release of this resolution for filing. The site contains three existing water services and three existing sewer services. One of the sewer services is located in au umtsable location and as a result, the applicant will need to construct a new sewer service for Tract A. The sewer service for Tract A shall either be installed or some type of financial ,mmrantee provided such as a cash escrow or performance bond, prior to release of this resolution for filing. A grading, drainage and erosion control plan must be submitted as part of the building permit application for review and approval by the City Engineer. do The applicants shall provide drainage easements along all new lot lines, 5 feet in width along all sides lot lines, 15 feet in width along rear lot lines, 10 feet in width along the front of Tracts A and C, and 4.5 feet in width along the front of Tract B. The easement descriptions and easement documents must be reviewed azd approved by the City Engineer and then must be filed in conjunction with 'dais resolution at the County. Proof of filing the easements must be provided to the City of Mound prior to building permit issuance. eo One deficient street unit charge in the amount of $1,170.90 shall be paid prior to release of this resolution for recording. f. The house and garage located on the proposed Tract C shall be removed prior to release of this resolution for filing (note: this resolution must be filed within 180 days, see #7). A demolition permit is required. The City does hereby approve the following varianc~ in conjunction with the minor subdivision: A variance from the bluff setback provisions for each lot. A front yard setback variance for the existing home on Tract B of 15.28 feet. The existing legal description is: Lots 6, 7 and 8, Block 2, Avalon, and Lot 5 and the Southwesterly half of Lot 4, Block 2, Avalon. The proposed legal descriptions are as follows: Tract A: The Northeasterly 15.00 feet of Lot 7 and the Southwesterly 35.50 feet of Lot 6, Block 2, Avalon. Tract B: The Southwesterly Half of Lot 4, all of Lot 5 and Lot 6, except the Southwesterly 35.50 feet of said Lot 6, Block 2, Avalon. Tract C: Lot $ and Lot 7, Block 2, Avalon, except the Northeasterly 15.00 feet of said Lot 7. It is determined that the foregoing subdivision will constitute a desirable and stable community development and it is in harmony with adjacent properties. -7648- R~sotudon ~6-116 MoriartT P~g¢ ~ The City Clerk is authorized to deliver a ~rHfied copy of this resolution to the applicant upo,~ ~ompHanc~ with all condit/on~ containe~ hcr~in. Thc applican£ shall have the responm'bility of filing ~ re~olufion in the office of the Register of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles of Hennepin County to show con:pliance with the subdivision regulations of the City The applicant ~ also have the respons~ilit7 to pay all costs assc~ated with such recording. 7. This lot subdivision is to be filed and recorded w~thi. I80 clays of the adoption date of this resolution. The foregoing r~olution was mov~l by Councilmembm- Hanus and seconded by Councilmember The following Coundlmembers voted in the a/Ymnative: Ahr~s, Hanus and Polston The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Jenson, less~n AtteSt: Acting City Clerk Resolution adopted: November 12, 1996 MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 1.13 CASE//96-31: MINOR SUBDMSION & VARIANCE, RANDY MORIARTY, 4356 DENBIGI-I ROAD, AND ROBERT BAUMGARTEN, 4552 DENBIGIt ROAD, LOTS 4-8, BLOCK 2, AVALON, PID //19-117-23 24 0008 & 0048. DENIAL RECOMMENDED. Building Official Jon Sutherland reviewed the report. The Planning Commission had recommended denial of a different version of this plan in June. Part of the reason it was denied in June was that it created a new nonconforming lot and violated the bluff provisions. The new proposal establishes three Tracts labeled A, B and C. Tracts B and C contain existing homes. The home on Tract A will be eventually removed and replaced with a new residence. All three tracts comply with side yard setback requirements and hardcover restrictions for non-lots of record. There are 4 variances applied for. All three of the proposed tracts are in an area of very steep topography. Sutherland stated that the creation of the third lot appears to be an economic issue and not a hardship issue. He also mentioned the survey was not clearly understandable and more information would be needed. The Planning Commission voted 7-1 to deny the request. Randy Moriarty and Jack Cook spoke before the Council regarding their efforts to make this plan workable. Hanus stated he had voted against the denial at the Planning Commission because the lots would be conforming except for the bluff area. Building on bluffs has been done before. He stated they had alleviated all nonconformities physically possible. Jensen stated she did not want another house built on a bluff. Jessen stated the Shoreland Management Plan does not allow this type of building, she was not in favor. Polston asked if the applicant could possibly redesign the plans to work around the bluff and they responded that they already had done that to remove the as many variances as possible. The only problem that is left is the bluff. (Councilmember Hanus was absent and excused from the October 8, 1996 meeting when these minutes were up for approval. He submitted comments on this item, they are as follows). "Hanus stated that in a previous variance granted on the easterly property, one of the findings was practical difficulty due to the location of the bluff line leaving a restricted building envelope and that this applies in this case as well. He said if it were possible to build outside of the bluff or even more outside of the bluff he would be strongly in favor of this. But this is not possible in this entire area. He said all conditions of the new center lot are conforming except for the location of the bluff. He also pointed out other cases that received similar approval for like conditions. Hanus stated that it is his intention that any building constructed on this lot would be fully conforming except for the bluff setback. Hanus pointed out that in the Planning Commission minutes there was reference to the easterly -7650- Minutes - Mound City Council September 24, 1996 property not having enough parldng but clarified that this is an error. There actually are two spaces on this lot, one in the garage and one alongside the garage, so this property does have the required two spaces. Hanus said that there is an erosion problem that exists today because runoff is funneled into one area on the center of the proposed center lot. He felt that with proper mitigating techniques such as gutters, retaining walls, and other landscaping methods to direct and slow water flow, that an actual improvement could be realized over what exists today. Hanus said that the gain to the city is that it will get the removal of a very old, small, rundown house and get new housing in its place. MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Ahrens to direct staff to prepare a resolution approving a minor subdivision and variance for lots 4-8, Block ~ Avalon and to include the 5 conditions listed in the Planner's report and to add condition #6 to include the removal of the house to the west (Tract C) before approval of the subdivision. The vote carried 3-2, Jensen and Jessen voting nay. /U J/ -7652- J -7653- ~© -7654- -7655- :1 0 /- -7656- ~-7657- CITY OF MOUND - ZONING INFORMATION SHEET ADDRF-.SS: SURVEY ON FILE? YES / NO ZONING DISTRICT, LOT SIZE/WIDTH: .w.l----l.a.~oo/6o ~i ?.5oo/o Ri, A 6.000/40 -'~2 20,000/~0 R2 ~.000/40 S3 10,000/6o R2 14,000/80 RI SEE ORD. I1 30,000/100 EXI~'I'ING LOT SIZE: LO'[' WIDTlt: LOT DP2PT}t: LOT OF RECORD? YE5 I NO IIOUS~- ......... ~ FRONT FRONT SIDE SIDE REAR N EW N'SEW N S E W 7.. 0 LAKE N S E W TOP OF BLUFF 10' OR ]0' GARAGE, SIIED ..... DETACHED BUILDINCt~; FRONT N S E W FRONT N S E W SIDE N s E w a'OR6' + .' ~ SIDE N S E W 4' OR6' ~ ..~ ";J REAR N S E W 4' : LAKE N S E W top OF BLUFF 10' OR 30' IIARDCOVER This Zoning Infonnatio. Sheet only summarizes a portion of ~e requirementa tmtiincd in thc City of Mound Zoning Ordinance. For further information, contact thc City of Mound Plarmi. ng Department at 472-0600. ...... . ... :-..., ..... .-. ..... , r,--~-.I ...... ---7658--- 0 I O O Co SITE LEASE AGREEMENT This Site Lease Agreement ("Agreement") is made as of this day of 2001, by and between City of Mound, a Minnesota Municipal corporation ("Owner"), whose address is 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 and Lessee West Corp., a Delaware corporation ("Lessee"), whose address is 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 and Verizon Wireless (VAW) LLC, d/b/a Verizon Wireless, a Delaware limited liability company ('Lessee"), whose address is 180 Washington Valley Road, Bedminster, new Jersey 07921, for the leasing of certain property interests at , Mound, Minnesota pursuant to the following terms: PROPERTY. The property interests hereby leased (collectively, the "Leased Premises") and granted by Owner shall include the following: real property comprised of approximately 500 square feet of land for the installation of Lessee's equipment building, water tower ("Structure") exterior space for the attachment of up to 12 antennas; space required for cable runs to connect equipment and antennas; non-exclusive rights to mn utility lines and cables, and a non-exclusive access right across Owner's Property (hereinafter defined) for access in or upon the Owner's real property ("Owner's Property") legally described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto. The Leased Premises are shown in relation to the Owner's Property on Exhibit "B" attached hereto. The exact location of the Leased Premises upon the Owner's Property is subject to the reasonable Owner's approval. TERM. The initial term of this Agreement shall begin on the "Commencement Date" (as hereinafter defined) and subject to the terms of the Termination paragraph herein, shall end on December 31, 2005 ("Initial Term"), or on the date the Structure is demolished, whichever is earlier; provided, however, that the Owner may terminate the Agreement by demolition of the Structure whether it occurs within the time of the Initial Term or within an Option Period as defined in Section 4. The Commencement Date shall be an agreed upon date when the Owner grants Lessee the right to occupy the Leased Premises. RENT. Lessee shall pay Owner the annual rent beginning ten (10) days after the Commencement Date for the first calendar year (or portion thereof) and thereafter ten (10) days prior to the first day of the next calendar year of the term of this Agreement. Payments will be wired directly into the Owner's bank account in accordance with written instructions previously provided or to be provided by Owner to Lessee. The annual rent for the initial term shall be Twenty Thousand and NO/100 dollars ($20,000.00) ("initial Annual Rent") together with any applicable sales tax. Rent for any initial partial year will be prorated. The annual rent shall be increased each January 1 by the greater of five percent (5%) of the previous year's rent or the increase in the Consumer Price Index ("CPI"). The CPI shall mean the "Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, All Cities, All Items (1984=100)" as published by the United States Department of Labor RJV-198616vl MU200-93 -7659- Bo Statistics, or if such index shall be discontinued, the successor index, or if there shall be no successor index, such comparable index as mutually agreed upon by the parties. To determine the annual rental increase to be paid by Lessee under a CPI adjuster, the annual rental for the previous year shall be multiplied by a percentage figure, computed from a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the CPI for the third quarter of the preceding year and the denominator of which shall be the CPI for the corresponding quarter of one year earlier. Such fraction shall be converted to a percentage equivalent. The resulting percentage figure shall be multiplied by the previous year's rent (annualized for the first year). OPTION TERMS. Lessee may extend the term of the Agreement for four (4) additional five year option periods (individually, and the "Option Period" and collectively, the "Option Periods.") Lessee shall have elected to extend the term for each successive Option Period unless it gives Owner written notice of its intention not to extend at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the then current term. Lessee hereby acknowledges that Owner intends, but is not obligated to, demolish the Structure and construct a similar water tower in the immediate area sometime within the Initial Term or first or second Option Periods. Owner shall give Lessee nine (9) months written notice of termination prior to the date the Structure will no longer be useable for Communications Facilities. In the event the Structure is demolished or otherwise rendered unsuitable for the Communications Facilities prior to the expiration of the Initial Term or an Option Period, the parties agree to modify this Agreement or enter into a new agreement for the new water tower location on substantially similar terms and conditions. Owner retains the right, however, to terminate this Agreement without entering into a new agreement if it demolishes the Structure and does not replace it with a new water tower in the immediate area. The Owner further retains the right to terminate or substantially modify the terms of this Agreement notwithstanding the .building of a new water tower in the immediate area, if the Owner can demonstrate that the health, safety or general welfare of Owner's inhabitants will be adversely affected by the leasing of space on the new water tower to Lessee under substantially similar terms and conditions as this Agreement. o USE. Lessee may use the Leased Premises for the purpose of installing removing, replacing, maintaining, modifying, altering and operating a communications facility (collectively, the "Communications Facility or Facilities"). The manner in which the Communications Facility may be attached to the Leased Premises shall be subject to the prior approval by Owner. Lessee shall request access to the Structure twenty-four (24) hours in advance, except in an emergency, and Owner's approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Owner shall provide Lessee with twenty-four (24) hour, seven (7) day a week year round access to the Leased Premises. Lessee will pay all personal RJV-198616vl MU200-93 -7660- property taxes (if any) or other charges, levies, assessment or taxes assessed against its Communications Facilities. Owner shall timely pay all real property taxes and assessments against the Owner's Property. Lessee will not allow any mechanics' or materialmen's liens to be placed on the Leased Premises as a result of its work on the Leased Premises. Lessee, its agents and contractor are hereby granted the right, at its sole cost and expense, to enter upon the Owner's Property and conduct such studies as Lessee deems necessary to determine the Leased Premises' suitability for the Communications Facility. These studies may include surveys, soil tests, environmental evaluations, radio wave propagation measurements, field strength tests and such other analyses and studies as Lessee deems necessary or desirable. Owner shall cooperate with Lessee and execute all documents required to permit the Communications Facility to be in compliance with zoning, land use, and building regulations. FACILITIES. Installation. Lessee agrees to install its Communications Facilities as described in Exhibit "E" attached hereto, in compliance with the Site Standards (as outlined in Exhibit "D") and any reasonable amendments thereto, all FCC rules and regulations, and good engineering practices. Lessee agrees that its Communications Facilities will be of types and frequencies which will not cause radio frequency interference to Owner or to any other lessees of the Owner's Property existing as of the Commencement Date, provided that Owner, all lessees and other users of the Owner's Property are in full compliance with Subparagraph 6B below. In the event such interference does occur, Lessee agrees that it shall be responsible for the correction of said interference as provided in Paragraph 7 below. Prior to attaching to or installing on the Structure its Communications Facilities, Lessee shall obtain Owner's approval of the proposed manner of attachment or installation, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Lessee shall construct at its expense the Communications Facilities on the Leased Premises in accordance with the plan, specifications and site plan on file with Owner and as identified in Exhibit "E" and in accordance with all applicable codes, ordinances and statutes. After construction Lessee shall repair and maintain its Communications Facilities its antennae for reasons of safety and aesthetics at its own expense, which repair and maintenance shall occur at least annually. Lessee shall screen its equipment building with trees or other foliage acceptable to Owner. Maintenance. Owner agrees to maintain and operate Owner's Property in accordance with good Engineering practices, with all applicable FAA and FCC rules and regulations, and in compliance with the Site Standards, which are attached hereto and made part hereof as Exhibit D, and any reasonable RJV-198616vl MU200-93 -7661 - amendments thereto that it shall decide to make, and to cause all other lessees and users of the Owner's Property, where feasible, to do the same. Frequencies. Lessee agrees to provide the Owner (within the first sixty (60) days) with the radio frequency of each transmitter and receiver initially installed and operational on the Leased Premises. Prior to adding additional transmitter or receiver frequencies on the Leased Premises, Lessee agrees to notify the Owner of the modified frequencies so that Owner can perform the necessary interference studies to lessees. For the purpose of this Agreement, harmful interference shall be defined as transmitters that produce receiver desensing because of inadequate frequency spacing between new transmitters and existing receivers, or transmitters that produce second, third, or fifth order harmful intermodulation products within twenty (20) KHZ of existing receivers on the Owner's Property. Lessee will not utilize transmitters at the Leased Premises that cause harmful interference to existing radio users on the Owner's Property. Owner acknowledges and agrees that if from time to time and at any time Lessee, in the course of its business, may be required to change or to increase or decrease the number of frequencies upon which its transmits and receives, that Lessee may do so, provided that prior to any such changes or increases Lessee shall give Owner seventy two (72) hours written notice identifying such changes or increases. The frequencies which are currently in use by Lessee at any given point in time shall be considered the frequencies that Lessee is using for all purposes under this Agreement (hereinafter referred to as "Lessee's Frequencies"). Lessee may, at its option, add or modify its Communications Facilities on the Leased Premises with the prior notification to Owner. Lessee shall provide a list of the initial frequencies it intends to use on the Leased Premises at least thirty (30) days prior to utilization of such frequencies. INTERFERENCE. User Priority. Lessee agrees that the following priorities of use, in descending shall apply in the event of communication interference or other conflict while this Agreement is in effect: 2. 3. 4. Owner; Public safety agencies, including law enforcement, fire, and ambulance services, that are not part of the Owner; Other governmental agencies where use is not related to public safety; and Lessee and other government-regulated entities whose antennae offer a service to the general public for a fee, in a manner similar to a public utility, such as long distance and cellular telephone, not including radio or television broadcasters. RJVo198616vl MU200-93 -7662- Co With Structure. Lessee shall not interfere with Owner's use of the Structure and agrees to cease all such actions which unreasonably and materially interfere with Owner's use thereof no later than three business days after receipt of written notice of the interference from Owner. In the event that Lessee cessation of action is material to Lessee's use of the Leased Premises and such cessation frustrates Lessee's use of the Leased Premises within Lessee's sole discretion, Lessee shall have the immediate right to terminate this Agreement for cause and without payment for any damages. With Higher Priority Users. If Lessee's Communications Facilities cause impermissible interference with higher priority users as set forth in Subparagraph 7A above or with preexisting tenants as of the Commencement Date, Lessee shall take all measures necessary to correct and eliminate the interference. If the interference cannot be eliminated within forty-eight (48) hours after receiving Owner's written notice of the interference, Lessee shall immediately cease operating its Communications Facilities and shall not reactivate operation, except intermittent operation for the purpose of testing, until the interference has been eliminated. If the interference cannot be eliminated within 60 days after Lessee received Owner's written notice, Owner or Lessee may at its option terminate this Agreement immediately for cause and without payment of any damages. Interference Study - New Occupants. Upon written notice by Owner that it has a bona fide request from any other party to lease an area including or in close proximity to the Leased Premises ("Leased Premises Area"), Lessee agrees to provide Owner within sixty (60) days, the radio frequencies currently in operation or to be operated in the future of each transmitter and receiver installed and operational by Lessee on the Leased Premises at the time of such request. Owner may then have an independent, registered professional engineer of Owner's choosing perform the necessary interference studies to determine if the new applicant's frequencies will cause harmful radio interference to Lessee. Owner shall require the new applicant to pay the reasonable cost for such interference studies. Interference-New Occupants. Owner agrees that it will not grant a future lease in the Leased Premises Area to any party who is of equal or lower priority to Lessee, if such party's use is reasonably anticipated to interfere with Lessee's operation of its Communications Facilities or would contribute to causing interference with higher priority users. Owner agrees further that any future lease of the Leased Premises Area will prohibit a user of equal or lower priority from interfering with Lessee's Communications Facilities. Owner agrees that it will require any subsequent occupants of the Leased Premises Area of equal or lower priority to Lessee to provide Lessee these same assurances against interference. Owner shall have the obligation to eliminate any interference with the operation of Lessee caused by such subsequent occupants. If Lessee terminates this Agreement because of such interference, Owner shall reimburse all prepaid rent covering the period subsequent to the date of termination. KIV-198616vl MU200-93 -7663- 8. UTILITIES. Payment for electric service, telephone or other communication services to the Communications Facility shall be Lessee's responsibility. Owner agrees to cooperate with Lessee in its efforts to connect the Communications Facility to existing utility service at Lessee's expense. 9. INSURANCE. A. Indemnification. Lessee indemnifies Owner and holds Owner, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and representatives, from and against any and all claims, costs, losses, expenses, demands, actions, or causes of action, including reasonable attorneys' fees and other costs and expenses of litigation arising out of Lessee's use and occupancy of the Leased Premises or the installation, operation, use, maintenance, repair, removal, or presence of the Communications Facilities on Owner's Property, which may be asserted against or incurred by the Owner, including claims against the Owner for its alleged negligent issuance of permits or negligent inspection. Lessee does not agree to indemnify the Owner for claims of negligence or willful misconduct of Owner, and its employees and agents not related to permit issuance or inspection. B. Workers Compensation. Lessee must maintain Workers' Compensation insurance in compliance with all applicable statutes. The policy shall also provide Employer's Liability coverage with limits of $500,000 bodily injury each accident, $500,000 bodily injury by disease, policy limit, and $500,000 bodily injury by disease, each employee. C. General Liability. Lessee must maintain an occurrence form Commercial General Liability Coverage. Such coverage shall provide for third party bodily injury and property damage arising out of the use, maintenance, or operation of the Leased Premises and Communications Facility. Lessee must maintain aforementioned Commercial General Liability Coverage with limits of liability of $1,000,000 each occurrence; $1,000,000 personal and advertising injury; $2,000,000 general aggregate, and $2,000,000 products and completed operations aggregate. These limits may be satisfied by the Commercial General Liability Coverage or in combination with an Umbrella or Excess Liability Policy, provided coverage afforded by the Umbrella or Excess Policy is no less than the underlying commercial General Liability Coverage. D. Automobile Liability. Lessee must carry Commercial Automobile Liability Coverage. Coverage shall afford total combined single limits in the amount of $1,000,000 per accident. The liability limits may be afforded under the Commercial Automobile Liability Policy, or in combination with an Umbrella or Excess Liability RJV-198616vl MU200-93 -7664- Policy provided coverage afforded by the Umbrella or Excess Policy is no less than the underlying Commercial Automobile Liability coverage. Coverage shall be provided for third party bodily injury and property damage arising out of the ownership, use maintenance or operation of all owned, non- owned, and hired automobiles. Unless rejectable by State law, the Commercial Automobile Policy shall include at least statutory personal injury protection, uninsured motorists and underinsured motorists coverages. E. Property Insurance. Lessee must keep in force during the term of the Agreement a policy covering damages to its Communications Facilities at the Leased Premises. The amount of coverage shall be sufficient to replace the damaged property, loss of use and comply with any ordinance or law requirements. Owner will maintain standard League of Minnesota Cities insurance coverage. F. Additional Insured - Certificate of Insurance. Lessee shall provide, prior to tenancy, evidence of the required insurance in the form of a Certificate of Insurance licensed to do business in the state of Minnesota, which includes all coverages required in this Section. Lessee will list Owner as an Additional Insured on the Commercial General Liability and Commercial Automobile Liability Policies. The Certificate(s) shall provide that the coverage may not be canceled without thirty-(30) days prior written notice to Owner. G. Waiver of Subrogation. Owner and Lessee hereby waive any and all rights of action for negligence against the other (or the other's successors or assigns) which may hereafter arise on account of damage to the Lease Premises or Owner's Property, resulting from any fire, or other casualty of the kind covered by standard fire insurance policies with extended coverage, regardless of whether or not, or in what amounts, such insurance is now or hereafter carried by Owner or Lessee. 10. CONDITION OF PROPERTY. Owner represents that Owner's Property and all improvements thereto, including the proposed installation of the Communications Facilities on the Leased Premises, are in compliance with all building, life/safety, and other laws of any governmental or quasi-governmental authority. 11. TERMINATION. Ao Termination Events. Except as otherwise provided herein, this Agreement may be terminated, without any penalty or further liability, on sixty (60) days notice as follows: By either party upon default of any covenant or term hereof by the other party which default is not cured within sixty (60) days of receipt of written RJV-198616vl MU200-93 -7665- notice of default (without, however, limiting any other rights available to the parties pursuant to any other provisions hereof). (2) By Lessee if it is unable to obtain or maintain any license, permit or other governmental approval necessary to the construction and/or operation of the Communications Facilities or Lessee's business. (3) By Lessee if the Leased Premises is or becomes unacceptable under Lessee's design or engineering specifications or the communications systems to which the Communications Facilities belong. (4) By Owner, upon sixty (60) days prior written notice to Lessee, except as provided in Subparagraph 4B, if its Council decides, for any reason, to redevelop the Leased Premises in a manner inconsistent with the continued use of the Leased Premises by Lessee and/or discontinues use of the Structure for all purposes. (5) By Owner, upon sixty (60) days written notice, if it determines that the Structure is structurally unsound, including, but not limited to, consideration of age of the Structure, damage or destruction of all or part of the Structure on the Leased Premises from any source, or factors' relating to condition of the Leased Premises. (6) By Owner, upon sixty (60) days written notice, if after engineering studies, it determines that a potential user with a higher priority under Subparagraph 7A above cannot find another adequate location, or the Communications Facilities unreasonably interfere with another user with a higher priority, regardless of whether or not such an interference was predicted in the initial interference study that was part of the application process, and Lessee is unable to correct the interference within the sixty (60) day notice period, provided that Owner shall not at any time over the balance of the then existing term and all unexpired Option Periods, lease the Leased Premises space as depicted on Exhibit B attached hereto to another party with equal or lesser priority for the same use as that of Lessee. Site Restoration. In the event that this Agreement is terminated or not renewed, Lessee shall have ninety (90) days from the termination or expiration date to remove its Communications Facilities and related equipment from the Leased Premises, repair the site and restore the surface of the Structure, reasonable wear and tear excepted. Upon the commencement of this Agreement, Lessee shall deposit with the Owner the sum of Two Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($2,000.00) or provide for a $2,000.00 bond or irrevocable Letter of credit which principle shall be fully refunded to Lessee upon the timely removal of the Communications Facilities and related equipment, the repair of the site and the restoration of the Structure surface to the reasonable satisfaction of the Owner, RJV-198616vl MU200-93 -7666- reasonable wear and tear and casualty excepted. In the event that Lessee's Communications Facilities and related equipment are not removed to the reasonable satisfaction of the Owner, they shall be deemed abandoned and become the property of the Owner and Lessee shall have no further rights thereto. The provisions of this paragraph shall not be limited by Owner's waiver of rights concerning the Communications Facility as provided for in paragraph 20. 12. COMPLIANCE WITH STATUTES AND REGULATIONS. Lessee's Communications Facilities shall be erected, maintained and operated in accordance with City code, and State statutes, rules and regulations and in compliance with any regulations and in compliance with any rules or orders now in effect or that hereafter may be issued by the FCC, and FAA and the Metropolitan Airports Commission and with the Site Standards as outlined in Exhibit "D". 13. MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION. mo Owner Right to Operate. Owner shall have the right to operate its facilities at the Structure in such manner as will best enable it to fulfill its own service requirements, but in accordance with the provisions herein. Owner shall not be liable to Lessee for interference with the operation of Lessee's Communications Facilities arising in any manner from use of the Leased Premises. Limitations of Owner's Liability. If Owner terminates this Agreement other than as of right as provided in this Agreement, or Owner negligently causes interruption of the business of Lessee or for any other Owner breach of this Agreement, Owner's liability for damages to Lessee shall be limited to the actual and direct costs of equipment removal, relocation or repair, reimbursement of all prepaid rent and shall specifically exclude any recovery for value of the business of Lessee as a going concern, future expectation of profits, loss of business or profit or related damages to Lessee. Nothing herein shall prevent Lessee from maintaining an action for injunctive or other equitable relief. Co Temporary Interruptions of Service. If Owner reasonably determines that continued operation of the Communications Facilities would cause or contribute to an immediate threat to public health and/or safety, Owner may order Lessee to discontinue its operation. Lessee shall immediately comply with such order. Service shall be discontinued only for the period that the immediate threat exists. If Owner does not give prior notice to Lessee, Owner shall notify Lessee as soon as possible after its action and give its reason for taking the action. Owner shall not be liable to Lessee or any other party for any interruption in Lessee's service or interference with Lessee's operation of its Communications Facilities, except as may be caused by the willful misconduct of Owner, its employees or agents. If the discontinuance extends for a period greater than three days, either consecutively or cumulatively, Lessee shall have the right to terminate this Agreement within its sole discretion for cause and without payment of any damages. RJV-198616vl MU200-93 -7667- Do Maintenance~ Improvement Expenses. All modifications to the Leased Premises and all improvements made for Lessee's benefit shall be at Lessee's expense and such improvements, including the Communications Facility and equipment, shall be maintained in a good state of repair at least equal to the standard of maintenance of the surrounding Owner's Property on or adjacent to the Leased Premises and shall be secured by Lessee. Lessec's antennas shall at ail times be painted, at Lessee's expense, the same color as the Structure. Upon 30 days written notice to Lessee, and in the event Owner's reasonable maintenance of Owner's Property will affect areas involving the Leased Premises, Lessee agrees to protect its equipment from such repairs at Lessee's sole cost and expense. Replacements. Before Lessee may modify, update or replace the Communications Facility, Lessee must notify and obtain Owner's approval which shall not be unreasonably withheld. Lessee shall submit to Owner a detailed proposal for any such replacement facilities and any other information reasonably requested by Owner of such requested update or replacement, including but not limited to, a technical study carried out at Lessee's expense. Owner may not unreasonably withhold or delay approval. Fo Additional Maintenance Expense. Upon notice from Owner, Lessee shall promptly pay to Owner all reasonable additional Owner expenses incurred in maintaining the Leased Premises including painting of the Leased Premises that are directly caused by Lessee's occupancy of the Leased Premises. 14. HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES. Owner represents that Owner has no knowledge of any substance, chemical, or waste on Owner's Property that is identified as hazardous, toxic or dangerous in any applicable federal, state or local law or regulation. Owner shall hold Lessee harmless from and indemnify Lessee against any damage, loss, expense, response costs, or liability, including consultant fees and attorneys' fees resulting from the presence of hazardous substances on, under, or around Owner's Property or resulting from hazardous substances being generated, stored, disposed of, or transported to, on, under, or around Owner's Property as long as the hazardous substances were not generated, stored, disposed of, or transported by Lessee or its employees, agents or contractors. 15. CASUALTY. If any portion of Owner's Property or the Communications Facility is damage by any casualty and such damage adversely affects Lessee's use of the Leased Premises, this Agreement shail terminate as of the date of the casualty if Lessee gives written notice of the same within thirty (30) days after Lessee receives notice of such casualty. In the event Lessee elects to terminate the Agreement, Lessee shall be entitled to reimbursement of prepaid rent covering the period subsequent to the date of damage to or destruction of the Leased Premises. KIV-198616vl MU200-93 -7668- 16. CONDEMNATION, If a condemning authority takes any portion of Owner's Property and such taking adversely affects Lessee's use of the Leased Premises, this Agreement shall terminate as of the date of the taking if Lessee gives written notice of the same within thirty (30) days after Lessee receives notice of such taking. The parties shall be entitled to make claims in any condemnation proceeding for value of their respective interests in Owner's Property (which for Lessee may include, where applicable, the value of the Communications Facility, moving expenses, prepaid rent, and business relocation expenses). Sale of all or part of Owner's Property to a purchaser with the power of eminent domain in the face of the exercise of such power shall be treated as a taking by condemnation. 17. QUIET ENJOYMENT. Owner covenants that Lessee, upon performance of its obligations hereunder, shall peaceably and quietly have, hold and enjoy the Leased Premises subject to all pre-existing uses of the Owner's Property. If, as of the date of execution of this Agreement or hereafter, there is any mortgage or other encumbrance affecting Owner's Property, then Owner agrees to obtain from the holder of such encumbrance an agreement that Lessee shall not be disturbed in its possession, use and enjoyment of the Leased Premises. Owner shall not cause or permit any use of Owner's Property which interferes with or impairs (a) the integrity of the Communications Facility and/or the structure to which it is attached, or (b) the quality of the communication services being rendered by Lessee from the Leased Premises. Except in cases of emergency, Owner shall not have access to the Leased Premises, except the Structure, unless accompanied by Lessee personnel. 18. MISCELLANEOUS. Ao Authority; Title. Owner represents and warrants that Owner has full authority to enter into this Agreement and that any person or entity executing in a representative capacity for Owner has full authority to do so, such authority being verified and confirmed by attestation in the provided therefor. Further, Owner represents that it has good and marketable title to Owner's Property. Integration; Amendment. This Agreement supersedes all prior discussions and negotiations and contains all agreements and understandings between Owner and Lessee. This Agreement may only be amended in writing signed by all parties. Exhibits "A" through "E" are incorporated into this Agreement by reference. Co Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts by the parties hereto. Do Headings. Headings set forth herein are for convenience, only, and are not to be constructed against the content of any paragraphs herein Successors in Interest. The terms and conditions of this Agreement shall mn with the land and shall extend to and bind the heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns of Owner and Lessee. RJV-198616vl MU200-93 -7669- Go Ho N° Attorneys Fees. The prevailing party in any action or proceeding in court to enforce the terms of this Agreement shall be entitled to receive its reasonable attorneys fees and other reasonable enforcement costs and expenses from the non- prevailing party, for an amount not to exceed Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) total. Memorandum of Agreement. Owner shall contemporaneously herewith execute, acknowledge and deliver to Lessee for recording a Memorandum of this Agreement ("Memorandum") in a form similar to Exhibit "C" Notice. Notices shall be in writing and sent by United States Mail, postage prepaid, certified or registered with return receipt requested or by courier service to the address set forth beneath the signature of each party below. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the state in which Owner's Property is located. Each party agrees to furnish to the other, within ten (10) days after request, such truthful estoppel information regarding this Agreement as the other may reasonably request. Brokers. If either party is represented by any broker or listing agent, that party is responsible for all commission, fee or other payment to such agent. Document Execution. Owner hereby agrees to cooperate with Lessee and its authorized representatives regarding any reasonable request made subsequent to execution of this Agreement to correct any clerical errors contained in the Agreement and to provide any and all additional documentation deemed necessary by Lessee to effectuate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. The Owner further agrees that "to cooperate" as used in this Agreement includes but is not limited to, the agreement by the Owner to execute or re-execute any documents that Lessee reasonably deems necessary or desirable to carry out the intent of this Agreement. Owner's Affidavit. In order to induce a title insurance company to provide coverage against standard title insurance exceptions in a leasehold title insurance policy to be issued to Lessee, Owner hereby agrees to execute, acknowledge and deliver to Lessee an owner's affidavit in form customarily used by title insurance companies in the community where Owner's Property is located. Owner Approvals. Owner's approvals required herein shall not be unreasonably withheld (unless otherwise provided herein) or unreasonably delayed. Owner Consultant Costs. Lessee shall reimburse the Owner its reasonable consultant costs, including attorneys fees, not to exceed One Thousand Five Hundred and No/100 Dollars ($1,500.00) within thirty (30) days of Owner's RIV-198616vl MU200-93 -7670- invoice to Lessee, for review of Lessee's application for lease of the Structure and preparation of the Agreement. Severability. If any term of this Agreement is found to be void or invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining terms of this Agreement, which shall continue in full force and effect. Waiver. The waiver or failure to enforce any breach or violation hereof, by either party, shall not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach or violation. 19. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLETTING. Lessee may not assign, or otherwise transfer all or any part of its interest in this Agreement or in the Premises without the prior written consent of Owner; which consent will not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed; provided, however, that Lessee may assign its interest, without any approval or consent of the Owner, to its parent company, any subsidiary or affiliate of it or its parent company or to any successor-in-interest or entity acquiring fifty-one percent (51%) or more of its stock or assets in the market defined by the Federal Communications Commission in which the Property is located by reason of a merger, acquisition or other business reorganization, subject to any financing entity's interest, if any, in this Agreement as set forth in Paragraph 20 below. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Agreement, Lessee may assign, mortgage, pledge, hypothecate or otherwise transfer without consent its interest in this Agreement to any financing entity, or agent on behalf of any financing entity to whom Lessee (i) has obligations for borrowed money or in respect to guaranties thereof, (ii) has obligations evidenced by bonds, debentures, notes or similar instruments, or (iii) has obligations under or with respect to letters of credit, bankers acceptances and similar facilities or in respect of guaranties thereof. 20. WAIVER OF OWNER'S LIEN. Ao Waiver. Owner waives any lien rights it may have concerning the Communication Facilities which are deemed Lessee's personal property and not fixtures, and Lessee has the right to remove the same at any time without Owner's consent, but upon written notice to Owner of the Facilities removed. Financing. Owner acknowledges that Lessee may enter into a financing arrangement including promissory notes and financial and security agreements for the financing of the Communication Facilities (the "Collateral") with a third party financing entity (and may in the future enter into additional financing arrangements with other financing entities). In connection therewith, Owner (i) consents to the installation of the Collateral; (ii) disclaims any interest in the Collateral, as fixtures or otherwise; and (iii) agrees that the Collateral shall be exempt from execution, foreclosure, sale, levy, attachment, or distress for any Rent due or to become due and that such Collateral may be removed at any time without recourse to legal proceedings. RJV-198616vl MU200-93 -7671 - IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have their respective seals the day and year first above written. OWNER: City of Mound, a Minnesota Municipal Corporation set their hands and affixed By: By: Pat Meisel Its: Mayor Its: Kandis Hanson City Manager Address: Telephone: Federal Tax ID # STATE OF COUNTY OF 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-0600 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,2001, by and , the Mayor and City Manager respectively of the City of Mound, a Minnesota Municipal Corporation on behalf of the Municipal corporation. LESSEE: Verizon Wireless (VAW) LLC d/b/a Verizon Wireless By: Cellco Partnership, its Single Member By: Its: Notary Public [Notary Seal] RPq-198616vl MU200-93 -7672- Address: Verizon Wireless Attn: Network Real Estate 180 Washington Valley Road Bedminster, NJ 07921 STATE OF ) )SS, COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ., 2001, by , the of Lessee, of Cellco Parmership, the Single Member of Verizon Wireless (VAW) LLC, d/b/a Verizon Wireless, a Delaware limited liability company, on behalf of said limited liability company. Notary Public [Notarial Seal] RJV-198616vl MU200-93 -7673- EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description. Crevier's Lafayette Park, Block 4, Lots 10-11-12. 415100/1 3 -7674- ]U.G. COAX LINES EXIST 10' X 20' PREFAB BLDO I CHAIN LINK FENCE W/ ,, ',4' GATES '' PROPOSED 12' X 16'8" PREFAB EQUIP 'SHELTER I VAU LT / RE WAT E R , TANK ' ' EXIST DRIVE N EXIST WATER TAN K EXIST ICE BRIDGE EXIST WELL HOUSE ;AL E · 1/16" = 1'0" ~ - ,,,~,.-- MIN MOUND 2355 Cho'feou Lone Mound, MN 2~o32~5 ~ ~verizon l DESIGN~ ~L ~um Park, MN -7675- -' - ' ' (3) - WHIP EXISTING ANTENNAS ._~ 86' 0" A.G.L. TIP OF ANTENNAS (12) - PANEL ANTENNAS, 4 PER SECTOR @ 86' AGL EXISTING WATER TOWER EXISTING PUMP HOUSE EXISTING NEXTEL SHELTER PROPOSED 12' X 16'8" EQUIPMENT SHELTER I II II i'- -- II II ~Q_ II II ' ~'-~ = = SCALE'1/16" = 1'0" L2 ;1 1 284032451 -7676- EXHIBIT B' SOUTH ELEVAT Of verizon IDESIGN~ Suit~ I10 MIN MOUND EXHIBIT "D" Pursuant to the Site Lease Agreement dated between the City of Mound, a Minnesota Municipal Corporation ("Owner") and Verizon Wireless (VAW) LLC, d/b/a/Verizon Wireless, a Delaware limited liability company ("Lessee"). CITY OF MOUND WATER TOWER COMMUNICATIONS SITE STANDARDS The following specifications shall apply: Proposed Radio Band: Proposed Radio Frequency: Proposed Base Station: Power Output: Antenna types: CELLULAR B TX: 880.02-899.98 MHz & 891.51-893.97 MHz RX: 835.02-844.98 MHz & 846.51-848.97 MHz MOTORALA SC4812T 3440 SECTOR-14.1 WATTS; 104° SECTOR-28.2 WATTS; 224° SECTOR -14.1 WATTS ALLGON 7130.18.33 FOR ALL SECTORS The following will also apply if applicable: Unless housed in a separate solid, walled, closed room dedicated to single user, all equipment must be housed in a RF tight, metal enclosure. Desktop base stations and open racks cannot be used unless separate RF tight enclosures are provided around individual transmitters and receivers. Additional shielding kits may be required. All receivers must be adequately protected with a band-limiting device, such as cavities, duplexers or other filters. Unprotected preamplifier devises or receivers will not be guaranteed freedom from radio frequency interference. Many manufacturers provide receiver options for maintaining narrow receive bandwidth. These devices, typically crystal filters, will be used whenever necessary to eliminate interference problems caused by overload. At least 60 dB of isolation for 440-470 MHz and 800-920 MHz transmitters and 25 dB of isolation for 140-170 MHz and 30-50 MHz transmitters must be provided. A band pass cavity must be provided on the transmitters between the antenna and any ferrite device used. Additional filtering and isolation may be required and will be considered on a case by case basis. EXCEPTION: Frequency bands not covered above will be reviewed and subject to proper installation and operation. 413604/3 -7677- MIN MOUND EXHIBIT "D" PAGE 2 Maximum transmitter power allowed into the antenna feed line will be 110 watts per transmitter provided that maximum effective radiated power (ERP) will be 500 watts. EXCEPTION: Higher power levels will be considered on a case by case basis. Additional protective devices may be required. Only jacketed copper Haliex cable will be permitted for transmission line at the site. All on-site intercabling must use RG/9, RG/142, RG/214, ½ inch superflex or equivalent. RG8 or any other single shielded cable will not be allowed. All outside connections must be dept weather tight at all times. All connectors will be N type or EIA whenever possible. All transmitters must have band-pass cavities that will provide at least the following attenuation of side bank noise: 30-50 MHz band: 140-170 MHz band: 440-470 MHz band: 800-920 MHz band: 15 dB at 1 MHz 15 dB at 1.5 MHz 15 dB at 2.5 MHz 20 dB at 10 MHz EXCEPTION: Requirements for transmitters outside of these bands will be considered on a case by case basis. Each cabinet must be identified by the owner's name, address and FCC station license. It must also have the name and telephone number of the responsible service agency. Each user will inform the Lessor of all receive and transmit frequencies in use at all times. Any changes in frequency use or modifications of any kind of equipment will be reported to and approved by the Lessor at least 10 days prior to the change. Where it can be demonstrated that there is a strong likelihood such frequency use will result in an interference problem, testing of that frequency use prior to its actual operation may be required by the Lessor. 413604/3 -7678- MIN MOUND EXHIBIT E TO SITE LEASE AGREEMENT SEE ATTACHED INSTALLATION PLANS 413604/3 -7679- CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1667 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 STAFF REPORT DATE: May 29, 2001 MEETING DATES: May 17, 2001 Dock and Commons Commission (D&C) June 12, 2001 City Council TO: Dock and Commons Commission and Applicant FROM: Jon Sutherland, Building Official APPLICANT: John and Linda Verkennes, 4771 Island View Drive LOCATION' Dock Site # 42691 SUBJECT: Public Lands Permit Application to Modify Retaining Walls Back,qround: The applicants are seeking a Construction on Public Lands Permit as described in the attached application in order to modify the retaining walls in conjunction with the city re grading the balance of the area back to a slope that tie's into the adjacent properties. The Dock and Commons Commission has recommended approval. This is the least expensive option for the city; the retaining wall by the applicant will provide a small area for dock storage. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approVal. Docks and Commission Minutes May 17, 2001 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MOUND ADVISORY DOCKS COMMISSION MAY 17, 2001 present: Chair Jim Funk, Commissioners, Gerald Jones, Greg Eurich, Mark Goldberg, and City Council Representative Mark Hanus. Also present were Parks Director Jim Fackler Dock Inspector Katie Hoff and Recording Secretary Sue Schwalbe. Absent and excused Frank Citizens Present: City Council Member Peter Meyer and John and Linda Verkennes of 4771 Island View Drive. Chair Funk called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. t, APPROVAL OF, THE APRIL t 9,-200.1~ DCA©,MI NUTES MOTION BY Funk seconded by Eurich to approve the April 19, 2001 Dock and Commons Advisory Commission. MOTION carried unanimously. 2. AGENDA CHANGES Commissioner Goldberg requested information and introduction of the new dock inspector. Add as Item 2A. MOTION by Funk, seconded by Eurich to add information and introduction of new dock inspector as Item 2A. MOTION carried unanimously. 2A. INTRODUCTION OF KATIE HOFF, DOCK INSPECTOR ~Park Director Jim Fackler introduCed Dock Inspector Kati Hoff; her qualifications . ~7-~,% responsibilities. The Commission then introduced themselves to Hoff. ~.~/ % ~-~EVIEW: RETAIN'lNG WALL AT 4771 ISLAND VIEW DRIVF ~ // Par. k./ and L?~rdeaCt~errFkeaCnknlee; Phro°mViedea~ 4Pi¢7t~lrles~a°nfdDvieZw°~rCiv°e.mmT(~neSwlaa~sSifda~lin°~ ~?ohrnn the April 2001 rains and is in need of removal. -7681 - Docks and Commission Minutes May ]7, 2001 In June of 1998 a large storm hit the city. A portion of this wall came down. Because the Verkennes laid no claim to the wall and FEMA would not allow it to be a reimbursable item, the hillside was graded with no wall at the cities expense. Staff is recommending that the remaining wall be removed and the hillside be graded at the expense of approximately $5,200.00 to the Dock Fund. There is a possibility that the Verkennes may apply for a public lands permit to install a small retaining wall allowing a flat surface to store their dock and boatlifts in the winter. This application if applied for, will go through the Building Department. The Verkennes distributed pictures as a handout to demonstrate to the Commission the state and condition of the wall. Also they then showed a =61 ~rawi-r~:~l~f-the~-eeml~i ete6P-i~ r--ej e The entire failed hill is on public land as per Fackler. Hanus indicated that this is an improvement. The Verkennes are paying for their portion and that sounds reasonable. Fackler stated this is non-Transversible Commons. The stairs are in good shape and the pump underneath will remain. Commissioner Goldberg is uncomfortable with staff's recommendation of giving the property owner quasi rights on the Commons. The $5,200.00 includes barge work and bobcat work. It is best doing this type of work from a barge which is the major cost of the project. This wood is green- treated and was installed 12 years ago. This had no drainage from the backside and was not installed corrected. Fill must be brought in as well. MOTION by Funk seconded by Eurich, to approve staff's recommendations and contingent upon a completed application of a Public Lands Permit be submitted to the City Council. MOTION carried unanimously. 4.' DISCUSS: FISHING ACCESS/DESIGNATED AREAS City Councilman Meyer has requested the fishing docks be added on the agenda because he is looking for ways to increase fishing opportunities for our families and children. City Council Representative Hanus questioned if this is the appropriate place to start this issue. The group is appropriate for dock issues and this should be -7682- RaW, ed 8.2'1-00 CITY ul~' Jluu~u PUBLIC LAND PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF MOUND, 5341 Maywood ~oad, Mound, MN 55364 Phone: 472-0607, Fax. 472-0620 BUILDING OFFICIAL_ PARKS_ DNR PUBLIC WORKS MCWD Date Received Park Meeting Date City Council Date TYPE OF APPLICATION (check one): CONSTRUCTION ON PUBLIC LAND PERMIT.new~onstruction. NOTE: NOPERMIT SHALL BE iSSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF BOATHOUSES OR OTHER BUILDINGS O N PUBLIC LAND (City Code Section 320, Subd. 1). PUBLIC LAND MAINTENANCE PERMIT- to a, ow repairs to an existing structure (City CONTINUATION OF STRUCTURE-to ~iow an existing improvement to remain in an "as is" condition (City Code Section 320, Subd, 3). LAND ALTERATION - change in shoreline, drainage, slope, trees, vegetation, fill, etc. (City Code Section 320, Subd. 4), The structure or work you ere requesting ia an activity on Publicly owned lands. Stru;ture~ like boathouses, patio shads, etc. are all NON.CONFORMING USES. It le the intent of the City to bring all these uses Into conformance which means that those stru~ture~ will at some time in the future have to be removed from the public lends. Ali permits granted are for a limited time and are non.transferable. Stairway construction must meet the State Building Code when the permit Is for new construction, or e new permit Is applied for due to change of dock alta holder. ABU~ING PROPER~ ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION OWNER LOT BLOCK SUBDIVISION PUBLIC PROPER~ NAME DOCK SITE~ SHORELINE ~PE LOCATION: RX TII1E 05/15 'Ol 11:19 -7683- CONCEPT LANDSCAPING 3153 Priest Lane Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-4118 PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO STREET CITY~ STATE anO ZIP ~DE PHONE I°ArE __ JOB NAME '~'OB LOCATION We hereby submit specifications and estimates for: We Propose hereby to furnish material and labor -- comptete in accordance with above specifications, for li3e sum of: clollars ($ ................................ ), Payment to be made ,as manner according 'o sandard practice Any 'dter'~to or dovia~o~ f( *,~ aeove specifications ' · ' ' . ,,gnmure ~~ ~.~. ~ ~ ................. iwotving extra costs ~fl be executed only upon wrilte~ orders, and wdl becnme an extra ..... ~ ......... charge over and above the estimate All agreements contingent tJpo[~ strikes, ~ccidents ur Not~: Thk~ proposal may rm delays ~y~d our control, Owner to ca~ fire, t,)mado and otlmr ne~ssaw Jflsuf'~JliCS. OttJ' withdrawn by u~ if not accepted w~tHin ............................. days, workers are fully covered by Wo~ma~;'s Compensation Insur4nce, Acceptance of Proposal -.. a ,o.e..oes, and conditions are satisfactory and are l~ereby accepted. You are authorized to dc) the Signtdure work as specified. Payment will be made as outlined above. Date of Acceptance: .................................................................. Signature ................................... -7684- ~ CITY O$/I_~/O~L :L't: ~Z Ft,.X °°"'~'~ /~L;o~--~ ~'"-' ~ '. ?" .. VALUATION/PROPOSED COST OF pROJECT (INCLUDING ~BOR & MATERIALS~_ .. ~ .1/ '~.~ ~t,?i'/~:. DESCRIBE REQUEST & pURPOSE: ~;~ ~~ ~,~ Signature of Applicant LOCIqTION: TIME 05/15 '01 11:19 -7685- MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 28, I998 Polston moved and Jensen seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION//98-84 RF_~OLUTION TO APPROVE A PUBLIC LANDS MAINTENANCE PERMIT FOR GREG KNUTSON AT 4701 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE, LOT 1, BLOCK 7, DE¥ON, DOCK SITE # 42077 Councilmember Hanus stated that he feels we will be seeing more of this type of permit request in the future. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 1.12 JOHN & LINDA VERKENNES, 4771 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE. The Building Official explained that this is a request for a public lands permit to replace some existing retaining wails. Councilmember Hanus asked if the wall is on public lands? The Building Official stated, yes. Hanus asked if the tree that fell was on the public land? The Building Official stated, yes. The applicant explained that a tree from their property fell on their house and that this tree that fell from the Commons was hanging over their house but not laying on top of the house. He explained that they had a tree service already lined up the next day to remove the trees. The City did remove and pay for the removal of a portion of the tree that fell from Commons. Councilmember Hanus stated that while he is not in favor of spending the Dock Fund for anything that is not necessary but, in that same storm other trees went down on Commons and the City did pay for those trees to be removed and there were repairs to structures, such as staks that were also paid for by the Dock Fund. The Mayor asked what the status is on the FEMA reimbursement for these storms. The City Manager stated it has been submitted and is close to $100,000. The Feds would pay 75 %, the State 15%.and the City would be responsible for 10%. The Mayor suggested that since this was a public tree that fell from public property and if there is no insurance reimbursement to Mr. & Mrs. Verkennes, he would like to see them paid for the removal of this tree. This could either happen through FEMA or the City's insurance company. The Building Official stated that he is recommending approval of the public lands permit with the following conditions: A revised plan be submitted as required by the Building Official that is suitable for review. The applicant needs to provide a survey identifying the location of the utility easement between the home and the shoreline. -7687- MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 28, 1998 e In the event the project is not completed within one year of the date of approval of the resolution, the abutting dock permit will not be issued until compliance is achieved as required by the Building Official. The Council discussed who should be responsible for paying for the retaining wall since it is on public property and is owned by the public. The Building Official stated that this was discussed and the applicant came in and was willing to pay for it. The Mayor felt that since the City can be reimbursed through FEMA for this damaged retaining wall because it is on public property, that the City should pay for the repair of the retaining wall. The City Clerk explained that a permit was issued back in 1986 to the previous owner to install this retaining wall, and was not put in by the City. Polston moved, Hanus seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION $98-85 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT TO REPAIR A RETAINING WALL FOR JOHN & LINDA VERKENNES, 4771 ISLAND VIEW DRXVE The applicant then mentioned the stairway that is also on the public property. He stated that the metal stairway that is there is not up to code and should also be replaced. The Building Official agreed with the applicant. The Building Official encouraged the Council to require the stairway to also be repaired and brought up to code. The applicant stated that the stairway was not damaged by the storm. The Mayor stated that the stairway would be a separate issue and should be dealt with separately. The Building Official suggested the following: That the Council approval the public lands permit for the replacement of the retaining walls and the stairway. The applicant to be responsible for the cost and installation of the stairway and that the Staff be directed, through the City Manager, to work with the applicant regarding the City paying for the cost of replacing the retaining walls. The Council asked if plans have been submitted. The Building Official stated that the applicant does have plans and that he and the Park Director are agreeable to the plans. He further explained that they are not sufficient for a Building Permit but they are sufficient enough to get through this process tonight with the two conditions mentioned above. The Council asked the applicant if he is applying for both a permit for the retaining wall and a permit for the stairway. The applicant answered, yes. The Building Official stated that the City would choose the contractor to do the work. 10 -7688- MOUND CITY COUNCIl., MINUTES - JULY 28, 1998 The Mayor stated there is a motion on the floor to approve a public lands permit for the retaining wall and having the City look into using FEMA reimbursement for the repair of the wall. He stated he would then make a second motion for the stairway. The Council discussed only repairing the damaged wall with a similar type timber wall. If the applicant wants a better wall than the timber wall that was damaged, he would be responsible for that cost. The Building Official stated that Staff and the applicant have put together a cost estimate of the portion of the project that is related to the storm damage and the City could pay that portion. The Mayor stated he would like to see some type of general specifications developed for stairways and retaining walls that go in public lands. This could include a standard type of material to be used. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Polston moved, Hanus seconded the following resolution: RESOLIYrlON//98-86 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT TO REPLACE A STAIRWAY FOR JOHN & LINDA VERKENNES, 4771 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE The Mayor stated that he wants this stairway to be some standard wood type construction that has been allowed in the past. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carded. MULTIPLE DOCK APPLICATION: 1.13 FINE LINE DESIGN, STEVEN BEHNKE, SETON BLUFF. The Building Official stated that today new information was received which changes the number of slips being requested and the location of the dock. He stated Staff has not had a chance to review the change in the application and he is recommending that the application be referred back to the Dock & Commons Commission and be treated as a multiple dock license under Section 437. The applicants were present. Tom Stokkes, owner of the property, stated he would like to give a little background. "Back in May we had plat approval of the development there and we were told we couldn't start the dock approval process until plat approval was completed. So we started our process in May to get on the May Dock Committee. We found that rather difficult. We found that we couldn't get a 11 -7689- July 28, 1998 RESOLUTION #98- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A PUBLIC LANDS MAINTENANCE PERMIT FOR JOHN & LINDA VERKENNES AT 4771 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE LOTS 14 & 15, BLOCK 7, DEVON DOCK SITE # 42691 WHEREAS, the applicant, John & Linda Verkennes, are seeking a Public Lands Maintenance Permit to replace a stairway on Devon Commons abutting 4771 Island View Drive; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is on Devon Commons and abuts 4771 Island View Drive, Block 7, Lot 14 & 15, Devon; and, WHEREAS, City Code Section 320, requires City Council approval by a four-fifths vote for Construction of any kind on any public way, park or commons, or the alteration of the natural contour of any public way, park, or commons; and, WHEREAS, the stairway is not suitable to the applicant who would like to install a stair that conforms to current building code; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: To approve a Construction on Public Lands Permit to replace the existing stairway on Devon Commons abutting 4771 Island View Drive with the following condition: Approve the issuance of a five (5) year Public Lands Permit subject to meeting the City and State guidelines within one (1) year or the dock permit will be withheld until compliance has been achieved. -7690- FROM : Concept Landscaping PHONE NO. : 472 4228 Aug..¢5 1998 07:54AM Pi Concept Landscaping 3153 Priest l.~ne, Mound, 472-4118 Proposal MN, Cono~ac~ur LIC,~000-8997 Boodeci Sho~li~ Contractor ~0190096~4 City. of Mound, 5341 Ma)~eood Road, Mound, MN 55364 att. Jim Fackler 815198 Stcu'm Damage 4771 Islandveiw - Remove:roots-fi-om-smmlyas:neeess~-toxe-establish~htllside ...... $200 Bring washed clown soils up the hill to ~ump hole-barge $1200 Fill stump hole with clay fill 9 yards (hand wheel dirt $650 Cover area with black dirt (3" layer) $350 Staple erosion control fabric 400 sq R $670 Install timberwall pumphouse towards lake (wall destroyed in storm) $g25 we propose hereby to ~tmi~ all n~teri~l and ls~pl~e in ~r~ m the a~ve s~ifi~ti~ ~t ~ sum o~ $389 J.00 Terras of payment ~l~uce day of comple~ ~.vmcnt will be nmde as outlined above: a~:epi~nc~ __ -7691 - Rev ~/',~F~ -W OvDISTRIBUTION: '7-¢ BUILDING OFFICIAL ~..-(~ PARKS DIRECTOR "~- (.~p DNR fWD ch(~ one): I I~1 PUBLIC LAND PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF MOUND, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620 55364 DATE RECEIVED k~_l.~rliT. 7930: l°tqg DOCK MEETING DATE 'Ot.~ ,d I~, Iqq~ CITY COUNCIL DATE 4~ ~g~ ~qq~ 7 '~ CONSTRUCTION ON P~LIC L~ PE~IT - new concoction. NOTE: NO PE~IT SHALL BE ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF BOAT HOUSES OR OTHER BUILDINGS ON PUBLIC LAND (Ci~ Code Set,on 320, Subd. 1). PUBLIC LAND MAINTENANCE PERMIT - to allow repairs to an existing structure (City Code Section 320, Sub& 3). CONTINUATION OF STRUCTURE - to allow an existing encroachment to remain in an "as is" condition (City Code Section 320, Subd. 3). LAND ALTERATION - change in shoreline drainage slope, trees, vegetation fill etc (City Code Section 320 Subd. 4). The structure or work you are requesting is an activity on publicly owned lands. Structures like boat houses, patios, sheds, etc. are all NONCONFORMING USES. It is the intent of the City to bring all these uses into conformance which means that those structures will at some time in the future have to be removed from the public lands. All permits are granted for a limited time and are non-transferable. Stairway construction must meet the State Building Code when the permit is for new construction, or a new ~ermit is applied for due to change in dock site holder. Phone (home) ~"/'7~- 1~''0 q (work) q~lO ,.~15-'~ Abut t lng Addre s s Property Owner Legal Lot Block Description Subd. Pub 1 i c Name Property Dock Site # Shoreline Type Contractor Name Vt Address C~, [~._. Phone VALUATION/PROPOSED COST OF PROJECT (INCLUDING LABOR 8,: MATERIALS) DESCRIBE ~.~UEST~,~: PU, RPOSE: ~lr'/~(~ ~"/5/~ ~t ,.~'/'L) r"roq tx'_o_, lq cz" S~n~"-ttrfe'of dpplicant Date ' / "' -7~@2- MEMORANDUM Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. To: Mound City Council From: Loren Gordon Date: June 6, 2001 Subject: Langdon Bay Final Plat revision Since the approval of the Langdon Bay Final plat on May 8th, Staff has been working with the ........................................ ' .' ..,._.-,~_~.l._;.~.lzl.~l..._._q2. ~_j ........... 1. 1.~ ........ ' .... have surfaced ~d ~e enough to ~gger a revision to the final plat. These revisions need City Co~cil approval. The first revision is a result of the additional easement along Robin Lane. Originally, 10 feet was going to be gained on each side. Property owner discussions on the east side broke down and in order to maintain the necessary 50 feet of right-of-way, 20 feet was gained on the west side. The result is the platted right-of-way will need to slide west slightly where it intersects with lot 28. The second is the result of a request to vacate the north/east half of Butternut Road. The developer, R.H. Development submitted a vacation request on behalf of the adjacent owner, Harold Borg. The public heating was held at the Planning Commission June 4t~ and is scheduled for City Council hearing on June 26t~. The recommendation from Planning Commission was to vacate the entire right-of-way, consistent with Staff's recommendation. The result to the plat will be the lots adjacent to Butternut would gain additional land area. Including the vacated land in the plat is the "cleanest" approach in addressing the request. A condition of this plat revision will need to be approval of the vacation on the 26th. In an effort to keep the project on track, the plat revisions need to be approved and filed to stay ahead of construction which is rapidly approaching. I'm hopeful a copy of the revisions make it into your packets. If no, and in any event, a revised plat will be presented at the Council meeting. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838 -7693- June 7, 2001 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 ~qU-B~EC-T.'- ..... ~,tyef$~e'and West Edge Boulevard Street Improvements MFRA #7827 Dear Mayor and Council Members: The City's scheduled bid opening for the subject project on May 30th resulted in only one bid submitted. The plan holders list included six (6) contractors; however, for a number of reasons GMH Asphalt Corp. was the only contractor to submit a bid. Attached is a copy of the bid tabulation. The bid from GMH was in the amount of $214,163.85. The engineer's estimate from the feasibility report prepared last summer was $167,900 and the revised estimate used after the final plans were prepared this spring was $176,172. The bid submitted is 27-1/2 percent over the feasibility report estimate and 21-1/2 percent over the revised engineer's estimate, We have reviewed the unit prices of the bid submitted and feel a substantial number of are too high and therefore are recommending that the bid be rejected. The City has a number of options to consider including the following: 1. Rebid the project immediately for construction yet this summer. We do not believe this option would result in much, if any, savings since many contractors already have too much work and with the amount of rain we have had are behind schedule. Rebid the project in August or September for construction either late fall or next spring. This option also has too many variables that could affect the bids, such as, workload and the weather. -7694- Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council June 7, 2001 Page 2 o The third option would be to rebid the project in February or March of 2002. It appears this may be our best chance at getting more contractors to bid and hopefully result in lower prices. The second phase of the Rottlund project is also scheduled for completion in 2002. The first phase of their project will take access from County Road 15 and would not need the West Edge Boulevard improvements until the 2002 construction year. We have discussed with R.H. Development and Rottlund the prospect of delaying the construction of West Edge Boulevard until next year. They indicated that a one year delay would not place any undo hardship on their project. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact us. Sincerely, John Cameron, City Engineer JC:pry Enclosure s:\main:\Mou7827:\Correspondence~nayor6-6 -7695- -7696- Dear Elected Official: At your direction, we have prepared the enclosed preliminary Official Statement describing this financial transaction which must meet the Securities and Exchange Commission disclosure requirements. This Official Statement is also being distributed to potential bidders who will rely on the contents of this document in assessing the security of this issue before submitting their bid. The resolution you will consider when you award the sale of this offering to the successful bidder will ask you to approve the contents of this Official Statement by designating it as the "Final Official Statement." "A Pocket Guide for Elected and Other Public Officials" prepared by the National League of Cities; National Association of Counties; National Association of State Auditors, Comptrollers, and Treasurers; and the Government Finance Officers Association with input from the Securities and Exchange Commission recommends that municipal officials ask the following questions of outside p.. ....... ~ .... ~o=p ...... d-isetow,~ ~_ doeurc ....... or-=t~~tmkdpat=oblig ,,, ~,ns:. 1. What is the nature ~r sc~pe ~f the written ~pini~n ~r certificati~n~ if any~ that y~u are giving in this transaction and relating to the disclosure document? Have we given you access to the information you need? 2. Have you explained to.us ali aspects of the structure or nature of this transaction so that you are confident we fully understand all critical aspects ? Does our official statement adequately address any concerns you have about this transaction that a reasonable investor would consider important? 3. Are there any matters regarding your participation in this transaction about which you should make us aware, including potential conflicts of interest? 4. Has your review of the relevant financial documents and other materials, including the official statement, raised any concerns regarding this borrowing? Do these concerns need to be disclosed ? 5. Are you aware of any circumstances in which we, our staff, or others have not complied with our procedures so that we can make sure that our official statement adequately and accurately describes this transaction? We hope Ehlers has answered these questions prior to or within this document. If not, please feel free to contact us. Please review the contents of the Official Statement, and let us know within one week if any changes are necessary to this Official Statement. Yours truly, EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. cc: Administrator LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Equal Opportunity Employer Charter Member of the National Association of Independent Public Finance Advisors 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, MN 55113-1105 651.697.8500 -7697- fax 651.697.8555 www.ehlers-inc.corn 05/0~i/2001 lS:28 ET REF: ATTN: Kandice Hanson Mound NOOD0985.0001 FR:HOODYS T0:9524720620 Page 1 of 2 MOODY'S ASSIGNS A2 TO THE CITY OF MOUND (MN) SERIES 200lA AND 2001C G.O. BOND. $4.1 MILLION IN DEBT AFFECTED Mound (City of) MN Municipality Minnesota Moody's Rating Issue Rating General Obligation Bonds, Series 200lA Sale Amount $1,585,000 Expected Sale Date 06/12/01 Rating Description General Obligation Unlimited Tax A2 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2001C A2 ~le Amount $780,000 Rating Description General Obligation Unlijmited Tax NEW YORK, June 5, 2001 -- Moody's has assigned an A2 rating to the City of Mound, MN sale of $1,585,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 200lA, and $780,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2001C. In addition, Moody's affirms the A2 rating on the city's outstanding $1.755 million in general obligation bonds. Proceeds from the bonds, secured by the city's general obligation unlimited tax pledge, will finance various improvements, as well as a portion of the costs associated with the payment of a judgment against the city. The rating reflects the city's sound economy as a mature suburb in the Twin Cities metropolitan area; its satisfactory financial position; and low debt burden characterized by an above average principal amortization. Concurrently, the city is issuing $1,155,000 Municipal Liquor Store Revenue Bonds, Series 200lB, which are unrated. MATURE MINNEAPOLIS SUBURB EXPERIENCING REDEVELOPMENT Moody's expects the city's economy to remain strong and stable due to its favorable location in the economically vibrant Twin Cities metro area and the ongoing redevelopment initiatives to foster tax base growth. The tax base, currently $659 million and covering just over 4 square miles, has averaged 8.9% annual growth over the last five years, evidencing both appreciation of reai estate in the region, as well as new or redeveloped construction. While the city is essentially fully mature, proceeds from the Series 200lB bonds will finance the infrastructure improvements as part of a new 73 single-family housing development . Officials cite that these new homes will sell for approximately $250,000 to $400,000. Additionally, redevelopment efforts are underway, with emphasis on several mixed-use downtown redevelopment projects. The city's wealth levels are above the state average, and ample employment opportunities are evidenced by the city's low unemployment rate of 2.5%, in March 2001, which is less than the state average of 3.8%. DESPITE RECENT OPERATING DEFICITS, SASTIFACTORY FINANCIAL POSITION EXPECTED T. CONTINUE; REDUCED LIQUIDITY DUE TO TAX INCREMENT RECEIVABLE Moody's expects the city's financial position to remain satisfactory due historically to sound financial management and a renewed General Fund balance -7698- g61~$12~ ~$:28 ET NOODO~83.OOO~ FR:HOgO¥$ T0:9524720620 Page 2 o? 2 strategy. In fiscal 2000, the General Fund balance declined to $1.2 million, or 40.6% of General Fund revenues, while the undesignated portion declined to 29.7% of General Fund revenues. Essentially balanced operations characterize dCal 1998 and 1999, with a $289,000 operating deficit occurrin~ in fiscal o. The drawdown was largely due to a $250,000 expenditure related to the gment, which is expected to be reimbursed by proceeds of the Series 200lA bonds. An operating deficit is budgeted for fiscal 2001, however Moody's expects conservative budgeting to mitigate the long-term impact. Additionally, the city has renewed its goal to maintain an undesignated General Fund balance of 30%, which would provide for liquidity and contingency needs. ~nile the General Fund balance remains satisfactory, Moody's notes that in fiscal 2000, the General Fund incurred a long-term receivable reaching $933,901 from the Capital Projects Fund, related to tax increment development. The TIF revenue stream is expected to flow over 20 years, however, officials state that one-third to one-half of the receivable may be pre-paid. The net impact of the receivable is a reduced General Fund cash position (from $1.5 million in fiscal 1999, to $686,000 in fiscal 2000) and therefore more limited liquidity. Of the available cash and investments, maturities are three months or shorter. LOW DEBT BURDEN CHARACTERIZED BY ABOVE AVERAGE PRINCIPAL AI~ORTIZATION Moody's expects the city's 1.4% debt burden will remain manageable due to an above average principal amortization of 62% in ten years and modest future --borro~i~ needS'. A~--~'--~lly d~I~P~-~ub~b~--t~--bb-f~-ih~ n~d~--6f'~-"~i-~ ....... community are minimal, with an expected $2 million fire station in the next few years. Additionally, development related debt may be utilized in conjunction with the city's redevelopment efforts, with the city currently in the process of detailing expected financing. STATISTICS )0 population: 9,435 Change in population (since 1990): -2% 2001 estimated full valuation: $659 million Full Valuation per capita: $69,855 Debt burden: 1.4% Payout of principal (10 years): 61.5% FY00 General Fund balance: $1,202,000 (or 40.6% of General Fund revenues) City unemployment (March 2001): 2.5% ANALYSTS: Jonathan North, Analyst, Public Finance Group, Moody's Investors Service Adam Goldin, Backup Analyst, Public Finance Group, Moody's Investors Service Linda Ebrahim, Senior Credit Officer, Public Finance Group, Moody's Investors Service CONTACTS: ~lists: (212) 553-0376 7ch Clients: (212) 553-1625 -7699- Extract of Minutes of Meeting of the City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, was duly held in the City Hall in said City on Tuesday, June 12, 2001, commencing at 7:30 o'clock P.M. The following members were present: ~:_~lo_wing were absent: The Mayor announced that the next order of business was consideration of the proposals which had been received for the purchase of the City's $1,585,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 200 lA. The City Manager presented a tabulation of the proposals that had been received in the manner specified in the Terms of Proposal for the Bonds. The proposals were as follows: DJK-198441vl MU200~90 -7700- After due consideration of the proposals, Member then introduced the following resolution, and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AWARDING THE SALE OF $1,585,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 200lA; FIXING THEIR FoRM AND SPECIFICATIONS; DIRECTING THEIR EXECUTION AND DELIVERY; AND PROVIDING FOR THEIR PAYMENT BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota (City) as follows: Section 1. Sale of Bonds. 1.01. It is determined that: (a) there has been entered in District Court of Hennepin County a judgement (Judgement) against the City in favor of Independent School District No. 277 in the amount of $240,000, and the City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, sections 475.52 and 475.58 to issue its general obligation bonds to pay a judgement without voter approval. (b) the City engineer has recommended the construction of various improvements to the City's water and storm sewer system (Project) and the City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, section 444.075 (Act) to finance all or a portion of the cost of the Project (Project Costs) by the issuance of general obligation bonds of the City payable from the net revenues of the water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer system. The Project Costs are presently estimated by the engineer to be as follows: Project Designation & Description Total Prqiect Cost Project Costs Contingency Discount Allowance Finance Related Expenses Capitalized Interest $1,270,000 12,870 26,945 27,100 8,085 Utility Bond Issue $1,345,000 Judgement Bond Issue 240,000 Total Issue $1,585,000 DJK-198441vl MU200-90 -7701 - (c) it is necessary and expedient to the sound financial management of the affairs of the City to issue $1,585,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 200lA (Bonds) pursuant to the Act to provide financing for the Project and the Judgement. 1.02. The proposal of (Purchaser) to purchase $1,585,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 200lA (Bonds) of the City described in the Terms of Proposal thereof is found and determined to be a reasonable offer and is accepted, the proposal being to purchase the Bonds at a price of $ plus accrued interest to date of delivery, for Bonds bearing interest as follows: Year of Interest Year of Interest Maturity Rate Maturity Rate 2003 2013 21X)4 ......... 2014 2005 2015 2006 2016 2007 2017 2008 2018 2009 2019 2010 2020 2011 2021 2012 2022 True interest cost: 1.03. The sum of $ being the amount proposed by the Purchaser in excess of $1,558,055 will be credited to the appropriate accounts in Debt Service Fund hereinafter created. The City Finance Director is directed to retain the good faith check of the Purchaser, pending completion of the sale of the Bonds, and to return the good faith checks of the unsuccessful proposers forthwith. The Mayor and City Manager are directed to execute a contract with the Purchaser on behalf of the City. 1.04. The City will forthwith issue and sell the Bonds pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 444.075 (Act), in the total principal amount of $1,585,000, originally dated July 11, 2001, in the denomination of $5,000 each or any integral multiple thereof, numbered No. R-l, upward, bearing interest as above set forth, and maturing serially on February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: DJK-198441vl MU200-90 -7702- Year Amount Year Amount 2003 $45,000 2013 $80,000 2004 50,000 2014 85,000 2005 55,000 2015 85,000 2006 55,000 2016 90,000 2007 55,000 2017 95,000 2008 60,000 2018 95,000 2009 60,000 2019 110,000 2010 65,000 2020 115,000 2011 70,000 2021 120,000 2012 70,000 2022 125,000 1.05. Optional Redemption. The City may elect on February 1, 2011, and on any day thereafter to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2012. Redemption may be in whole or in p~_n_d i_fir~part, _a_t the~option_of_theCity_and_in such-~manner~s~theCity-wi-ll4teter-mine~-t~f-less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City will notify DTC (as defined in Section 7 hereof) of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest. 1.06. Term Bonds. To be completed if Term Bonds are requested by the Purchaser. Section 2. Registration and Payment. 2.01. Registered Form. The Bonds will be issued only in fully registered form. The interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof, is payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein. 2.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Each Bond will be dated as of the last interest payment date preceding the date of authentication to which interest on the Bond has been paid or made available for payment, unless (i) the date of authentication is an interest payment date to which interest has been paid or made available for payment, in which case the Bond will be dated as of the date of authentication, or (ii) the date of authentication is prior to the first interest payment date, in which case the Bond will be dated as of the date of original issue. The interest on the Bonds will be payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing February 1, 2002, to the registered owners of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the immediately preceding month, whether or not that day is a business day. 2.03. Registration. The City will appoint a bond registrar, transfer agent, authenticating agent and paying agent (Registrar). The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the Registrar with respect thereto are as follows: (a) Register. The Registrar must keep at its principal corporate trust office a bond register in which the Registrar provides for the registration of ownership of Bonds DJK-198441vl MU200-90 -7703- and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged. (b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of a Bond duly endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar will authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one Or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until that interest payment date. (c) Exchange of Bonds. When Bonds are surrendered by the registered owner for exchange the Registrar will authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like owner's attorney in writing. (d) Cancellation. Bonds surrendered upon transfer or exchange will be promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City. (e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When a Bond is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the Bond until the Registrar is satisfied that the endorsement on the Bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar will incur no liability for the refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized. (f) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat the person in whose name a Bond is registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the Bond, whether the Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on account of, the principal of and interest on the Bond and for all other purposes, and payments so made to a registered owner or upon the owner's order will be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon the Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (g) Taxes, Fees and Charges. The Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof for a transfer or exchange of Bonds sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to the transfer or exchange. (h) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. If a Bond becomes mutilated or is destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar will deliver a new Bond of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of the mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in substitution for a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection DJK-198441vl MU200-90 -7704- therewith; and, in the case of a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that the Bond was destroyed, stolen or lost, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it and as provided by law, in which both the City and the Registrar must be named as obligees. Bonds so surrendered to the Registrar will be cancelled by the Registrar and evidence of such cancellation must be given to the City. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Bond has already matured or been called for redempti°n in accordance with its terms it is not necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment. (i) Redemption. In the event any of the Bonds are called for redemption, notice thereof identifying the Bonds to be redeemed will be given by the Registrar by mailing a copy of the redemption notice by first class mail (postage prepaid) [take out for DTC not more than 60 and not less than 30 days prior to the date fixed for redemption] to the registered owner of each Bond to be redeemed at the address shown on the ........... registration-books&e-q~t-~y~--- ' : -~- ~e~notice4Lre, q-uiredq~y~law~ Failure to give notice by publication or by mail to registered owners, or any defect therein, will not affect the validity of the proceedings for the redemption of Bonds. Bonds so called for redemption will cease to bear interest after the specified redemption date, provided that the funds for the redemption are on deposit with the place of payment at that time. 2.04. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City appoints , , Minnesota, as the initial Registrar. The Mayor and the City Manager are authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of the City, a contract with the Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation of the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or trust company authorized by law to conduct such business, the resulting corporation is authorized to act as successor Registrar. The City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges of the Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves the right to remove the Registrar upon 30 days' notice and upon the appointment of a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar must deliver all cash and Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar and must deliver the bond register to the successor Registrar. On or before each principal or interest due date, without further order of this Council, the City Finance Director must transmit to the Registrar moneys sufficient for the payment of all principal and interest then due. 2.05. Execution, Authentication and Delivery. The Bonds will be prepared under the direction of the City Manager and executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of the Mayor and the City Manager, provided that those signatures may be printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles of the originals. If an officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature appears on the Bonds ceases to be such officer before the delivery of a Bond, that signature or facsimile will nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if the officer had remained in office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, a Bond will not be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this Resolution unless and until a certificate of authentication on the Bond has been duly executed by the manual signature of an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates of authentication on different Bonds DJK-198441vl MU200-90 -7705- need not be signed by the same representative. The executed certificate of authentication on a Bond is conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this Resolution. When the Bonds have been so prepared, executed and authenticated, the City Manager will deliver the same to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price in accordance with the contract of sale heretofore made and executed, and the Purchaser is not obligated to see to the application of the purchase price. 2.06. Temporary Bonds. The 'City may elect to deliver in lieu of printed definitive Bonds one or more typewritten temporary Bonds in substantially the form set forth in Section 3 with such changes as may be necessary to reflect more than one maturity in a single temporary bond. Upon the execution and delivery of definitive Bonds the temporary Bonds will be exchanged therefor and cancelled. Section 3. Form of Bond. ................. -3- -.I~!~L- -~ds4 .'dll~-4yp -ea~ilten4nzubstami'ally-4h- e~e!!owi~ag-fonn: ............... No. R- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA $ STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF MOUND GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND, SERIES 200lA Date of Rate Maturity Original Issue CUSIP July 11, 2001 Registered Owner: Cede & Co. The City of Mound, Minnesota, a duly organized and existing municipal corporation in Hennepin County, Minnesota (City), acknowledges itself to be indebted and for value received hereby promises to pay to the Registered Owner specified above or registered assigns, the principal sum of $ on the maturity date specified above, with interest thereon from the date hereof at the annual rate specified above, payable February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing February 1, 2002, to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) of the immediately preceding month. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof, the principal hereof are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft by ., Minnesota, as Bond Registrar, Paying Agent, Transfer Agent and Authenticating Agent, or its designated successor under the Resolution DJK-198441vl MU200-90 -7706- described herein. For the prompt and full payment of such principal and interest as the same respectively become due, the full faith and credit and taxing powers of the City have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. The City may elect on February 1,2011, and on any day thereafter to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2012. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such manner as the City will determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity._ .a?e called for redemption, the City will notify The Depository Trust Company (DTC) of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest. The City Council has designated the issue of Bonds of which this Bond forms a part as "qualified tax exempt obligations" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal -Reve, nueCode of !986,as amended-(-the-Cod¢) re!ating-to~dl, sa!.!ew~ee-ofAnterest~-expense-for financial institutions and within the $10 million limit allowed by the Code for the calendar year of issue. This Bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of $1,585,000 all of like original issue date and tenor, except as to number, maturity date, redemption privilege, and interest rate, all issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on June 12, 2001 (the Resolution), for the purpose of providing money to aid in financing various improvements to the water and storm sewer systems of the City, and to pay a judgement against the City, pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State o~ Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, chapter 475 and section 444.075 and the principal hereof and interest hereon are payable primarily from the net revenues of the water and storm sewer plant and system of the City and from ad valorem taxes for the portion of this Bond attributable to the judgement, in a special debt service fund of the City, as set forth in the Resolution to which reference is made for a full statement of rights and powers thereby conferred. The full faith and credit of the City are irrevocably pledged for payment of this Bond and the City Council has obligated itself to levy additional ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the City in the event of any deficiency in net revenues and taxes pledged, which taxes may be levied without limitation as to rate or amount. The Bonds of this series are issued only as fully registered Bonds in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof of single maturities. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED That in and by the Resolution, the City has covenanted and agreed that it will continue to own and operate the water and sewer plant and system free from competition by other like municipal utilities to the degree permitted by law; that adequate insurance on said plant and system and suitable fidelity bonds on employees will be carded; that proper and adequate books of account will be kept showing all receipts and disbursements relating to the Water, Sewer and Storm Sewer Funds, into which it will pay all of the gross revenues from the water, sewer and storm sewer plant and system; that it will also create and maintain a General Obligation Bonds, Series 200lA Debt Service Fund, into which it will pay, out of the net revenues from the water, sewer and storm sewer system and ad valorem taxes a sum sufficient to pay principal hereof and interest thereon when due; and that it will DJK-198441vl MU200-90 -7707- provide, by ad valorem tax levies, for any deficiency in required net water, sewer and storm sewer system revenues. As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office of the Bond Registrar, by the registered owner hereof in person or by the owner's attorney duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Bond Registrar, d~iy ex~-cii~'~'d by th~-i~egis~ei:~d owr~e~-0i: the o-~r'~ ~tt-6-~he~i ~d ~ay-a]so b~ ~ende~-e-~-~in exchange for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange the City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the transferee or registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. The City and the Bond Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this Bond · - ......... ~s._registered -as-the absolj.J_t¢, o ~.~__er-hereef, whether this-Bend-is-overdue-er net,-f~r the-pm'pese of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Bond Registrar will be affected by any notice to the contrary. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance of this Bond in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation of the City in accordance with its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed as so required, and that the issuance of this Bond does not cause the indebtedness of the City to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation of indebtedness. This Bond is not valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon has been executed by the Bond Registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Mound, HennePin County, Minnesota, by its City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalf by the facsimile or manual signatures of the Mayor and City Manager and has caused this Bond to be dated as of the date set forth below. Dated: CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA (Facsimile) City Manager Mayor (Facsimile) DJK-198441vl MU200-90 -7708- CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within. By Authorized Representative The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, will be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: TEN_COM -- as:tenants in common TEN ENT -- as tenants by entireties as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common .UNI.F-GIET-MIN~ JT TEN -- Custodian (Cust) (Minor) under Uniform Gifts or Transfers to Minors Act ............ (State) Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. ASSIGNMENT For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint attorney to transfer the said Bond on the books kept for registration of the within Bond, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: Notice: The assignor's signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as it appears upon the face of the within Bond in every particular, without alteration or any change whatever. DJK-198441vl MU200-90 -7709- Signature Guaranteed: NOTICE: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by a financial institution that is a member of the Securities Transfer Agent Medallion Program ("STAMP"), the Stock Exchange Medallion Pr6gram ("SEMP")~ the New Y6~k-St6ck Exch~ge,-Inc. Medaiii6h Signatures PrograPh ("MSP") or other such "signature guarantee program" as may be determined by the Registrar in addition to, or in substitution for, STAMP, SEMP or MSP, all in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. The Bond Registrar will not effect transfer of this Bond unless the information concerning the assignee requested below is provided. ...................... Name_and_Address: (Include information for all joint owners if this Bond is held by joint account.) Please insert social security or other identifying number of assignee PROVISIONS AS TO REGISTRATION The ownership of the principal of and interest on the within Bond has been registered on the books of the Registrar in the name of the person last noted below. Date of Registration Registered Owner Cede & Co. Federal ID #13-2555119 Signature of Officer of the Registrar 3.02. The City Manager will obtain a copy of the proposed approving legal opinion of Kennedy & Graven, Chartered, Minneapolis, Minnesota, which will be complete except as to dating thereof and will cause the opinion to be printed on or accompany each Bond. DJK-198441vl MU200-90 -7710- Section 4. Payment; Security; Pledges and Covenants. 4.01. (a) The Bonds are payable from the General Obligation Bonds, Series 200lA Debt Service Fund (Debt Service Fund) hereby created in the City Enterprise Fund for the water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer systems (Utility) of the City (herein referred to as the Utility Fund). Tax levies (Taxes) as defined in paragraph (b), and net revenues as deS~rib~din paragraph (b)~ me hereby PI~d~d-~6 th~ Debt Servi6~ Fufidl IT a payment ~f principal or interest on the Bonds becomes due when there is not sufficient money in the Debt Service Fund to pay the same, the City Finance Director is authorized and directed to pay such principal or interest from the general fund of the City, and the general fund will be reimbursed for 'such advances out of the proceeds of Taxes and net revenues when collected. There is appropriated to the Debt Service Fund (i) capitalized interest financed from Bond proceeds, if any, (ii) any amount over the minimum purchase price paid by the Purchaser and (iii) the accrued interest paid by the Purchaser upon closing and deliverv~ of the glonds~ which appmprialion is to_be a!lne._ated 84_8% to the. Ut'~it~j Account for the Utility Bonds in the Debt Service Fund and 15.2% to the Judgement Account for the Judgement Bonds in the Debt Service Fund. (b) There is established in the Debt Service Fund two separate accounts, first the Utility Account and second the Judgement Account. Into the Judgement Account there is to be paid (i) from the net proceeds of the Bonds (that is, gross proceeds less the allocations made in paragraph (a)) an amount equal to 15.2% of the net proceeds; and (ii) all Taxes hereafter received by the City from the tax levy made by Section 4.03. Out of the Judgement Account are to be paid the amount of the Judgement, that is $240,000, and 15.2% of the principal and interest on the Bonds as the same become due. Into the Utility Account there is to be paid (i) from the net proceeds of the Bonds (as defined above) an amount equal to 84.8% of those net proceeds and (ii) net revenues (that is, gross revenues less costs of operation and maintenance) of the utility in an amount necessary to pay 84.8% of the principal of and interest on the Bonds as the same become due. Out of the Utility Account is to be paid the Project Costs, and 84.8% of the principal and interest on the Bonds as the same becomes due. 4.02. As permitted by the Act the net revenues of the water, sewer and storm sewer utilities are hereby pledged to the payment of the Utility Bonds. The Utility Bonds are issued on a parity with the City's General Obligation Water and Sewer Bonds of 1993, dated August 1, 1993. Additional bonds on a parity with the Utility Bonds may be issued by the City at any time. 4.03. The City Council covenants and agrees with the holders of the Utility Bonds that so long as any of the Utility Bonds remain outstanding and unpaid, it will keep and enforce the following covenants and agreements: DJK-198441vl MU200-90 -7711 - (a) The City will continue to maintain and efficiently operate the Utility as public utilities and conveniences free from competition of other like municipal utilities to the degree permitted by law, and will cause all revenues therefrom to be deposited in bank accounts and credited to the Utility Account as hereinabove provided, and will make no expenditures from the Utility account except for a duly authorized purpose and in accordance with this resolution. ................ (b) - Th~ City-~viI[ al~6/fi~/ih~in th~"D~bt S~i~Fuhd Md' He-h~clUd~d-Utility Account as a separate account in the Utility Fund and will cause money to be credited thereto from time to time, out of net revenues from the Utility and ad valorem taxes in sums sufficient to pay principal of and interest on the Utility Bonds when due. (c) The City will keep and maintain proper and adequate books of records and accounts separate from all other records of the City in which will be complete and correct entries as to all transactions relating to the Utility and which will be open to inspection and cngying by any bondholder~ or the bondhr~lcler'~ _agent or attorney, at any re~onab!e time, and it will furnish certified transcripts therefrom upon request and upon payment of a reasonable fee therefor, and said account will be audited at least annually by a qualified public accountant and statements of such audit and report will be furnished to all bondholders upon request. (d) The City Council will cause persons handling revenues of the Utility to be bonded in reasonable mounts for the protection of the City and the bondholders and will cause the funds collected on account of the operations of the Utility to be deposited in a bank whose deposits are guaranteed under the Federal Deposit Insurance Law. (e) The Council will keep the Utility insured at all times against loss by fire, tornado and other risks customarily insured against with an insurer or insurers in good standing, in such amounts as are customary for like utilities, to protect the holders, from time to time, of the Utility Bonds and the City from any loss due to any such casualty and will apply the proceeds of such insurance to make good any such loss. (f) The City and each and all of its officers will punctually perform all duties with reference to the water and sewer plant and system as required by law. (g) The City will impose and collect charges of the nature authorized by Minnesota Statutes, section 444.075 at the times and in the amounts required to produce, taxes designated as a source of payment of. the Utility Bonds and net revenues adequate to pay all principal and interest when due on the Utility Bonds and to create and maintain the Reserve Account. (h) The City Council will levy general ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the City, when required to meet any deficiency in net revenues available for the Utility Account. DJK-198441vl MU200-90 -7712- 4.04. For the purpose of paying the principal of and interest on the Judgement Bonds, there is hereby levied a direct annual irrepealable ad valorem tax upon all of the taxable property in the City, which will be spread upon the tax rolls and collected with and as part of other general taxes of the City. Such tax will be credited to the Judgement Account in the Debt Service Fund above provided and will be in the years and amounts as follows (year stated being year of levy for collection the following year): Year Levy (See Attachment A) 4.05. It is hereby determined that the estimated collections of net Utility revenues and foregoing taxes will produce at least five percent in excess of the amount needed to meet when due, the principal and interest payments on the Bonds. The tax levy herein provided is irrepealable until all of the Bonds are_paid,~om_v~at at the time the City _m___akes_its_anaual tax levies, the City Manager may certify to the Taxpayer Services Division Manager of Hennepin County the amount available in the Judgement Account in the Debt Service Fund to pay principal and interest on the Judgement Bonds due during the ensuing year, and the Taxpayer Services Division Manager will thereupon reduce the levy collectible during such year by the amount so certified. 4.06. The City Manager is authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the Taxpayer Services Division Manager and to obtain the certificate required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.63. Section 5. Authentication of Transcript. 5.01. The officers of the City are authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to the attorneys approving the Bonds, certified copies of proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds and to the financial condition and affairs of the City, and such other certificates, affidavits and transcripts as may be required to show the facts within their knowledge or as shown by the books and records in their custody and under their control, relating to the validity and marketability of the Bonds, and such instruments, including any heretofore furnished, will be deemed representations of the City as to the facts stated therein. 5.02. The Mayor, City Manager and Finance Director are authorized and directed to certify that they have examined the Official Statement prepared and circulated in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bonds and that to the best of their knowledge and belief the Official Statement is a complete and accurate representation of the facts and representations made therein as of the date of the Official Statement. DJK-198441vl MU200-90 -7713- 5.03. The City authorizes the Purchaser to forward the amount of Bond proceeds allocable to the payment of issuance expenses (other than amounts payable to Kennedy & Graven, Chartered as Bond Counsel) to U.S. Trust Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota on the closing date for further distribution as directed by the City's financial adviser, Ehlers & Associates, Inc. ........ S~fiii-oh 6.~ .... ~Fax c0vefi~t, .................. 6.01. The City covenants and agrees with the holders from time to time of the Bonds that it will not take or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or agents any action which would cause the interest on the Bonds to become subject to taxation under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code), and the Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder, in effect at the time of such actions, and that it will take or cause its officers, employees or agents to take, all affirmative action within its power that may be necessary to en.qure that such intere.qt will not become .quhject to taxation un_der the Code _a~d app!i, cable Treasury Regulations, as presently existing or as hereafter amended and made applicable to the Bonds. 6.02. (a) The City will comply with requirements necessary under the Code to establish and maintain the exclusion from gross income of the interest on the Bonds under Section 103 of the Code, including without limitation requirements relating to temporary periods for investments, limitations on amounts invested at a yield greater than the yield on the Bonds. [, and the rebate of excess investment earnings to the United States if the Bonds (together with other obligations reasonably expected to be issued in calendar year 2001) exceed the small-issuer exception amount of $5,000,000. (b) For purposes of qualifying for the small issuer exception to the federal arbitrage rebate requirements, the City finds, determines and declares that the aggregate face amount of all tax-exempt bonds (other than private activity bonds) issued by the City (and all subordinate entities of the City) during the calendar year in which the Bonds are issued and outstanding at one time is not reasonably expected to exceed $5,000,000, all within the meaning of Section 148(f)(4)(C) of the Code. 6.03. The City further covenants not to use the proceeds of the Bonds or to cause or permit them or any of them to be used, in such a manner as to cause the Bonds to be "private activity bonds" within the meaning of Sections 103 and 141 through 150 of the Code. 6.04. In order to qualify the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code, the City makes the following factual statements and representations: (a) Code; the Bonds are not "private activity bonds" as defined in Section 141 of the DJK-198441vl MU200-90 -7714- (b) the City designates the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code; (c) the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations (other than private activity bonds that are not qualified 501(c)(3) bonds) which will be issued by the City (and all subordinate entities of the City) during calendar year 2001 will not exceed $10,000,000; and (d) not more than $10,000,000 of obligations issued by the City during calendar year 2001 have been designated for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code. 6.05. The City will use its best efforts to comply with any federal procedural requirements which may apply in order to effectuate the designations made by this section. Section 7. Book-Entry System; Limited Obligation of City. 7.01. The Bonds will be initially issued in the form of a separate single typewritten or printed fully registered Bond for each of the maturities set forth in Section 1.03 hereof. Upon initial issuance, the ownership of each Bond will be registered in the registration books kept by the Bond Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee for The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York, and its successors and assigns (DTC). Except as provided in this section, all of the outstanding Bonds will be registered in the registration books kept by the Bond Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC. 7.02. With respect to Bonds registered in the registration books kept by the Bond Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, the City, the Bond Registrar and the Paying Agent will have no responsibility or obligation to any broker dealers, banks and other financial institutions from time to time for which DTC holds Bonds as securities depository (Participants) or to any other person on behalf of which a Participant holds an interest in the Bonds, including but not limited to any responsibility or obligation with respect to (i) the accuracy of the records of DTC, Cede & Co. or any Participant with respect to any ownership interest in the Bonds, (ii) the delivery to any Participant or any other person (other than a registered owner of Bonds, as shown by the registration books kept by the Bond Registrar), of any notice with respect to the Bonds, including any notice of redemption, or (iii) the payment to any Participant or any other person, other than a registered owner of Bonds, of any amount with respect to principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds. The City, the Bond Registrar and the Paying Agent may treat and consider the person in whose name each Bond is registered in the registration books kept by the Bond Registrar as the holder and absolute owner of such Bond for the purpose of payment of principal, premium and interest with respect to such Bond, for the purpose of registering transfers with respect to such Bond, and for all other purposes. The Paying Agent will pay all principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds only to or~ on the order of the respective registered owners, as shown in the registration books kept by the Bond Registrar, and all such payments will be valid and effectual to fully satisfy and discharge the City's obligations with respect to payment of principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. No person other than a registered owner of Bonds, as shown in the registration books kept by the Bond Registrar, will receive a certificated DJKoI98441vl MU200-90 -7715- Bond evidencing the obligation of this resolution. Upon delivery by DTC to the City Manager of a written notice to the effect that DTC has determined to substitute a new nominee in place of Cede & Co., the words "Cede & Co.," will refer to such new nominee of DTC; and upon receipt of such a notice, the City Manager will promptly deliver a copy of the same to the Bond Registrar and Paying Agent. 7.03. Representation Letter. The form of Blanket Issuer Letter of Representations propoSed to be submitted to DTC, which is on file With the City Manager Md presented tO this meeting (Representation Letter), is hereby approved, and the City Manager is authorized to execute and deliver the Representation Letter in substantially the form on file, with such changes therein not inconsistent with law as the City Manager and the City Attorney may approve, which approval will be conclusively evidenced by the execution thereof. Any Paying Agent or Bond Registrar subsequently appointed by the City with respect to the Bonds will agree to take all action necessary for all representations of the City in the Representation letter with respect to the Bond Registrar and Paying Agent, respectively, to be complied with at all times. 7.04. Transfers Outside Book-Entry System. In the event the City, by resolution of the City Council, determines that it is in the best interests of the persons having beneficial interests in the Bonds that they be able to obtain Bond certificate, the City will notify DTC, whereupon DTC will notify the Participants, of the availability through DTC of Bond certificates. In such event the City will issue, transfer and exchange Bond certificates as requested by DTC and any other registered owner in accordance with the provisions of this Resolution. DTC may determine to discontinue providing its services with respect to the Bonds at any time by giving notice to the City and discharging its responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. In such event, if no successor securities depository is appointed, the City will issue and the Bond Registrar will authenticate Bond certificates in accordance with this resolution and the provisions hereof will apply to the transfer, exchange and method of payment thereof. 7.05. Payments to Cede & Co. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Resolution to the contrary, so long as a Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, payments with respect to principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bond and all notices with respect to the Bond will be made and given, respectively in the manner provided in DTC's Operational Arrangements, as set forth in the Representation Letter. Section 8. Continuing Disclosure. 8.01. In order to qualify the Bonds for limited continuing disclosure under paragraph (d)(2) of Securities and Exchange Commission Rules, Section 15c2-12 (the SEC Rule), the City makes the following factual statement and representation: As of the date of delivery of the Bonds, the City will not be an obligated person (as defined in paragraph (f) of the SEC Rule) with respect to more than $10,000,000 in aggregate amount of outstanding municipal securities, including the Bonds and excluding municipal securities that were exempt from the SEC Rule pursuant to paragraph (d)(1) thereof. DJK-198441vl MU200-90 -7716- The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member , and upon 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. DJK-198441vl MU200-90 -7717- STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS. ) CITY OF MOUND ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and Acting City Clerk of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a regular meeting of the City Council of the City held on Tuesday, June 12, 2001 with the original minutes on file in my office and the extract is a full, tree and correct copy of the minutes insofar as they relate to the issuance and sale of $1,585,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 200lA of the City. WITNESS My hand officially as such Acting City Clerk and the corporate seal of the City this __ day of ,2001. Acting City Clerk Mound, Minnesota (SEAL) DJK-198441vl MU200-90 -7718- STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN TAXPAYER SERVICES DIVISION MANAGER'S CERTIFICATE AS TO TAX LEVY AND REGISTRATION I, the undersigned Taxpayer Services Division Manager of Hennepin County, Minnesota, hereby certify that a certified copy of a resolution adopted by the governing body of the City of Mound, Minnesota, on June 12, 2001, levying taxes for the payment of $1,585,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 200lA, of said municipality dated July 11, 2001, has been filed in my office and said bonds have been entered on the register of obligations in my office and that such tax has been levied as required by law. WITNESS My hand and official seal this day of ., 2001. (SEAL) Taxpayer Services Division Manager Hennepin County, Minnesota By. Deputy DJK-198441vl MU200-90 -7719- Extract of Minutes of Meeting of the City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnes~ota, was duly _h~!¢ in the CityHallin said City on_Tuesday, June 12,_ 2001, commencing at 7:30 o'clock P.M. The following members were present: and the following were absent: The Mayor announced that the next order of business was consideration of the proposals which had been received for the purchase of the City's $1,155,000 Municipal Liquor Store Revenue Bonds, Series 200lB. The City Manager presented a tabulation of the proposals which had been received in the manner specified in the Terms of Proposal of the Bonds. The proposals were as set forth in Exhibit A attached. After due consideration of the proposals, Member then introduced the following resolution, and moved its adoption. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLU~ON AWARDING THE SALE OF $1,155,000 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR STORE REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 200lB; FIXING THEIR FORM AND SPECIFICATIONS; DIRECTING THEIR EXECUTION AND DELIVERY; AND PROVIDING FOR THEIR PAYMENT DJK-198466vl MU200-90 -7720- BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota (City) as follows: Section 1. Sale of Bonds. 1.01. The City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, has investigated the facts and does hereby find, determine and declare that: (a) the City has by ordinance duly adopted, authorized the establishment and operation of a municipal liquor dispensary for the "off-sale" of intoxicating liquor and other merchandise in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 340A, Minnesota Statutes, and it is deemed necessary and expedient that its Municipal Liquor Store Revenue Bonds, Series 200lB (Bonds) be authorized, issued and sold pursuant to Chapter 475, Minnesota Statutes, for the purpose of financing in part the construction of a new municipal liquor store (Project); (Jo)- the-revenuesneasonably anticipated to benecei~~e Project during the period for which the Bonds are outstanding will be more than sufficient to pay all costs of the operation and maintenance thereof and to provide excess or net revenues adequate to meet all payments of principal of and interest on the Bonds and necessary reserve of the Bonds, and it is in the best interest of the City that the Bonds be made payable solely from such net revenues. (c) it is necessary and expedient to the sound financial management of the affairs of the City to issue the Bonds to provide financing for the Project. 1.02. The City will therefore issue and sell the Bonds in the amount of $1,155,000. 1.03. The proposal of (Purchaser) to purchase $1,155,000 Municipal Liquor Store Revenue Bonds, Series 200lB (Bonds) of the City described in the Terms of Proposal thereof is found and determined to be a reasonable offer and is accepted, the proposal being to purchase the Bonds at a price of $ plus accrued interest to date of delivery, for Bonds bearing interest as follows: DJK-198466vl MU200-90 -7721 - Year of Interest Year of Maturity Rate Maturity 2003 2012 2004 2013 2005 2014 2006 2015 2007 2016 2008 2017 Interest Rate 2009 2018 2010 2019 2011 True interest rate: 1.04. The Mayor and City Manager are directed to execute a contract with the Purchaser on behalf of the City. 1.05. The City will forthwith issue and sell the Bonds in the total principal amount of $1,155,000, originally dated July 11, 2001, in the denomination of $5,000 each or any integral multiple thereof, numbered No. R-1, upward, bearing interest as above set forth, and which mature serially on February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: Year Amount Year Amount 2003 $45,000 2012 $70,000 2004 45,000 2013 75,000 2005 45,000 2014 75,000 2006 50,000 2015 80,000 2007 55,000 2016 85,000 2008 55,000 2017 90,000 2009 60,000 2018 95,000 2010 60,000 2019 105,000 2011 65,000 1.06. Optional Redemption. The City may elect on February 1,2011, and on any day thereafter to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2012. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such manner as the City will determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City will notify DTC (as defined in Section 7 hereof) of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest. DJK-198466vl MU200-90 -7722- 1.07. Term Bonds. To be completed if Term Bonds are requested by the Purchaser. 1,08. The proceeds from the sale of the Bonds will be credited to the Construction Account hereinafter created in the Municipal Liquor Fund. Section 2. Registration and Payment. 2.01. Registered Form. The Bonds will be issued only in fully registered form. The interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond, the princ!p_al__ amount thereof, is payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein. 2.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Each Bond will be dated as of the last interest payment date preceding the date of authentication to which interest on the Bond has been paid or made available for payment, unless (i) the date of authentication is an interest payment date to which interest has been paid or made available for payment, in which case such Bond will be dated as of the date of authentication, or (ii) the date of authentication is prior to the first interest payment date, in which case such Bond will be dated as of the date of original issue. The interest on the Bonds ,M1Lbe-pa-yable on Febmary44nd Aught Kof-eaeh-yea~, ~~ein~bruary-l-,-~02;-, to the owner of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the immediately preceding month, whether or not such day is a business day. 2.03. Registration. The City will appoint, and will maintain, a bond registrar, transfer agent, authenticating agent and paying agent (Registrar). The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the Registrar with respect thereto are as follows: (a) Register. The Registrar must keep at its principal corporate trust office a bond register in which the Registrar provides for the registration of ownership of Bonds and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged. (b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of a Bond duly endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar will authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until such interest payment date. (c) Exchange of Bonds. When Bonds are surrendered by the registered owner for exchange the Registrar will authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the registered owner or the owner's attorney in writing. DJK-198466vl MU200-90 -7723- (d) Cancellation. Bonds surrendered upon any transfer or exchange will be promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City. (e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When a Bond is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the Bond until the Registrar is satisfied that the endorsement on the Bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar will incur no liability for the refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems .... improper or urn__ authorized (f) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat the person in whose name a Bond is registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the Bond, whether the Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on account of, the principal of and interest on the Bond and for all other purposes, and payments so made to a registered owner or upon the owner's order will be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon such Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (g) Taxes,~eee~nd~harges. Fur a is-an~fer or exchange of Bonds, the R~gistrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to the transfer or exchange. (h) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. Ifa Bond becomes mutilated or is destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar will deliver a new Bond of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of the mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in substitution for a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that the Bond was destroyed, stolen or lost, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it and as provided by law, in which both the City and the Registrar must be named as obligees. Bonds so surrendered to the Registrar will be cancelled by the Registrar and evidence of such cancellation must be given to the City. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Bond has already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it is not necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment. (i) Redemption. In the event any of the Bonds are called for redemption, notice thereof identifying the Bonds to be redeemed will be given by the Registrar by mailing a copy of the redemption notice by first class mail (postage prepaid) to the registered owner of each Bond to be redeemed at the address shown on the registration books kept by the Registrar and by publishing the notice in the manner required by law. Failure to give notice by publication or by mail to any registered owner, or any defect therein, will not affect the validity of any proceeding for the redemption of Bonds. Bonds so called for redemption DJ'K- 198466v 1 MU200-90 -7724- will cease to bear interest after the specified redemption date, provided that the funds for the redemption are on deposit with the place of payment at that time. 2.04. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City appoints , City of ., Minnesota, as the initial Registrar. The Mayor and the City Manager are authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of the City, a contract with the Registrar. Section 3. Form of Bond. 3.01. The Bonds will be prepared in substantially the following form: No. R- $ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA ........................................ COUNT-Y-OF HENNEPIN CITY OF MOUND MUNICIPAL LIQUOR STORE REVENUE BOND, SERIES 200lB Date of Rate Maturity Original Issue July 11, 2001 Registered Owner: Cede & Co. The City of Mound, Minnesota, a duly organized and existing municipal corporation in Hennepin County, Minnesota (City), acknowledges itself to be indebted and for value received hereby promises to pay to the Registered Owner specified above or registered assigns, the principal sum of $ on the maturity date specified above, with interest thereon from the date hereof at the annual rate specified above, payable February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing February 1, 2002, to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) of the immediately preceding month. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof, the principal hereof are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft by the , , Minnesota, as Bond Registrar, Paying Agent, Transfer Agent and Authenticating Agent, or its designated successor under the Resolution described herein. For the prompt and full payment of such principal and interest as the same respectively become due, the full faith and credit and taxing powers of the City have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. DJK- 198466v 1 MU200-90 -7725- The City may elect on February 1,2011, and on any day thereafter to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2012. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such manner as the City will determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City will notify DTC (as defined in Section 7 hereof) of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest. The City Council has designated the issue of Bonds of which this Bond forms a part as "qualified tax exempt obligations" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code) relating to disallowance of interest expense for financial institutions and within the $10 million limit allowed by the Code for the calendar year of issue. This Bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of $1,155,000 all of like original issue date and tenor, except as to number, maturity date, redemption privilege, and interest rate,-all issued--pursuant-to a resolution-adopted by-the-City Council on-June-12, 200t-(the- Resolution), for the purpose of providing money to aid in acquisition and betterment of a municipal liquor store, pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 340 and 475, and the principal hereof and interest hereon are payable only out of the Sinking and Interest Account of the Municipal Liquor Fund of the City created by the resolution adopted June 12, 2001, entitled, "A Resolution Awarding the Sale of $1,155,000 Municipal Liquor Store Revenue Bonds, Series 200lB; Fixing their Form and Specifications; Directing Their Execution and Delivery; and Providing For Their Payment", to which reference is made for a full statement of rights and privileges hereby conferred. This bond does not constitute a general obligation of the City and the taxing powers of the City may not be used to pay principal hereof or interest hereon. As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office of the Bond Registrar, by the registered owner hereof in person or by the owner's attomey duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Bond Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or the owner's attorney; and may also be surrendered in exchange for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange the City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the transferee or registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. The City and the Bond Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this Bond is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Bond Registrar will be affected by any notice to the contrary. DJK-198466vl MU200-90 -7726- IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance of this Bond in order to make it a valid and binding special obligation of the City in accordance with its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed as so required, and that the issuance of this Bond does not cause the indebtedness of the City to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation of indebtedness; that the City has, by resolution duly adopted, established and will maintain a Liquor Fund and a Sinking and Interest Account therein and has irrevocably appropriated and pledged to said account, out of the net revenues to be derived from the operation of the municipal liquor dispensary, an amount sufficient to pay principal of and interest on this bond when due, and to maintain the reserve as may be required by the authorizing resolution; that the City and its officers will employ, establish and maintain operating policies governing the purchase and sale of merchandise and will do all things necessary and reasonable to assure gross receipts adequate to pay costs of operation and maintenance of the liquor dispensary and to provide net revenues in the amounts required to pay principal hereof and interest hereon, so far as permitted by law; and that in and by the authorizing resolution, other covenants, agreements and stipulations are provided for the security and enforcement of rights granted hereunder, which will be faithfully and promptly pefformedby-the~City-and-its officers-andagents, - IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, by its City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalf by the manual signatures of the Mayor and City Manager and has caused this Bond to be dated as of the date set forth below. Dated: CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA City Manager Mayor CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within. By Authorized Representative DJK- 198466v 1 MU200-90 -7727- The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, will be constructed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM -- as tenants in common UNIF GIFT MIN ACT (Cust) Custodian (Minor) TEN ENT -- as tenants by entireties under Uniform Gifts or Transfers to Minors JT TEN -- as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common (State) Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. ASSIGNMENT For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint attorney to transfer the said Bond on the books kept for registration of the within Bond, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: Notice: The assignor's signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as it appears upon the face of the within Bond in every particular, without alteration or any change whatever. Signature Guaranteed: NOTICE: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by a financial institution that is a member of the Securities Transfer Agent Medallion Program ("STAMP"), the Stock Exchange Medallion Program ("SEMP"), the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. Medallion Signatures Program ("MSP") or other such "signature guarantee program" as may be determined by the Registrar in addition to, or in substitution for, STAMP, SEMP or MSP, all in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. DJK- 198466v 1 MU200-90 -7728- The Bond Registrar will not effect transfer of this Bond unless the information concerning the assignee requested below is provided, Name and Address: (Include information for all joint owners if this Bond is held by joint account.) Please insert social security or other idemifying number of assignee PROVISIONS AS TO REGISTRATION The ownership of the principal of and interest on the within Bond has been registered on the books of the Registrar in the name of the person last noted below. Date of Registration Registered Owner Cede & Co. Federal ID # 13-2555119 Signature of Officer of the Registrar Section 4. Payment; Security; Pledges and Covenants. 4.01. In order to provide for the proper administration of the funds derived from the operation of the Project and for the security of the Bonds, the City will hereafter maintain the following subaccounts in the Liquor Fund: (a) A Capital Expenditure Account, to which will be credited all proceeds received from the sale of the Bonds, less the accrued interest (if any) paid by the Purchaser which will be credited to the Sinking and Interest Account, and any other amounts which may be appropriated for the purpose of acquiring, constructing and furnishing the Project. The moneys therein will be used solely for the purpose of paying for the costs thereof, DJK-198466vl MU200-90 -7729- including legal, engineering, financing and other such expenses incidental thereto, including interest during construction, and any surplus will be transferred to the Sinking and Interest Account. (b) An Operation and Maintenance Account, to which will be credited, as received, all receipts from the operation of the Project. There will be charged this account all items of disbursement which by sound accounting practices constitute normal and reasonable costs of current operation and maintenance of the Project, excluding allowance for depreciation, capital improvements, extraordinary repairs and debt service. The costs will include compensation for the manager and other necessary employees, insurance, utility services, costs of replacement of merchandise sold and similar expense items. There will be retained in this account an amount which will be sufficient to pay all anticipated expenditures for such current operation and maintenance for one month in advance. Any balance therein will be deemed net revenues. (c) A Sinking and Interest Account, to which will be credited on the first day of each calendar month, commencing on July 1, 2001, the amount of one-twelfth of the total amount-o f-pfincipal--and4nterest-due-£or -the,-Bonds~(and-any-other-bonds-issued--on~a-parity ............... therewith), for the ensuing 12 months from the net revenues in the Operation and Maintenance Account, to pay only principal and interest on the Bonds and any other bonds that are issued on a parity with the Bonds until the Bonds and interest thereon have been fully paid. There will also be credited to the Sinking and Interest Account the accrued interest (if any) paid by the Purchaser upon delivery of the Bonds. (d) A Reserve Account, into which, on the date of delivery of the Bonds to the Purchaser, will be deposited the sum equal to the lesser of (i) 10% of the principal amount of the Bonds, (ii) the maximum and debt service on the Bonds, or (iii) 125% of the average annual debt service on the Bonds is to be paid from the proceeds of the Bonds. Money in the Reserve Account may be used only to pay principal of and interest on the Bonds or additional parity bonds. Investment earnings in the Reserve Account may be transferred to the Revenue Bond Account. Moneys in the Reserve Account may not be transferred to the general fund of the City or used for any other purpose until all Bonds have been paid or sufficient sums for payment of principal and interest on the Bond has been deposited with the Bond Registrar. The funds in the Reserve Account may be invested only in securities authorized by State law for investment of municipal funds. It is determined that the Reserve Account is reasonably required in order to market the Bonds and provide adequate security therefor. Moneys in the Reserve Account may be used only for payment of debt service on the Bonds or additional parity bonds, except that such moneys may be used for payment ora fmal installment maturity, or for such payment if the Bonds are defeased. If additional parity bonds are issued the Reserve Account must be increased so that its ratio to the total amount of outstanding Bonds and parity bonds is equal to its ratio to the Bonds at the date of delivery of the Bonds. Money in the Reserve Account may be used only (i) for transfer to the Revenue Bond Account and (ii) for the redemption and prepayment of Bonds. (e) Net revenues not required for the foregoing purposes will be deemed surplus net revenues, and may be used for any other corporate purpose authorized by law. DJK-198466vl MU200-90 -7730- 4.02. The City Finance Director will keep separate bank accounts in which will be deposited all funds properly applicable to the Operation and Maintenance Account and the Sinking and Interest Account. These accounts will be kept in a bank insured under the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or invested in obligations authorized by laws for Minnesota municipalities. 4.03. For the proper protection and security of the Bonds, the City certifies, covenants, represents and agrees to and with the Purchaser and the holder from time to time of the Bond as follows: (a) So long as the City continues to operate the Project, it will charge for all merchandise sold, prices comparable to those charged by other liquor stores and will continue to operate the Project in accordance with sound economic practices so as to produce net revenues from the operation thereof and that it will not permit or suffer any private off-sale liquor stores to be operated within the City except as provided by law, and that it will not establish any additional municipal liquor store unless the revenues therefrom will be credited to the Liquor Fund and applied in accordance with this resolution. (b) In event any properties constituting capital assets of the Project are sold, the same will be sold at their full and fair market value and the proceeds will be used to procure other capital assets of equal utility and value or will be appropriated to the Liquor Fund and used to pay the Bonds and interest thereon. The proceeds of any condemnation or insurance award will be similarly applied. (c) The City will procure and keep in force insurance on the Project building and all equipment and fixtures therein and its stock of merchandise against loss by fire, theft and all other causes customarily insured against for like properties, in amounts sufficient to cover the total loss thereof and will procure and keep in force suitable fidelity bonds on all employees in connection with the Project or handling any funds thereof, in such amounts as are required to fully protect the City and the holders of the Bonds against any loss due to failure or default on the part of such employees. In event of any loss, the proceeds will be used to repair and restore the damage or to replace the loss or will be used to retire the Bonds. (d) The City will maintain its Liquor Fund and the accounts specified in Section 4.01 hereof and will cause proper and adequate books of record and account to be kept separate from all other records of the City, which will accurately reflect all receipts and disbursements of the Liquor Fund. Those books and records will be open to inspection and copying at all reasonable times by any holder of the Bonds, their attorney or agent, and the City will furnish certified copies of any portion thereof upon reasonable request and payment of the cost thereof. The City will cause said fund and accounts to be audited at least annually by a competent public accountant and will furnish a copy of the audit report to the Purchaser upon request. DJK-198466vl MU200-90 -7731 - (e) The City will cause the income and revenues of the municipal liquor store to be credited to the Liquor Fund and to the subaccounts as herein provided and will make no expenditures therefrom except as herein provided. 4.04. If there are insufficient amounts in the Sinking and Interest Account to pay the total installment of principal and interest then due on the Bonds, the amount therein will first be used to pay interest ratably and the balance, if any, will be used to pay the principal then outstanding and due, provided that the holder of a Bond will not be required to accept less than full payment on any installment of principal. The Bonds shall constitute a first and prior lien upon the net revenues of the Project, provided that the City reserves the right to issue and sell additional parity bonds provided that it will appear from the last preceding City audits that the annual net revenues of the Project, for each of the three fiscal years prior to the issuance of such additional bonds were in an amount not less than one and one-quarter times the highest amount required in any future year to pay principal of and interest on all bonds payable from such net revenues, including the Bonds and additional bonds. Parity bonds may be issued to complete the Project. 4.05. In event the operation of the Project will be discontinued, all merchandise and fixtures will be sold so far.as necessary to provide money to pay principal of and interest on the Bonds~-.and the proceeds from such sale will be used solely for such purpose. The building will be rented and all rentals will be applied in the same manner until the Bonds are paid in full. 4.06. Upon failure on the part of the City to pay an installment of principal of or interest on the Bonds when due, or the failure on the part of the City to observe and perform any covenant herein contained within 30 days after written notice of such default, the holder of a Bond is authorized to bring such action in law or in equity as they may deem suitable on behalf of all holders of the Bonds and will be entitled to recover the cost of such suit as a first claim on any amounts recovered thereby. 4.07. The City Manager is authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the Taxpayer Services Division Manager of Hennepin County and to obtain the certificate required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.63. Section 5. Authentication of Transcript. 5.01. The.officers of the City are authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to the attorneys approving the Bonds, certified copies of proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds and to the financial condition and affairs of the City, and such other certificates, affidavits and transcripts as may be required to show the facts within their knowledge or as shown by the books and records in their custody and under their control, relating to the validity and marketability of the Bonds and such instruments, including any heretofore furnished, will be deemed representations of the City as to the facts stated therein. 5.02. The Mayor and City Manager are authorized and directed to certify that they have examined the Official Statement prepared and circulated in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bonds and that to the best of their knowledge and belief the Official Statement is a complete and DJK-198466vl MU200-90 -7732- accurate representation of the facts and representations made therein as of the date of the Official statement. Section 6. Tax Covenant. 6.01. The City covenants and agrees with the holders from time to time of the Bonds that it will not take or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or agents any action which would cause the interest on the Bonds to become subject to taxation under the Intemal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code), and the Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder, in effect at the time of such actions, and that it will take or cause its officers, employees or agents to take, all affirmative action within its power that may be necessary to ensure that such interest will not become subject to taxation under the Code and applicable Treasury Regulations, as presently existing or as hereafter amended and made applicable to the Bonds. 6.02. (a) The City will comply with requirements necessary under the Code to establish and maintain the exclusion from gross income of the interest on the Bonds under Section 103 of the Code, including without limitation requirements relating to temporary periods for investments, limitations.on amounts invested at a yield greater than-the -yield onthe Bonds,-and-the rebate-of excess investment earnings to the United States if the Bonds (together with other obligations reasonably expected to be issued in calendar year 2001) exceed the small-issuer exception amount of $5,000,000. Co) For purposes of qualifying for the small issuer exception to the federal arbitrage rebate requirements, the City finds, determines and declares that the aggregate face amount of all tax-exempt bonds (other than private activity bonds) issued by the City (and all subordinate entities of the City) during the calendar year in which the Bonds are issued and outstanding at one time is not reasonably expected to exceed $5,000,000, all within the meaning of Section 148(f)(4)(C) of the Code. 6.03. The City further covenants not to use the proceeds of the Bonds or to cause or permit them or any of them to be used, in such a manner as to cause the Bonds to be "private activity bonds" within the meaning of Sections 103 and 141 through 150 of the Code. 6.04. In order to qualify the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code, the City makes the following factual statements and representations: (a) Code; the Bonds are not "private activity bonds" as defined in Section 141 of the (b) the City designates the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code; (c) the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations (other than private activity bonds, treating qualified 501 (c)(3) bonds as not being private activity bonds) DJK- 198466v 1 MU200-90 -7733- which will be issued by the City (and all subordinate entities of the City) during calendar year 2001 will not exceed $10,000,000; and (d) not more than $10,000,000 of obligations issued by the City during calendar year 2001 have been designated for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code. 6.05. The City will use its best efforts to comply with any federal procedural requirements which may apply in order to effectuate the designations made by this section. Section 7. Book-Entry System; Limited Obligation of City. 7.01. The Bonds will be initially issued in the form of a separate single typewritten or printed fully registered Bond for each of the maturities set forth in Section 1.03 hereof. Upon initial issuance, the ownership of each Bond will be registered in the registration books kept by the Bond Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee for The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York, and its successors and assigns (DTC). Except as provided in this section, all of the outstanding Bonds will be registered in the registration books kept by the Bond Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC. 7.02. With respect to Bonds registered in the registration books kept by the Bond Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, the City, the Bond Registrar and the Paying Agent will have no responsibility or obligation to any broker dealers, banks and other financial institutions fi.om time to time for which DTC holds Bonds as securities depository (Participants) or to any other person on behalf of which a Participant holds an interest in the Bonds, including but not limited to any responsibility or obligation with respect to (i) the accuracy of the records of DTC, Cede & Co. or any Participant with respect to any ownership interest in the Bonds, (ii) the delivery to any Participant or any other person (other than a registered owner of Bonds, as shown by the registration books kept by the Bond Registrar,) of any notice with respect to the Bonds, including any notice of redemption, or (iii) the payment to any Participant or any other person, other than a registered owner of Bonds, of any amount with respect to principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds. The City, the Bond Registrar and the Paying Agent may treat and consider the person in whose name each Bond is registered in the registration books kept by the Bond Registrar as the holder and absolute owner of such Bond for the purpose of payment of principal, premium and interest with respect to such Bond, for the purpose of registering transfers with respect to such Bonds, and for all other purposes. The Paying Agent will pay all principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds only to or on the order of the respective registered owners, as shown in the registration books kept by the Bond Registrar, and all such payments will be valid and effectual to fully satisfy and discharge the City's obligations with respect to payment of principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. No person other than a registered owner of Bonds, as shown in the registration books kept by the Bond Registrar, will receive a certificated Bond evidencing the obligation of this resolution. Upon delivery by DTC to the City Clerk- Treasurer of a written notice to the effect that DTC has determined to substitute a new nominee in place of Cede & Co., the words "Cede & Co.," will refer to such new nominee of DTC; and DJK- 198466v 1 MU200-90 -7734- upon receipt of such a notice, the City Clerk-Treasurer will promptly deliver a copy of the same to the Bond Registrar and Paying Agent. 7.03. Representation Letter. The form Blanket Issuer Letter of Representation letter proposed to be submitted to DTC, which is on file with the City Clerk-Treasurer and presented to this meeting (Representation Letter), is hereby approved, and the City Clerk-Treasurer is authorized to execute and deliver the Representation Letter in substantially the form on file, with such changes therein not inconsistent with law as the City Clerk-Treasurer and the City Attorney may approve, which approval will be conclusively evidenced by the execution thereof. Any Paying Agent or Bond Registrar subsequently appointed by the City with respect to the Bonds will agree to take all action necessary for all representations of the City in the Representation letter with respect to the Bond Registrar and Paying Agent, respectively, to be complied with at all times. 7.04. Transfers Outside Book-Entry System. In the event the City, by resolution of the City Council, determines that it is in the best interests of the persons having beneficial interests in the Bonds that they be able to obtain Bond certificates, the City will notify DTC, whereupon DTC will notify the Participants, of the availability through DTC of Bond certificates, In such event the City will issue, transfer and exchange Bond certificates as requested by DTC and any other registered owners in accordance with the provisions of this Resolution. DTC may determine to discontinue providing its services with respect to the Bonds at any time by giving notice to the City and discharging its responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. In such event, if no successor securities depository is appointed, the City will issue and the Bond Registrar will authenticate Bond certificates in accordance with this resolution and the provisions hereof will apply to the transfer, exchange and method of payment thereof. 7.05. Payments to Cede & Co. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Resolution to the contrary, so long as a Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, payments with respect to principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bond and notices with respect to the Bond will be made and given, respectively in the manner provided in DTC's Operational Arrangements, as set forth in the Representation Letter. Section 8. Continuing Disclosure. 8.01. In order to qualify the Bonds for limited continuing disclosure under paragraph (d)(2) of Securities and Exchange Commission Rules, Section 15c2-12 (the SEC Rule), the City makes the following factual statement and representation: As of the date of delivery of the Bonds, the City will not be n obligated person (as defined in paragraph (f) of the SEC Rule) with respect to more than $10,000,000 in aggregate amount of outstanding municipal securities, including the Bonds and excluding municipal securities that were exempt from the SEC Rule pursuant to paragraph (d)(1) thereof. DJK-198466vl MU200-90 -7735- The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member ., and upon 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. DJK- 198466v 1 MU200-90 -7736- STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS. ) CITY OF MOUND ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and Acting City Clerk of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a regular meeting of the City Council of the City held on June 12, 2001 with the original minutes on file in my office and the extract is a full, tree and correct copy of the minutes insofar as they relate to the issuance and sale of $1,155,000 Municipal Liquor Store Revenue Bonds, Series 2001B of the City. WITNESS My hand officially as such Acting City Clerk and the corporate seal of the City this __ day of ,2001. Acting City Clerk Mound, Minnesota (SEAL) DJK-198466vl MU200-90 -7737- STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN TAXPAYER SERVICES DIVISION MANAGER'S CERTIFICATE AS TO REGISTRATION WHERE NO AD VALOREM TAX LEVY I, the undersigned Taxpayer Services Division Manager of Hennepin County, Minnesota, hereby certify that a resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, on June 12, 2001, relating to Municipal Liquor Store Revenue Bonds, Series 200lB, in the amount of $1,155,000, dated July 11, 2001, has been filed in my office and said obligations have been registered on the register of obligations in my office. WITNESS My hand and official seal this __ day of ,2001. (SEAL) Taxpayer Services Division Manager Hennepin County, Minnesota By Deputy DJK-198466vl MU200-90 -7738- MINUTES - EDC - MAY 17, 2001 The meeting was called to order by Paul Meisel at approximately 7:00 a.m. Members present were Sharon McMenamy-Cook, Stan Drahos, John Wilsey, Paul Meisel, Jerry Pietrowski, and Bob Brown. Others present were City Manager Kandis Hanson, Bruce Chamberlain, Gino Businaro, and Shirley Hawks. REPORT ON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HIRING PROCESS City Manager Kandis Hanson stated the hiring process has been underway since February and they are currently down to twelve candidates. A committee will select six or seven out of those candidates for her to interview. As part of the selection process, the City Manager stated she is considering inviting the candidates to come to City Hall for her to observe how they interact with selected citizens. The City Manager stated she would like the new director to be on board in July. "BUY A BRICK PROGRAM" AND/OR INFORMATION BOOTH AT CITY DAYS JUNE 16 All members of the committee felt it was important to have a booth for the "Buy A Brick" program to be manned before and after the parade. There was a discussion on the importance to reactivate the program even if the bricks will possibly not be laid before spring of 2003. It is believed most people are not real concerned as to when the bricks will be laid and are understanding as to why the project has been delayed. It was also the consensus of the Commission that it is important to keep the program visible to ckizens and also be available to answer questions regarding the redevelopment projects. There was a discussion as to the time and location of the booth. The carnival will be at the Metro Plains lot and it was the consensus not to have the booth close to them. It was decided the placement of the tent would be next to the historical society, if possible. Paul Meisel offered his tent and Stan Drahos will bring the brochures explaining the program. Paul Meisel and Bob Brown will be at the tent from 9:00 to 11:00 a.m. and Suzanne Claywell and Gino Businaro will be at there from 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Bob Brown will ask council members to assist in the booth. It was also decided to have the tripods set up showing the downtown redevelopment vision to encourage citizen participation in the "Buy A Brick" program and support for the redevelopment of Mound. An article and application form will be put in the Laker regarding the program and how to "Buy a Brick". It will explain the importance of purchasing bricks now, giving them a better opportunity to say where they would like their brick located. -7739- EDC Meeting - May 17, 2001 There was a discussion as to the concerns being brought up by citizens regarding the entire project being slowed down and the attempt to stop the project by the pending law suit. The City Manager assured everyone that the project is continuing to go forward. The City Manager reported that the approval of the preliminary plans for County Rd. 15 last week is the framework for the rest of the projects. The City Manager reported the City also closed on the Longpre property last week. After a short discussion, it was the consensus of the Commission to urge the City Council to authorize tearing down the old Longpre building not only for aesthetic reasons but also for safety. The City Manager stated it is currently boarded up but before anything else can be done, a decision needs to be made regarding how to abate the asbestos in the building. ~ ~I~CUSSION ON TIlE FUTURE OF ~ EDC The concept of this commission started in 1986 in Mark Brewer's office with Mark Brewer and Jerry Longpre. Shortly thereafter it was approved by the City Council to be an official Commission of the Cky. The City Manager pointed out the original vision of the EDC was to get redevelopment started in Mound, and that has been accomplished. Even though the projects are not complete, the Gramercy development, Metro Plains development, County Rd. 15 realignment; the relocation of the post office, Mound Family Hardware, Cal's Barbershop, and Scotty B's are all because of the efforts and vision put forth bY this Commission. After discUssing how much the Commission has accomplished over the years and the cost to the City for meetings, it was decided the EDC be disbanded a month after the new development director has started which would be after the July meeting. This will give the director an opportunity to really understand the Mound Visions concept and answer any questions he/she may have of the committee. It was suggested that we continue to have quarterly meetings for the next year so members can be updated on the downtown redevelopment. It was decided that instead of meeting, everyone would continue to receive Jim Prosser's weekly updates. The City Manager reminded everyone that disbanding the Commission does not preclude the group from meeting, minutes just will not need to be taken. The City Council will be informed of disbanding of the Economic Development Commission. There was a discussion of inviting the City Council, all former EDC members as well as current members to be recognized at the last meeting. This will be announced in the Laker. Bruce Chamberlain stated it is incredible how much this Commission has accomplished and suggested that in honor of all members, a brass plaque be placed in the center of the Plaza with their names on it. John Wilsey offered to assist Bruce Chamberlain in accomplishing this recognition. 2 -7740- EDC Meeting - May 17, 2001 ACTION ON MARK BREWER RESIGNATION MOTION made by Sharon McMenamy-Cook and seconded by Bob Brown to accept the resignation of Dr. Mark Brewer. The motion passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION made by Stan Drahos and seconded by Sharon McMenagray-Cook to approve the February 15, 2001, minutes. DISCUSSION: Paul Meisel stated we should wait to approve the minutes at the next meeting because no one has had the opportunity to read them. Stan Drahos withdrew his motion and Sharon McMenamy-Cook withdrew her second to approve the minutes. The minutes will be included in the next packet for approval. There was no motion to approve the March 15, 2001, minutes. OTHER Stan Drahos asked about the post office move. The City Manager stated the lease for the post office is up in 2002. The City will not allow them to stay where they are so they will have to relocate at that time. She is preparing a letter to the post office and we are hopeful that they realize it will be more cost effective for them to build now rather than later. There was a short discussion regarding the current lawsuit. The City Manager explained that she cannot report on the most recent hearing until after the next Council meeting. The City Manager did report that the judge did not rule in favor of the City to require the plaintiffs to put up a bond. There was a discussion on the need for citizens to be reminded that they voted in favor of the redevelopment of the old high school property, and how much this lawsuit to stop the redevelopment is costing them. It was pointed out that many people are upset about the lawsuit and how it has delayed the redevelopment projects but they don't know what they can do about it. Many are upset with the negativism and would like to see more positive letters written to the Editor of the Laker. -7741 - EDC Meeting - May 17, 2001 The City Manager reported that everything is going forward with Gramercy and 'they are planning to break ground this fall. They will start with the housing development on Auditors Road. At this time they do not plan to put any retail along Auditoxs Road except on the north end of County Kd. 110. There was a discussion regarding the change of having both commercial and housing in this area. The City Manager explained that it is just not feasible to put in retail at this location. The City Manager also pointed out that with the new plans, there will actually be more retail than what was originally planned and this will add a new main street concept to the plans. Paul Meisel informed the Commission that the retailers on John's Variety block have requested the City to assist them with parking. It was pointed out the City should use this as an incentive for the businesses to upgrade their buildings. Bob Brown brought up the health issues of little Kyler Linquist. He is currently in St. Louis waiting for a heart transplant. He stated a fund raiser is being planned for him. ADJOURNMENT MOTION made by Bob Brown and seconded by Stan Drahos to adjourn the meeting. The motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 8:40 a.m. The next meeting will be June 21, 2001. .- Respectfully submitted, Shirley Hawks 4 -7742- Page 1 of 1 JonSutherland From: To: Sent: Subject: "KandisHanson" <KanclisHanson(~msn.com> "Jon Sutherland" <JonSuthedand~msn.com>; "Loren Gordon" <lgordon~.hkgi.corn> Tuesday, May 08, 2001 6:51 PM Fw: Resignation Your ncxt a~end~ K --- Original Message -- From: SHARONVosssa~.aol.com To: KandisHanson~msn.com Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 5:15 PM Subject: Resignation Effective immediately I am submitting my resignation from the City Of Mound Planning Commission. Time constraints and personal obligations do not allow me to give the service the commission demands. My years of service as a volunteer on the commission have been personally rewarding and productive. I was fortunate to be an integral part of the many positive changes that have taken place in the past few years.. I will always take pdde in my involvement on the commission. Sincerely, William D ¥oss -7743- 5/21/01 Excerpts from MINUTES MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY MAY 21, 2001 3.3 Consideration of Commissioner Voss' resignation Staff wants to send the resignation on to the Council to find a replacement. MOTION by Clapsaddle, second by Mueller, to recognize Voss' resignation and pass it on to City Staff. MOTION carried unanimously. MOTION by Clapsaddle, seconded by Glister, to nominate Mr. Burma as Vice Chairman. MOTION carried unanimously. -7744- MARK E. BREWER, D.C. 5581 Shoreline Blvd. Mound, MN 55364 Telephone: (612) 472-4888 April 30, 2001 Kandis Hanson 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Kandis: It is with deep regret that I must resign fi:om the Economic Development Committee. This move is prompted by the fact that I made plans to move fi:om town and due to my busy schedule of moving and summer soccer I have decided to "bowout' prior to my move. Needless to say, I am disappointed that I was unable to stay in Mound after being part of the redevelopment since 1986 when the first meeting took place in my office. Best wishes and luck to the remaining members. -7745- Mag 25 2881 11:30:59 Via Fax -> Administrator FRIDAYFAX A weekly legislative update from the League of Minnesota Cities Page 881 Of 881 Number2, May 25.2001 Post-session working groups begin "Working Group" has become the new catch phrase for Capitol observ- em in light of unfinished business for the interim of post-2001 session and pre-special session. With the close of the 2001 official session, comes the end of the previously set conference committees. Now called working groups, we expect member- ship and the jurisdictions of the groups to stay the same. The tax and the health/human services working groups are the only ones meeting publicly. Other working groups, such as state departments, transportation/public safety, and environment, have not yet convened. As of noon on Thursday, Capitol staff are reporting their respective working groups would not convene until alter the Memorial Day week- end. They all need budget targets to finish their work. At our press time, however, none of the tax or budget work groups had been given targets as the leaders of the House, Senate, and the governor's office continue to negotiate. The tax working group officially met on Tuesday for most of the day, and through the early evening on Wednesday and again Thursday morning. The group has made some progress on sales tax and miscella- neous tax issues. Major sticking points continue to be the different approaches to property tax reform. Tax Chairs Rep. Ron Abrams and Sen. Larry Pogemiller have been meeting with Education Chairs Sen. Lardy Stumpf and Rep. Alice Seagren to discuss the interaction of the tax reform provisions and education finance. A number of identical provisions contained in the local development articles of the House/Senate tax bills were adopted Wednesday. These items originally appeared in the TIF technical bills introduced in both houses. Conferees expressed their recognition that the state takeover of the general education levy would have significant implications for TIF districts. Sen. Pogemiller stated his understanding that the collective intent was to protect existing districts. While Rep. Abrams indicated his support for the special taxing district and grant fund provisions in the House bill, he seemed open to considering alternative mechanisms to address the problem. Conferees directed staff to meet with the interested parties to identify poten- tial alternatives. Thursday morning in the working group, the members spent a consid- erable amount of time discussing proposed LGA and HACA changes. The Senate proposal would effectively merge the two programs into one, expanded LGA program with a much smaller HACA program remaining. The Senate would also add $30 mil- lion to the LGA appropriation. The House increases LGA by nearly $90 million, but eliminates HACA and creates a new $245 million home- stead credit program. Under the House proposal, cities would be allowed to replace lost HACA, although levy limits would be imple- mented for two years and a reverse referendum process would be established after the sunset of levy limits. The most optimistic guess of when the governor will call a special session would be next Thursday or Friday, which would allow a few days for the working groups to meet after the Memorial Day weekend. Although the state's fiscal year does not end until June 30, the Legisla- ture has other reasons to complete their work as soon as possible. The Department of Revenue and the county auditors who must adminis- ter any property tax changes have publicly stated that the second week in June might be the "drop-dead" date for changes to be implemented to the property tax system. After that time, the counties will be hard pressed to have their computer systems ready for the fall truth-in- taxation process. A special session is a new session. All legislative work will need to be reintroduced, and those bills will start with SF 1, SF 2, etc. Techni- cally, a special session would take, at the very least, three days to process bills. But it is more likely that both the House and Senate will use parliamentary procedure to suspend the rules and push the end deals through in less than three days. The governor has stated he would prefer a 24-hour special session, which would require suspension of the rules. Since virtually no one wins politically in the court of public opinion with a special session, legislators will most likely cooperate in passing the agreed upon deals once the governor calls for a special session For more information on city legislative issues, contact any member of the League of .&linnesota Cities Intergovernmental Relations team. (651) 281- z ?l}tl ~, /~t)O) 925-1122 -7746- ' C 145 Univerdty Avenue West, St. Paul, MN 55103-2044 Phone: (651) 281-1200 ° (800) 925.1122 Fa~: (651) 281.1299 ° TDD (651) 281.1290 Web Site: http://w,~.lmnc.org MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: Metro Cities James F. Miller, Executive Director May 29, 2001 I am saddened to inform you that A.rly Gunderman passed away sometime early this morning. He had been in declining health for some time, but this was still unexpected. Many of you had the opportunity of working with him when he was on the Leag~ae Board several years ago or have known him from his many years as a New Brighton City Council member. Ironically, the City of New Brighton had a celebration scheduled for this evening to commemorate Arly's years of dedication to the community. Arrangements have yet to be made; I will inform you when we know and will send flowers on behalf of the League. If you know of anyone planning on attending the celebration scheduled for this evening, please notify them that it has been cancelled. Thank You! ZBB JO ZBB ofl~d uosu~H s!pu.~ -7747- <- xv~ v!~ BE:SI:SI IBBZ 6Z ~ Xa~ 38 Z801 14:57:~1 Via Fa× -> ~mlnis~ra~or I* SPECIAL WEDNESDAY EDITION * I FRIDAYFAX i'~=~ ~=~[=" A weekly legislative update from the League of Minnesota Cities Page 881 0£ 882 Number2_ May 30,2001 Tax and budget deal reached? Maybe Details may be sticking point On Friday afternoon, House and Senate leadership and the governor announced they had reached a resolution to the budget impasse and that after the joint working groups complete their work, a special session would likely be called-- possibly within the next two weeks. On Tuesday, the Tax Working Group (the special session successor to the Tax Conference Committee) reconvened. It quickly became apparent that the agreement wasn't as solid as the portrayal in the media last week. The Tax Working Group met for more than five hours on Tuesday, discussing many smaller provisions contained in one bill or the other. The discussions notably avoided the major policy issues, including property tax and state aid reform. At the conclusion of last evening's meeting, Sen. Larry Pogemiller requested the Department of Revenue prepare an analysis of the Friday agreement so members could more fully understand the impacts. Pogemiller stated there was not much enthusiasm in his caucus because members felt the agreement contained "way too much class rate compression." At other working group meetings on Monday, there appeared to be little progress. Several legislators who are members of the other working groups have previous engagements away from St. Paul, which will slow any progress of the final compro- mise. Rep. Dan McEIroy, the House chair of the Jobs and Economic Development Working Group, will be away Tuesday afternoon; Rep. Roxanne Daggett, a member of the Tax Working Group, will be away for most of the week. In Daggett's place, Speaker Steve Sviggum appointed Rep. Bob Milbert, a DFLer who has actively supported reverse referendum requirements over the past several years. The Transportation Working Group will meet at 10 a.m. today; the Tax Working Group reconvenes at 11 a.m. today. The Education Working Group has delayed any further meetings until the Tax Group has completed its work. The State Departments Group has not yet met. The Friday agreement The Friday "compromise" closely mirrors a proposal offered by Gov. Ventura. Although the governor had opposed levy limits in his Big Plan reform proposal, the agreement would reinstate levy limits for taxes payable in 2002 and 2003. The details of the levy limits are not yet worked out. Class rate compression would provide relief to commercial, indus- trial, apartment, cabin, and higher value homes. The class rate com- pression would negatively impact existing tax increment districts, although the agreement presumably contains an expanded state TIF grant program. The fate of HACA was unclear, although based upon the amount of "spending" contained in the compro- mise, it appears as if the House proposal to recycle HACA would be a necessary provision. A number of other key city issues were yet to be resolved in conference committee, including whether the LGA formula would be revised and whether a reverse referend u m provision would be included. Under the agreement, the state will assume the basic costs of K-12 education, removing the general education costs entirely from the property tax. Currently, the state pays approximately 70 percent of basic education costs through the general education aid formula. In a Friday news conference, Hous Speaker Sviggum praised the deal as achieving landmark and historic property tax reform. On the other hand, Sen. Moe characterized the deal as the best the Senate could achieve. Moe termed the agreement a loser for schools, housing, and transportation. Capitol rumors suggest Sen. Moe had given up due to the relatively consistent position of the House and the governor. In other words, believing that the governor and House positions would not be supported by the average Minnesotan, Moe was trying an '1 told you so" approach to the final agreement. Tax reform agreement highlights · The agreement will provide estimated net property tax relief of $800 million. The actual amount of property tax cuts will be roughly $1.2 billion, but this is offset by th,' additional revenue raised from th new statewide business/cabin property tax. For more information on city legislative issues, contact att}' member of the League of /Vlinne$ota Cities Intergovernmental Aelations team, Ma~ 38 2881 14:58:15 Via Fax -> Rdministrator Page 882 0£ 882 FRIDAYFAX .30, 200i -- P,~E 2 · $100 million in additional tax cuts. · A one-time sales tax rebate of $856 million and $926 million in new spending. · First tier of homestead market value, which has a tax capacity of 1 percent is increased from the current $76,000 to $500,000. · Cabins will carry the same tax capacity as homes. · Commercial and industrial prop- arty will have tax capacity set at 1 5 percent for the market value under $200,000 and 2.1 percent for the market value over $200,000. · Levy limits for all counties and cities over 2,500 population will be reinstated for two years (taxes payable in 2002 and 2003). · A new state property tax will be imposed on business and cabin properties. However, public utility generating property will be exempt from the statewide tax. · Limited market value, which is currently scheduled to sunset after taxes payable in 2002, will be phased-out over five or six years beginning in 2002. · Metro transit operating property tax levy will be eliminated and replaced with minimum dedication of 20.5 percent of the motor vehicle sales tax plus MNDOT/ Met Council sales tax exemption. · The state-determined K-12 general education levy will be eliminated. · The first $310 per pupil of school referendum revenue will be converted into general education revenue. · Cabins and farmland will be exempted from school operating referenda. Details that must be negotiated: · Local government aid formula changes and appropriation level , Reverse referendum on local levy increases · Homestead and Agricultural credit structure and appropriation · Amount raised by statewide property tax on cabins and business property · Cap relief for school referenda · Tax increment financing issues State aid showdown During tax conference committee and now working group discussions on the omnibus tax bill, House and Senate members disagreed on whether the LGA formula should be modified this year or if the Legisla- ture should wait until complete Census data is available, probably next year. To complicate matters, the changes being proposed by the House and the Senate seem to only fit with their respective property tax reform proposals. The Senate LGA proposal merges a large portion of HACA with the current LGA appropriation and adds several factors to the distribution formula. The Senate proposal also increases the LGA appropriation by an additional $30 million. However, the formula is largely based on Census data that is now more than a decade out of date. The House LGA proposal makes fewer changes to the LGA formula-- the largest of which is the increase in the appropriation by nearly $90 million. House Tax Committee Chair Ron Abrams has strongly suggested that any reforms wait until the 2002 session. During a meeting of the Tax Working Group last week, he offered to convene a stakeholder and interested party working group to discuss new formula components. What will the economic future hold? There has been some discussion at the Capitol as to whether the national economic slowdown will ultimately impact the Minnesota economy and state revenues. Although the governor has recently commented that his staff have reviewed the economic data and concluded that the state budget will not face imminent shortfalls, a U.S. Commerce Department report released on Friday stated that the nation's gross domestic product (GDP) growth estimate for the first quarter of 2001 was revised sharply downward from 2.0 percent to 1.3 percent. Based upon the Commerce report, there is growing speculation in the national financial markets that the second quarter GDP growth esti- mates will also be revised downward. In addition, Federal Reserve Chair- man Alan Greenspan recently commented that future interest rate cuts may be needed. If the Minnesota economy ultimately experiences a slowdown, the earliest the state's official budget forecast will be updated is late November 2001. If the Minnesota economy sours, the 2002 legislative session could be as stormy as the 2001 session. -7749- Hay 31 2881 17~44~81 gia Fax -> B&~ in istrator Page 881 0£ 882 145 University Avenue West, St. Paul, MN 55103.2044 Phone: (651) 281.1200 · (800) 925.1122 TDD (651) 281.1290 LMC Fax: (651) 281.1299 LMCIT Fax: (651) 281.1298 Web Site: http://www.imnc.org Action Alert Tax Compromise will impact TIF districts Safeguards are being discussed The tax compromise being discussed by the House, Senate and Governor, will have a significant impact on existing tax increment financing districts. TF YOU CURRENTLY HAVE A TIF DISTRICT, OR ARE PLANNING ON ESTABLISHTNG A NEW DISTRICT, PLEASE PAY ATTENTION. Situation: Under the compromise as it was outlined last Friday, the commercial and industrial class rates will be reduced to 1.5 percent for the first $200,000 of market value and 2.1 percent for any value over $200,000. Currently, C/I property carries a tax capacity of 2.4 percent on the first $150,000 of market value and 3.4 percent on any excess value. The bill will also eliminate the K-12 general education levy. Coupled with the elimination of the K-J2 general education levy, the amount of tax relief to C/T property due to the class rate compression is so substantial that the Governor and the House proposed a new state property tax levy on commercial, industrial and cabin property. This new state property tax will likely generate between $450 and $550 million in state general fund revenue, which will offset some of the tax relief that would have otherwise accrued to C/I properties. However, the new state property tax will not generate tax increment revenues. TIF Impacts: The class rate reductions and general education levy takeover will also have a profound impact on existinq tax increment districts and will make revenue projections for potential future projects significantly smaller. Many cities that have analyzed the proposal suggest that increment reductions could be in the 30 percent to 40 percent range although larger TTF decreases are certainly not out of the question. The compromise proposal currently has no specified TIF shortfall component. However, the issue is on the "yet-to-be-derided' list of the tax working group. The Governor and the House have both discussed the -7750- Xay 31 2801 17:44:37 r~a Fax -> Administrator Pa~e 082 0£ 08Z implications on TTF districts and their earlier individual tax proposals each contained TTr shortfall provisions. We are confident that the tax working group members are aware of the significance of the issue. The House omnibus tax bill includes a grant pool of nearly $200 million to cover obligations supported by existing TTF districts. To qualify for a grant from the pool, a city must first impose a special tax on the TTF district property if the TIF district had a development agreement or an assessment agreement in place. This additional tax could cover a portion or the entire revenue shortfall created by the class rate compression and the education finance takeover. The proposal also allows the city to pool or share revenue from other districts within the city to cover shortfalls. The governor's Big Plan proposal relied largely on an expanded grant pool to address any shortfalls. A group of city officials, bond counselors, developers and lobbyists have been meeting to discuss alternatives and additions to the House and Governor's proposals. These ideas have been shared with legislative staff and legislators and include eliminating the TTF tax rate cap, a direct state aid program for deficiencies caused by state property tax changes, flexibility in expanding district durations and broader pooling flexibility. Acti o n: If you have an existing TIF district, you should contact your financial consultant and examine the potential impacts of the compromise proposal and ultimately the final tax bill. If you are in the process of creating a new district, please remember that financial forecasts should be based on the impacts of the final tax bill. We also need city officials to immediately contact their senators and representatives to let them know that the tax reform proposals being discussed will have a significant impact on TIF districts and that any final bill must include sufficient safeguards for TIF district revenues. -7751 - Mag 31Z801 11:19:33 Via Fax -) A&ministrator ?age 881 Of 881 (651 ) 281 - 120(), (800) 925- I 122 281-1 2(19 · 'Il)l) (0SI) 281-12!10 May 31, 2001 ACTION ALERT WETLANDS REPLACEMENT FUNDING - STATE MAY DROP THE BALL The transportation conference committee spreadsheet released yesterday afternoon (Wedn-a.sday, May 30) has $0 for wetland ~placement. While the Senate had earlier allocated furlding for the Local Road Wetland Replacerrient Funding from the FY01 surphJs, it was subsequently earmarked for' tax rebates. As you read ti'lis, the only possible funding source remaining is a bondirlg appropriatiorh However, the only way this is even a possibility is if the Counties, Cities arid Townships bring this issue to the attention of the House and Senate leadership and the Governor's office immediately. Urge them to secure at least $2.7 million for Loc;41 Road Wetland Replacement in the bonding bill. The point to make is that irt 1996 the state made a sIatutory comrrritrnent to local governments to pay for' it's mandated wetland o3nservation act. If the state breaks its promise to pay for its mandated pr'ograrTiS, local govemrnents 'face a significant unfunded rnar~date. Experience has shown that state funding of wetlarld replacement results in over~ll savings to taxpayers, high quality environrrlental projects, and expedited road project compledorL If the funding is not provided, agr~:;me, nb.~ to streamline the approval process 'for' road projects will be nullified and the required mitigation costs will have to be absorbed by the Iocat road authority or the project will have to be put on hold with the uncertain hope of future and retroactive funding, CONTACT STATE L. EADEIILC~H:I[P: House: Rep...Steve Sviggum, speaker, 651.-.296-2273 (Goodhue Co.) Rep. Tim Pawlenty, majority leader, 651.-.296--,-1128 (Dakota Co,) Sen, Roger Moe, majority leader, 65:1.-296--2577 (Polk Co.) 651-296-3391 switchboard/receptionist 651-296-14 3oe Bagnoli questions'? Contact Remi Stone at rstonc@lmnc.org or 651.281.:[256. AN EQUAL O?PORTUNI3- 7752 -.riVE ACTION EMPLOYE~ AMM FAX NEWS May 21-25, 2001 Association of Hctropolitan Hunicipalities Session Ends Working Groups Begin The 2001 legi.~tntive session officially ended on Monday May 21, 2001. Of the tax and spending bill~, the early childhood appropriation was the only abe passed and sent to the Guvernor. Working groups, which are the conference committees, are meeting or are schedul~.d to meet This week, Meanwhile legislative I~aders and th~ Governor are attempting to reach agreement on the overall budget and .~pending targets for individual bills. if there is a budget agreement this w¢ck it is possible that a special session cnlJld be called within the next two weeks. ,&MM will use the FAX NEWS to keep you informed. If you need additional information or have any questions please contac[ Gene or Roger at the AMM, 4MM Ne~s Fax is fared So all AMM city r~mna~r.~ and administrators, logislatlv: contacts and Board ~mbers. Please share thls f~ ~ith your mng'a~) council~n and ~ to keep t~em abre~t of l~or- taut mvt~ ci~ issues. .ge. Paul MN 55103-2044 .Fa~: (6Sl) 2gI-I~99 Public Finance (SF 2208) and Fee.,JStroamlining Development Bills (HFt310) Pass I'he publlc finance bill and the fees bill were passed on Monday. The public finance hilt is an annual bill that contain.~ proposals related to bonds, financing of public facili- ties. Tlqe bill is prepared by the Minnesota Institute of Public Fi- nance (MIPF). MIHF'S membershio con.~;ists generally of bond counsels; fisce~l consultants and other public finance professionals. The bill n.~ pass:ed includes the following provisions of interus[ to cities: · IV~odifies the federal t~x exempt 13and allocation act (section .~,74A) tn incorporate tl3e ln- :rease in federal allocation and 'Ia allocate a portion of the new allocation for housing. · P~.rmits cities under certain conditions [u I~llance a portion of public maintenance facilities with utility bonds. · AIl~ws tides to divide a bond referendum issue, The bill's other sections refer to county financing and special laws prouiding tar economic development autl3orities iH Scott and Carver Counties. The fees/streamlining bill (HF131D) contains a provision that allows rut simple majority for rezonings except for the conversion of residential use to commercial or industrial u~e. The Dill does not include specific authority for cities to i~clude affordable housing require- ments in official controls and poli- cies, Metropolitan Council to Discuss Regional Growth Strategy, Land Supply Study and Blueprint Update At its May 30, 2001 mccting the Metropolitan Council will begin deliberation~ on three separate but interrelated documen[~. The gional growth strategy will be pre- sentcd to the Council as a "work in progress" paper. The (]raft paper has had input ~rom the AMM, the Builders Association of the Twin Cities (B^TC), and environmental groups. The paper attempts to define tl~e challenge~ - t~ousing, environmental protection, transpor- tation, and land supply - facing the region and prnposes solutions to the challenges, Tile land supply study is a coop erative effort between the Council and BATC. The study, wh~Cll reviews land in five east grow. in.q cities, ~aises concern about the decrees lng amount of available [and for residential development~/ The blueprint discus~ie~ will not only be an update of work to date but also a discussion of the direc- tion of the blueprint and its impact nn the region. ggg lO ZgO aagl uosugH s~pu~a -7753- ¢- xol Q!A 8£:~£:~6 166Z ~Z ngU LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA 7:00 PM, Wednesday, May 23, 2001 Tonka Bay City Hall CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Chair Foster · LMCD Special Board. Meeting/Orientation Workshop (5/30/01 @ 7 PM) · 6/9/01 LMCD Board Lake Inspection Tour (Approximately 7:30 AM - late morning) READING OF MINUTES. 5/09/01 LMCD Regular Board Meeting PUBLIC COMMENTS - Persons in attendance, subjects not on agenda (5 min.) CONSENT AGENDA- Consent Agenda items identified with a (*) will be approved in one motion unless a Board member request discussion of any item, in which case the item will be removed from the consent agenda. PUBLIC HEARING · City of Minnet°nkaBeach, new multiple dock license appliCation= and variance application from LMCD Code for side setbacks and an adjusted dock use area at'its Cross Point Road dock (Dc Site #10). 1. Public Hearing 2. Discussion and/or Consideration 1. WATER STRUCTURES A) Tonka Bay Sales~' consideration of Findings of Fact and Order for approval of new multiple dock license and special density license applications for 18 Boat Storage Units (BSU's) on 475' of continuous shoreline; B) Rita Pederson & John Carrier, staff update on docking issues in Spring Park neighborhood on West Arm Bay; C) (*) 2001 Multiple Dock Licenses, staff recommends approval of 2001 renewal, without change, multiple dock license application for Meadowbrook Boat Club; D) Additional Business; EWMIEXOTICS TASK FORCE A) Lake Minnetonka Association (LMA), consideration of 2/21/01 letter from LMA requesting "Save the Lake" funding for 2001 weevil monitoring on Lake Minnetonka; B) Staff update on maintenance of EWM Harvesting Equipment; C) Additional Business; -7754- 3. FINANCIAL A) Audit of vouchers (5/16/01 - 5/31/01); B) (*) April financial summary and balance sheet; C) Review of draft 2002 LMCD Budget; D) Additional Business; 4. ADMINISTRATION A) Consideration of staff recommendation for compensation adjustment for Administrative Technician Judd Harper (handout); B) Additional Business; 5. SAVE THE LAKE 6. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT 7. LAKE USE & RECREATION A) Update on Hennepin County Sheriff's Office Water Patrol Proposal for the 2001 season (Review of doCuments and plan to collect funds from LMCD Member Cities); B) Additional Business; 8. OLD BUSINESS 9. NEW BUSINESS 10.ADJOURNMENT -7755- DRAFT LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS 7:00 PM, Wednesday, May 9, 2001 Tonka BaY City Hall CALL TO ORDER Chair Foster called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. ROLL CALL Member present: Bert Foster, Deephaven; Craig Nelson, Spring Park; Tom Skramstad, Shorewood; Lili McMillan, Orono; Andrea Ahrens, Mound; Doug Babcock, Tonka Bay; Craig Eggers, Victoria; Tom Gilman, Excelsior; Paul Knudsen, Minnetrista; Tom Seuntjens, Minnetonka Beach; Herb Suerth, Woodland; Katy Van Hercke, Minnetonka; Sheldon Wert, Greenwood. Also present: Chades LeFevere, LMCD Counsel; Greg Nybeck, Executive Director; Judd Harper, Administrative Technician. Members absent: Bob Ambrose, Wayzata. CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Chair Foster Foster stated that June 2nd and June 9th have been identified as possible dates for the annual lake inspection tour. The. conSensus of the Board was to conduct the inspection tour on June 9th with the itinerary of sites visited to be determined. READING OF MINUTES. 4/11/01 Regular Board Meeting 4/25/01 Regular Board Meeting MOTION: Seuntjens moved, Babcock seconded to approve the minutes of the 4/11/01 Regular Board meeting as submitted. VOTE: Ayes (9), Abstained (2; Ahrens & Babcock); motion carded. McMillan stated she would recommend two changes to the minutes. First, on page 5 under Item 2C, she would like to add 'cost of,' so. the sentence would read: "on or around May 20 and the cost of staffing would be approximately 60 percent less" Second, on page 9 under the 3rd bullet, the sentence should read: "Overtime would only be allowed if approved in advance by Harper or Nybeck". MOTION: Seuntjens moved, Skramstad seconded to approve the minutes of the 4125/01 Regular Board meeting as amended. VOTE: Ayes (9), Abstained (2; Ahrens & Babcock); motion carded. PUBLIC COMMENTS. Persons in attendance, subjects not on the agenda. Ms. Rita Pederson and John Carder, 4344 West Arm Road Spring Park, addressed the Board concerning a neighborhood docking issue that was being resolved by LMCD Staff. Gilman ardved at 7:07 p.m. -7756- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 9, 2001 Page 2 Babcock requested that staff add this situation update as an agenda item at a future Board meeting. CONSENT AGENDA. Consent agenda items identified witha (*) will be approved in one motion unless a Board member requests discussion of any item, in which case the item will be removed from the consent agenda. Nelson moved, Gilman seconded to approve the consent agenda as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. Items for approval included: 1 D, 2001 Multiple Dock Licenses, staff recommends approval of 2001 renewal, without change multiple dock license application for Driftwood Shores HOA; 4A, Minutes from the 4/13/01 EWM/Exotics Task Force Meeting. PUBLIC HEARING · Bayshore III HOA, new multiple dock license application to reconfigure a conforming multiple dock facility in Smithtown Bay. Foster opened the public headng at 7:21 p.m. He asked for background on the proposed application from staff. Harper made the following comments: · The applicant has submitted a new multiple dock license application for Board consideration. · The facility currently is licensed, for 8 Boat Storage Units (BSU's) on approximately 385' of continuous shoreline. · The shoreline further breaks down to 40' on Outlot A with 5 approved BSU's, two 100'lots with one BSU approved for each lot, and a 145' wide lot with one approved BSU. · Distdct staff ObserVed discrepancies with the dock installation and the approved site plan last summer. The applicant has made apPlication to correct these discrepancies. · The City of Victoria and lakeshore residents of the homeowners association have raised concems with the proposed application and configuration. · Staff believes the Board can approve the changes as proposed by the applicant or the Board can table the application to allow the applicant time to resolve pending issues with the city and residents of the homeowners association. Nybeck further explained that the full 385' of continuous shoreline has been dedicated towards the multiple dock license to achieve the increased boat storage density on Outlot A. The dedication restricted the boat storage on the other 3 lakeshore lots to one BSU per lot. Since the four lots are dedicated to the multiple dock license, LMCD side set back requirements do not apply to the internal extended lot lines. The side setback requirements only apply to the two outside extended lot lines on the 385' of shoreline. He also stated that the City of ViCtoda considers this a grandfathered facility under their zoning regulations and requires issues to be reSolved with the Bayshore III Conditional Use Permit. Foster asked the applicant if he had any comments. Tuck Thomas, spoke on behalf of the Bayshore III HOA, stated it was not his intention to create any animosity in submitting this application for reconfiguration. He stated that he would be willing to have the Board table the application to allow time to resolve the issues with the City of Victoria and with the members of the homeowners association. Foster asked if anyone from the public had any comments. Peter Johnson, attorney for the two Bayshore III lakeshore property owners (Robed Atkinson and Don Strom), stated that his interpretatiOn of the dedication eaSement specified that the Outlot dock must not be constructed in a location other than directly in front of the Outlot and can not extend in front of the ripadan lots. He stated that the configuration of the docks was set at the time that the property was subdivided and has remained the same until now. He added that -7757- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 9, 2001 Page 3 this is the first time the docks have been reconfigured and the applicant did not notify the lakeshore property owners the proposed changes until the public headng notice was sent to them by the LMCD. He stated that his clients and him would like to talk to Mr. Thomas to find a configuration that all parties would agree upon. Babcock responded to Mr. Johnson's remarks. He made the following comments: · The proposed dock plan seems to meet all LMCD requirements and the Board could approve the proposed configuration. · The LMCD treats the shoreline from the four lots as one continuous 385' lot for the multiple dock license. · The issues between the homeowners association contact and members of the homeowners association must be resolved outside of the LMCD. Mike Reiner, non-lakeshore member of the Bayshore 111 HCA, stated that the reason for the reconfiguration was that 2000 was the first year that more than one BSU was needed on the outlot and the water depth was too deep to install the dock three slips deep into the lake. Babcock emphasized that because this is 385' of multiple dock shoreline, changes on the docks at the outlot and the lakeshore lots can not be made without Board appreval. Because the property is all under a multiple dock license that was dedicated ten years ago, the residents can not randomly change the configuration of the docks without Board approval. The homeowners association must come into the District with an application and new site plan and get it approved before they can make dock changes. Seuntjens asked to have the minutes brought back at a future meeting to understand the dedication of the lakeshom. Babcock clarified that regardless of the potential LMCD Board approval, the applicant must resolve the issues with the City of Victoda and whichever regulations were the most restrictive, must be followed. · There being no further comments, Foster closed the public hearing at 7:40 p.m, Thomas stated if they must meet the most restrictive rules, the City of Victoria would not approve the configuration that has been proposed to the LMCD. He stated he would like to have his application tabled to resolve the issues with the city and the homeowner's association members. He would possibly come back with a revised site plan. Knudsen asked if there is a confliCt with the easement and the multiple dock license. LeFevere explained that the developer set up the development to give the non-lakeshore property owners access to the lake and the way they did that was by dedicating the whole development's shoreline to the multiple dock license. He stated that the development lakeshore was considered one site to achieve theone BSU per 50' of lakeshore. This allowed 8 BSU's to be located on the 385'. There was One applicant, the developer in the inception and the homeowners assOciatiOn currently. The LMCD treats the entire ShOreline as one site and it is not important within LMCD Code how it was done--by easement, by creating an extended outlot along the shoreline or having restrictive covenants. The district is not concerned with the Way the docking dghts were divided amongst the homeOwners. If there were a certain restrictions on the way the homeowners use the 385' of shoreline would not concern the LMCD, it would have to be resolved internally. This issue Will get the aSSociation to communicate. He stated the homeowners association contrels the shoreline. All the preperty owners in the association own a part of the shared riparian dghts; lakeshore owners and non-lakeshore owners. -7758- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District , -,Regular Board Meeting May 9, 2001 MOTION: Page 4 Gilman moved, Babcock seconded to table the new multiple dock license application per request of the applicant to resolve pending issues with the homeowners association and the City of Victoria and to direct staff to prepare a sixty day extension. VOTE: Motion carded unanimously. Walden Tract X, new multiple dock license application to reconfigure a non-conforming, multiple dock facility under LMCD Code Section 2.015. · Walden Tract Y, application to reconfigure a non-conforming, non-multiple dock facility under LMCD Section 2.015. Foster suggested that Board should combine the Walden Tract X and Walden Tract Y public hearing and discussion because the applicants are proposing to combine two adjacent properties for joint docks. Foster opened the public hearing at 7:50 p.m. He asked for background on the proposed application from staff. Nybeck provide background .information to the Board. He made the following comments: · Walden Tract X submitted a new multiple dock license application to reconfigure a non-conforming multiple dock facility and Walden Tract Y has.submitted an application to reconflgure it's non-conforming non-multiple dock facility. · The proposed applicationswould combine boat storage at the two non-conforming facilities utilizing LMCD Code section 2.015 or the envelope concept. · Walden Tract X is currently grandfathered for six Boat Storage Units (BSU.'s) on approximately 50' of continuous shoreline. · Walden Tract Y is currently grandfathered for four BSU's on approximately 40' of continuous shoreline. · County records reflect that there appears to be approximately 70' of shoreline between the two sites. · The applicants stated that they have a disagreement on the common lot line, which results in the double cOunting of approximately 20' of shoreline. · Over the years, the installation of dock and boat storage at these two sites has been problematic because of the number of boats, 10, being stored in small authorized dock use areas. · In 2000, staff was involved with the situation with Tract X, Tract Y and the adjacent City of Deephaven site. · The City of Deephaven has recently resolved their docking and boat storage issues on the south end of their site. · The reconfiguration would' be done under LMCD Code Section 2.015 and the proposed applications would meet all the requirements except the section that states the application may not result in any further extension into non- conforming setback areas than the existing docks. · Currently under LMCD Code, the proposed reconfigurations would not be allowed. · Staff received phone confirmation from the City of Deephaven that the City Council has agreed to allow Tract Y's boat storage encroachment over the City's extended lot line but would like to have the annual right to withdraw the consent. · Staff believes the Board has three options. They include: Change the Code to allow the Board to consider the combined dock use areas for the two non-conforming facilities; Consider the combined dock use areas through variance applications, questioning what the physical hardships or practical difficulties are; and the last option is to deny the applications. Babcock stated that since the Tract X and Y applications are separate, it appears that the proposed site plan would increase the number of BSU's on Tract Y from four to five, thus not complying with the first requirement in LMCD Code Section 2.015 prohibiting the increase in BSU's. -7759- Lake Minnetonka, Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 9, 2001 Foster asked if anyone from the public had any comments. Page 5 Mr. Dan Gilbed, Walden TractX, spoke on behalfofthe applicant. He stated thatthetwo propedies shouldbe considered as one applicaUon. Foster explained that if they were to combine the two properties, the grandfathered status would be lost and would have to conform to the current regulations that would allow two boats per lot with a total of 4 boats.. Gibed explained that Tract X and Y had been storing boats at that location before the LMCD was created and they have the right to store 10 boats. He stated the proposed configuration was the 11th layout drawn up and had taken a lOng time to come up with. He noted that they had received the consent from the City of Deephaven to allow the extension over the extended lot line, He explained that he would like the Board to approve the proposed reconfiguration as submitted whether through a Code change or a variance. Babcock stated that the current approved site plans seem to be reasonably conforming configuration. He asked what was the catalyst for the change? Dan Nelson, Tract X, explained that there is a domino affect in the area because some docks on the shoreline are installed parallel to the extended lot lines and others are installed perpendicular with the shoreline. This Pushed the docks to the North, which encroached on to Pat Florence's property. Babcock stated that if Tract X and Y docks were installed according to the aPProved site plans, it appears that the sidP setbacks would comply with code on the Pat Florence extended lot line and the City of Deephaven extended lot line. asked why the applicants would want to go to a configuration that is not in conformance with side setback regulations. Gilbert stated that it would not conform. Babcock stated that according to the site plans it would conform. He suggested that the applicants may not be installing the docks or storing watercraft in the designated locations according to the approved site plan. Foster explained that there is the problem of double counting the 20' of shoreline. Dan Nelson stated that there was a dispute between a survey from 1957 compared to a survey from 1993. It was the same surveyor with differing depictions of where the common property line was. Both Tract X and Y relied on what the surveyor told each of them. Babcock asked why the LMCD shOUld continue to allow the same number of BSU's now when it is recognized that at the time of the applications, there was erroneous information submitted. Dan Nelson stated that Tract X and Y have been working with Pat Florence and the City of Deephaven to find a solution that would be agreeable for all parties. Nybeck explained that thero aro some issues with the approved site plan for Walden Tract X that was approved by the board in the past and would currently nOt be aPprOved. He fUrther explained that the site plan shows that three of the BSU's do not meet the required northerly 5' setbaCk with Tract Y. Although, the annual license certificate states that boats or lifts on outside slips must not intrude on 5' side setbacks. He noted that the 'language on the certificate contradicts what is illustrated on the approved site plan. Babcock asked if these requirements could be looked up at the time of the initial approval, -7760- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting 9, 2001 Page Nybeck stated the approval was in 1981 and the records around that time were not complete. Foster stated that City of DeePhaven has had some conversations concerning expanding their multiPle dock license in upcoming years to allow more slips for their residents and this may resolve the problems with Tract X and Y. Babcock stated that with the City's special density license, slips can not be tied to specific real property. Judd Peterson, Tract Y, stated that Tract X and Y have a grandfathered right to have ten boats on the lake. LeFevere stated the concept of grandfathering allows a person to continue something that was legally in existenCe at a time that Code was changed. The LMCD is not required to recognize grandfathered rights of docking compared~lo land because the Lake is public waters. In 1978, the LMCD made it's first density limitation which was the 1:50' rule. Pdor to the 1:50' rule, the LMCD code allowed riparian owners to store as many boats as they could fit within their dock use area. When the 1:50' rule was enacted in 1978, certain facility's densities that were lawfully in existence at that time were grandfathered in. The density grandfathedng could not be at the expense of any other Code provisions such as dock use area. Thus, the boat storage density would only be grandfathered if it fit within the dock use area at the time of grandfathering, otherwise it is just an illegal structure. He concluded that the entitlement to the number of waterCraft stored is grandfathered, but does not carry with it the right to violate side setback restrictions or cross extended lot lines. Babcock requested to. bep~ovided a survey with the amount of shoreline on Tract X and Tract Y. There being no further comments, Foster closed the public hearing at 8:30 p.m. Wed stated that the applicants can not go forward with the proposed applications unless there is a Code change or a variance application. MOTION: Van Hercke moved, Wert seconded to table these two agenda items and revisit them after agenda Item 1C is discussed because, current LMCD Code would not alloW the reconfiguration proposed in these two applications. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. WATER STRUCTURES A. Tonka Bay Sales, new multiple dock license and special density license applications for 18 Boat Storage units (BSU's) on 475' of continuous shoreline (tabled at the 2/28/01 Regular meeting to conduct a mandatory F_.AW). Foster asked for background on the proposed application from staff. Nybeck made the folloWing comments: · A public headng was held on 2/28/01 to consider a new multiple dock license and special density license application from Tonka Bay Sales. · A mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (RAW) was required for the expansion and was prepared by LMCD staff. · The mandatory RAW was reviewed and approved by the Board atthe 3/14/01 Regular Meeting, It was published in the 4/2/01 EQB Monitor, with comments due in the Distdct office by 5/2/01. · Staff received comments from three agencies, none of which were negative. · Staff recommends the Board make a negative declaration for the need to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement. -7761 - Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 9, 2001 Page 7 If the Board makes a negative declaration, staff feels the Board can take the new multiple dock. license and special density license applications off the table and act upon them. · Staff believes that the applicant has provided sufficient public amenities to qualify for a special density license. · If the Board concurs with this, staff recommends the Board Direct the District Attomey to prepare Findings of Fact and Order for approval of the new multiple dock license and special denSity license applications. MOTION: Nelson moved, Babcock seconded to declare a negative declaration on the F_AW with regards to conducting an ElS on the proposed Tonka Bay Sales project. VOTE: Motion carded unanimously. MOTION: Skramstad moved, Nelson seconded to direct attomey to prepare Findings of Fact and Order for approval of a new multiple dock license application for Tonka Bay Sales subject to no objections raised by the MN DNR. VOTE: Motion carded unanimously. Eggers arrived at 8:50 p.m. Excel Marina (Sites 1 & 2),,new multiple dock license and special density license applications for 90 Boat Storage Units (BSU's) on 913' of continuous shoreline (tabled at the 2/28/01 Regular meeting to conduct a mandatory EAW); Foster asked for background on the proposed application from staff. Nybeck made the following comments: · A public headng was held on 2J28/01 to consider 2 new multiple dock license and special density license applications from Excel Marina, · A mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was required for the expansion and was prepared by LMCD staff, · The mandatory EAW was reviewed and approved by the Board at the 3/14/01 Regular Meeting. It was published in the 4/2/01 EQB Monitor, with comments due in the District office by 5/2/01. · Staff received comments from three agencies, none of which were negative. · Staff recommends the Board make a negative declaration for the need to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement. · The reason why two new multiple dOCk and special density license applications were submitted was because of a 12' firelane owned by the City of Excelsior bisected the Excel Marinaproperties. · There is currently discussiOn between Excel Madna and the City of Excelsior concerning possibly trading land to make Excel Marina one continuous site. Jerry Toberman, Excel Marina. owner, stated that progress was being made with the City of Excelsior and requested that the applications remain tabled until Possible negotiations with the City of ExcelSior were resolved but would like the Board to make a negative.declaration on the need for an EAW. MOTION: Wert moved, Gilman seconded to declare a negative declaration on the F. AW with regards to conducting an ElS on the proposed Excel Marina project. VOTE: Motion carded unanimously. -7762- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District .... Regular Board Meeting May 9, 201)1 Page 8 C. Consider possible Code changes for non-conforming structures to reduce setbacks and dock: use areas by mutual consent, Review ct memo from LMCD Attorney with pros and cons; Foster introduced the agenda item noting that LeFevere had prepared a letter that summarizes arguments for and against allowing adjustment of dock use area by mutual consent for non-conforming facilities. He stated that there has been applications brought before the Board recently that involved non-conforming facilities wishing to reeconfigure their facilities further into non-conforming setbacks, adjusting dock use areas or combining dock use areas for a common dock with mutual consent. Currently, under LMCD Code these options are available for some types of conforming facilities and not allowed for any non-conforming facility. Foster opened the agenda item up for Board discussion. Babcock made the following comments: · If the code was changed to allow waiving of setbacks for non-conforming sites, when property ownership changed, a possible situation involving the Board to resolve would occur. The situations will be more frequent under a broader ordinance than less. · This change would not benefit the Lake as a whole, it has the potential to make the lake a more congested place. · The setback violations with mutual consent become entitlements and it is very difficult for the Board to take away the conceived entitlements when consent is withdrawn. McMillan stated:that using mutual consent in regards to side setbacks, benefits the two residents but does not benefit theneighbors outside of the consent area that are potentially negatively affected by this. She stated that the Board needs to limit the non-conforming narrow lots around the lake and not let them expand by allowing them encroach into setbacks. She stated that by changing the code' concerning non- conformingsites would go against the LMCD's overall density management plan. Seuntjens stated that he was comfortable allowing the code change and addressing situations when consent is withdrawn. He stated that it would be worth the change to allow current grandfathered situations to work under the conditions. He noted the density would not change from the current use. He stated it would be too restrictive to not allow the adjustment of dock use area for non-conforming sites. Foster queS:tioned if it was the Board's expectation that grandfathered situations disappear over time. He stated that he has the expectations that these grandfathered rights should be carried forever. He explained that he didn't have any problem alloWing non-conforming private and municipaI sites to adjust dock use areas with mutual consent. He noted that he had reservations with allowing dock use area adjustments w th non-conforming commercial facilities. Babcock stated that it has never been his intention to take away any facility's grandfathered rights. He emphasized that the current ordinances in place prohibit the expansion of non,conforming use. He stated that the Board has passed ordinances that require new applicants to meet a certain set of standards and allowing non-conforming aPplicants further exPansion does not give the same opportunity to new applicants which is inconsistent and not good policy. Skramstad left at 9:14 p.m. Foster stated that under the potential ordinance amendment, the non-conforming facilities would not expand the number of BSU's, the size of BSU's or the square footage. -7763- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 9, 2001 Page 9 Babcock stated that it would be an expansion because it would increase the dock use area. He stated the non- conforming sites can use the grandfathered configuration as is or come into conformance with current Code and be able to make changes. Foster stated that the discussed ordinance amendment that allows non-conforming facilities to agree on setback adjustments with mutual consent seems to be a reasonable and practical solution with pdvate residents and municipalities. Babcock stated that in 1997, the city of Minnetonka Beach agreed that they would be binding on the mutual consent agreement with the neighbor and this year the city imposed pressure on the adjacent property owner that withdrew consent to maintain the non-conforming setback. Nelson stated that conforming sites have more dghts than non-conforming and the grandfathered site maintains their grandfathered status as a privilege not as a dght, He added that the privilege is granted because they were in existence prior to the adoption of the ordinances. He explained that it isn't fair to allow the non-conforming sites the same opportunities as the conforming site has. Gilman stated that he would never vote for an ordinance amendment that would allow a city to put pressure on a property owner to allow a city dock to encroach on the property owners dock use area or setbacks. Foster stated that the consensus of the Board was that there is no need to change LMCD Code to allow non- conforming facilities with mutual consent to reconfigure their facilities further into non-conforming setbacks, adjust dock use areas or combine dock use areas for a common dock. Ahrens left at 9:35 p.m. Foster asked the Board revisit the Walden Tract X and Walden Tract Y agenda items. Nelson stated that the prOposed Tract X and Y applications can not be approved without a variance application. He asked if it was appropriate to entertain a motion for denial of the applications. Foster stated that a potential approval of Tract X and Y would not be possible tonight without a variance application and stated that the extended lot lines that are not perpendicular and would that be a sufficient hardship to grant a vadance Babcock, stated the applicant could try to come up with a better configuration that would not encroach on the setbacks and there might be some tough choices of possibly having to store smaller boats or less boats, but when the applicants are dealing with 70' for 10 boats those are the choices you must make. He stated they,could leave the configuration as it has been approved in the past. There was discussion on the possibility of a vadance application to straighten the extended lot line between the Tract X and Florence property. LeFevere stated that if a variance application was submitted, a new publio headng would have to be held. Foster suggested that the applications be tabled until the next meeting. Nybeck stated that atthe 3/14/01 meeting the Board had approved the Walden Tract X renewal without change multiple dock license. He stated that Tract X can install their docks as specified on the site plan and the license until -7764- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 9, 2001 Page ~0 a new configuration or variance is submitted to the Board, He emphasized that the installation and storage of the two sites must be in full compliance with LMCD Code. He stated the Board can act upon the applications if there is further action by the applicants and if there is not by the next couple meetings, an extension letter may be required. E. Additional Business. There was no additional business. 2. LAKE USE & RECREATION A. Hennepin Parks, 2000 Water Quality of Lake Minnetonka Report presented by John Baden. Mr. John Baden, representing Hennepin Parks, provided an overview of the RePort for 2000. He summarized the key highlights and discussed the issues of wetland preservation. Members of the Board asked Barten questions on the 2000 Report and phosphorus concerns on Lake Minnetonka. The Board took no action on this agenda item. Gilman left at 10:25 p.m. B. Staff Report on the Lake Minnetonka Wetlands Task Force. Foster asked for an update on the Wetlands Task Force. Wed stated that as summarized in theenclosed minutes, the focus of the discussion at this meeting was to determine the characteristics of wetlands in Lake Minnetonka and to determine the impacts on them from activities on the water. He reported that he learned a lot from this meeting and that the experts believe that the establishment of "Non-Motorized" areas on the Lake might be a good idea for a vadety of reasons. This includes water quality, fisheries, plants, and phosphOrus. The task fome identified some of these areas, including Painters and Six Mile Creeks. The challenge will be to identify some other areas that could be owned by the public or pdvate sector, He stated that wOrking with NYbeck, they decided the way to move forward with the task force would be to identify the main wetland areas on Lake Minnetonka that could be impacted by development~ Thenext tasks would be figuring out how to categorize these main wetland areas and identifying the differences between these main wetland areas on the lake. He concluded that the Task Force was looking for comments and the authorization of the Board to move forward in addressing these issues at a meeting to be SCheduled in the near future. Foster asked John Baden about the Potential affects of prop dredging in wetland areas, specifiCallY inletS to Lake Minnetonka. Baden expreSsed his concern With prOp dredging in shallow wetlands in terms of stirring up sediment thus decreasing water clarity, He stated to increase water quality, plants are needed to replace the algae and good water clarity is needed to maintain plants such as bull rushes and curly leaf pond weed. He stated that the concern with Halsteads and Jennings BaYs to maintain water quality, plants must be maintained and to protect the plants something must be done about prop dredging. Babcock asked Baden if there was any correlation between the size of prop or speed with the depth and amount of prop dredging. -7765- Lake MinnetonkaConservation District Regular Board Meeting May 9, 2001 Barren stated there was a direct correlation, which was tested by a study in Florida. Page'11 Babcock asked if quiet waters areas would reduce the impact on prop dredging. Barren stated it would decrease the impact in certain areas with sufficient water depth, but in other areas with shallow water, there is still going to be a large re-suspension of sediments. He stated the public has to recognize that not all parts of the lake can support all watercraft activities if the public wants to maintain good water quality. Wert concluded that a Meeting of the Task Force will be planned in the near future. McMillan left at 10:35 p.m. Foster requested that agenda item 4B be brought up in the agenda. The consensus of the Board was to allow this. 4B. Evaluation of Truck hauling Bids for the 2001 EWM Harvesting Program. Foster introduced the agenda item by providing some background information, He made the following comments: · The District recently advertised in the Star Tdbune and the Lakeshore Weekly News for bids for hauling of Eurasian Watermilfoil for the 2001 EWM Harvesting Season, with sealed bids due in the District office by 2p.m,, CST, on Wednesday, 5/2J01. · Two sealed bids were received before the deadline, They included Curfman Trucking and.Repair, Inc. and Minnetonka Portable Dredging Company, Inc. Curfman Trucking Inc submitted a bid of $54 per hour for one truck service and $106 per hour for two truck service. A bid of $57 per hour for one truck service and $114 per hour for two truck service was submitted by Minnetonka Portable Dredging Inc, · Information was left out of the Curfman bid, Chair Foster talked to him over the phone and Steve Cuffman explained why the information was not included in the bid. A day after the closing date he submitted the correct and missing information. Curfman was invited to come before the Board to explain why the information was not included in the bid initially. · The Board needs to decide whether the Curfman bid was valid or invalid and need to accept a trucking bid for the 2001 season, LeFevere explained that this situation is subject to public bidding law, which requires sealed bids, and based on awarding contracts to the lowest responsible bidder. He stated the Board had three choices as follows: · Reject all bids and re-advertise. · Accept the iow bid from Curfman Trucking. · Reject the Iow bid from Curfman because of irregularities and accept the bid from Uinnetonka Portable Dredging. LeFevere stated that the Board has the authority to waive irregularities. He stated that certain criteria such as references is not as important as other information since the references were included in last years bid and most likely would not change. He stated' that the most important single issue is the.price. Another issue was whether the nature of the defects in the bid would allow the company to get out of the bid. Foster asked for comments from Steve Curfman. -7766- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District · *Regular Board Meeting May 9, 2001 Page 12 Mr. Steve Cuffman of Curfman Trucking and Repair addressed the Board explaining the reasons why some of the background information that was not submitted. He stated that it wasn't submitted because he was using the same trucks, personnel, and references as the prior year which was on file at the District office. He stated that his agent supplied him with a performance bond that is typically used in other public bidding projects but was not consistent with what is required by the LMCD. Nybeck emphasized the need to resolve this issue in a timely manner since the harvesting season starts in approximately five weeks. MOTION: Suerth moved, Van Herke seconded to waive the bid requirement discrepancies and award the 2001 Eurasian Watermilfoil trucking contract to Curfmans Trucking and Repair Inc. VOTE: Ayes (1; Suerth), Nayes (8), motion failed. There was discussion by the Board as follows: · There is a benefit having the truck driver that understands the equipment. · The irregular information was submitted the neXt day after it was brought to the applicant's attention. Concern was raised that by accepting perceived incomplete bid may put the LMCD in a bad legal situation. · A legal challenge would take a long time to resolve in which the Distdct cOUld not afford to put itself in that SituatiOn because of the time restraints with the harvesting season. There'is-an opportunity to reject all bids and republish for bids for hauling of EWM. It would be extraordinary for a court to reverse a decision to reject all bids. · There would have to be sufficient time to advertise for bids and have a Board meeting to accept a bid, which may require a special Board meeting due to the time constraints. · It was unfortunate that Curfman Trucking Inc. did not include all the information required and Minnetonka Portable Dredging is a reputable firm that the District has had a longstanding relationship with. Thus, the Curfman Bid should be thrown out and the contract should be awarded to MinnetOnka Portable Dredging. · The dSks invOlved with accepting a bid that was out of compliance would not oUtWeigh the 7% savings in the trucking contract. · It would create too much of a risk for the program schedule to re-advertise for the trucking bid or accept the bid from CUrfman Trucking. MOTION: Wert moved, Knudsen seconded to reject'all bids and re-advertise for new bids as soon as possible for the 2001 EWM trucking contract. VOTE: Ayes (5; Eggers, Foster, Knudsen, Suerth, Wert), Nayes (4; Babcock, Seuntjens, Nelson, Van Herke), motion carried. Wert left at 11'15 p.m. 3A. Audit of vouchers (5/1/01 - 5/15101). NybeCk reviewed the audit of vOuchers as submitted. He added check #13591 to Curfman Trucking and Repair Inc. for $2,500 to the voucher list, eXplaining that this is paid tWice a mOnth for the maintenance cOntract with the EWM harvesting program. MOTION: Nelson moved, Babcock seconded to approve the audit of vouchers adding check #13591. -7767- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 9, 2001 VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. Page13 C. Update on Sheriffs Office Water Patrol Proposal for the 2001 Boating Season. Foster introduced this agenda item, making the following comments: · Staffing of the two additional Deputies would include one hired on a full-time basis, with a second one taken from the Patrol Division backfilled through overtime. The five months of the two additional Deputies Would commence on around May 20 and the staffing would be approximately 60 percent less than what waS originally anticipated. · The cities should be given the option to receive a refund or keep the money in the account to pay for the additional officers for the 2002 season. · The chair will wdte a letter to the cities thanking them for the contribution and explaining the projected overage with a copy of the motion enclosed. The letter will explain that the LMCD will determine what all the details and costs occurred over the season were in October and give them the option to receive a refund or carry the money to the 2002 season. LeFevere asked if the board would like. him to put together a contract for the cities describing the contribution the city committed to and the services received from the fee collected. A consensus of the Board decided it would be a good idea to have a contract drawn up with the cities. MOTION: Nelson moved, Suerth seconded to calculate the cost of the two additional water patrol officers at the end of the 2001 boating season and give the cities that contributed the option to have the proportionate overage returned to the city or keep their share in the account to fund the officers for the 2002 season. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. E. Additional Business. There was no additional business. FINANCIAL B. Review of timetable to conSider 2002 draft LMCD Budget. Foster stated that if any of the Board members were interested in being involved in preparing the 2002 budget to contact staff to set up a meeting time the week of the 14th. Nybeck stated he would E-mail the draft budget to the interested Board members prior to the meeting. C, Additional Business. There was no additional business. EWM/EXOTICS TASK FORCE C. Additional Business. -7768- Lake Minnetonka. Conservation District Regular Board Meeting May 9, 2001 Page 14 Suerth stated he is working with Dick Osgood concerning the revised Weevil Survey Proposal and request for partial funding through the Save the Lake Fund. 5, SAVE THE LAKE There was no discussion. Sm EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT Nybeck reported on the following: · The monthly Executive Director Report is in the handout folder. · The discrepancy with the Boat Density survey on the 2000 audit was clarified with the auditor and was deleted off the management letter. Copies of the audit have been prepared and will be sent to the cities. · The lake level for Lake Minnetonka as of 519101 was 929.93'. 7. ADMINISTRATION There was no discussion. OLD BUSINESS Van Hercke asked for an update on the status of scheduling an introductory Workshop/Planning Session for new Board members Nybeck stated that this request has been taken under advisement and that a Workshop/Planning Session is being targeted sometime in May or June. 9. NEW BUSINESS Nelson expressed a need for the LMCD to find a way to communicate with dock installers to inform them the LMCD regulations and that they are hurting their customers by violating these rules. Suerth stated it would be difficult to identify the people and companies that install docks on Lake Minnetonka. Nybeck stated that the LMCD database of dock installers is not current or accurate. Consensus of the Board was to have staff update the dock installer database and contact the current dock installers to inform them of LMCD regulations. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:35 p.m. Albert Foster, Chairman Lili McMillan, Secretary -7769- BOARD MEMBERS Bert Foster Chair, Deephaven Craig Nelson Vice Chair, Spring Park Lili McMillan Secretary, Orono Tom Skramstad Treasurer, Shorewood Andrea Ahrens Mound Bob Ambrose Wayzata Douglas E. Babcock Tonka Bay Craig Eggers Victoria Tom Gilman Excelsior Paul Knudsen Minnetrista Tom Seuntjens Minnetonka Beach Herb J. Suerth Woodland Katy Van Hercke Minnetonka Sheldon Wert Greenwood LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 18338 MINNETONKA BLVD. · DEEPHAVEN, MINNESOTA 55391 · TELEPHONE 952/745-0789 · FAX 952/745-9085 Gregory S. Nybeck, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR May 24, 2001 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LMCD Member Cities LMCD BOard of Directors Greg Nybeck, Executive Director Draft 2002 LMCD Budget A meeting has been scheduled for Friday, 6/8/01, at 12 NOON in the LMCD office. The purpose of this meeting is to review the draft 2002 LMCD Budget and to allow your input on it. Under its enabling legislation, the LMCD is required to adopt a budget before July 1 of each year for the upcoming calendar year. If a member city objects to the adopted budget, the LMCD is required under its enabling legislation to hold a hearing to consider these objections. A copy of the draft 2002 LMCD Budget will be forwarded to you in the next week. The LMCD values your input and believes it is a key element in our budget process. A light lunch will be provided for those that attend the 6/8/01 meeting. Feel free to call the office if you have questions or concerns relating to the draft 2002 LMCD Budget. We look forward to your attendance on Friday, 6/8/01. 50% Recycled Content 20% Post Consumer Waste Web Page Address: http://www.lmcd.org E-mail Address: Imcd@ Imcd.org -7770- BOARD MEMBERS LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 18338 MINNETONKA BLVD, · DEEPHAVEN, MINNESOTA 55391 · TELEPHONE 952/7Zl5-0789 · FAX 952/745-9085 Gregory S. Nybeck, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR May 24, 2001 Bert Foster Chair, Deephaven Craig Nelson Vice Chair, Spring Park TO; Lili McMillan Secretary, Orono Tom Skramstad Treasurer, Shorewood Andrea Ahrens Mound Bob Ambrose Wayzata Douglas E. Babcock Tonka Bay Craig Eggers Victoria Tom Gilman Excelsior Paut Knudsen Minnetrista Tom Seuntjens Minnetonka Beach Herb J. Suerth Woodland Katy Van Hercke Minnetonka Sheldon Wed Greenwood 1. 50% Recycled Content 20% Post Consumer Waste FROM: SUBJECT: LMCD Board of Directors LMCD Member Cities Interested Parties Greg Nybeck, Executive Director Special Board Meeting (5/30/01) At its 5/23/01 Regular meeting, the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) Board of Directors scheduled a Special Board Meeting at 7 P.M. on Wednesday, May 30, 2001. The meeting will be held at Tonka Bay City Hall, 4901 Manitou Road, Tonka Bay, MN. This meeting has been called for two purposes. They include: First, consideration of sealed bids for the hauling of Eurasian Watermilfoil (EWM) and other lake vegetation for the 2001 EWM Harvesting Season. Completed sealed bids are due in the LMCD office on Friday, 5/25/01, with staff to make a recommendation on the awarding of a contract at this Special Board Meeting for the 2001 EWM Harvesting Season. This will be the only action item at the Special Board Meeting that requires a quorum of the Board, eight. Unless staff hears from you, we will assume that you can make this Special Board Meeting. Board action on this agenda item isessential for the 2001 EWM Harvesting Season. Second, an orientation of the LMCD Code of Ordinances and Policies is planned for interested Board members. This WorkShop/Planning format will not require a quorum and it will offered to those Board members that would like to learn more about the LMCD Staff, working with Chair Foster and LMCD Counsel Charlie LeFevere, is currently making plans for the 5/30/01 Special Board Meeting. An agenda, with possible attachments, will be circulated at the meeting that evening. Please feel free to call the office if you have questions regarding this meeting. We look fo~ard to your attendance! Web Page Address: http://www.lmcd.org F-rn~il Address: Irncd@ Imcd.org -7771 - BOARD MEMBERS Bert Foster Chair, Deephaven Craig Nelson Vice Chair, Spdng Park Liti McMilian Secretary, OrOno Tom skramstad Treasurer, Shorewood Andrea Ahrens Mound Bob Ambrose Wayzata Douglas E. Babcock Tonka Bay Craig Eggers Victoria Tom Gilman Excelsior Paul Knudsen Minnetrista Tom Seuntjens Minnetonka Beach Herb J. Suerth Woodland Katy ~/an Hercke MinnetOnka Sheldon Wed Greenwood LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 18338 MINNETONKA BLVD. · DEEPHAVEN, MINNESOTA 55391 · TELEPHONE 952/745-0789 · FAX 952/745-9085 Gregory S. Nybeck, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR May 31,2001 TO: LMCD Member Cities LMCD Board of Directors FROM: Greg Nybeck, Executive Director SUBJECT: Draft 2002 LMCD Budget Enclosed is a copy of the draft 2002 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) Budget for your review. As previously announced, a meeting has been scheduled for 12 NOON on Friday, 6/8/01, in the LMCD office to review it and for us to receive your input. Expenditures in the proposed 2002 Budget are $424,542, an increase of 3.55 percent over 2001 of $409,433. The increase is mainly due to the need to do the Boat Density Survey in 2002, (it was not done in 2001) as specified in the LMCD Lake Management Plan. This project is budgeted for $17,000, with $8,500 of this project cost to be reimbursed by the MN DNR. The proposed levy to the 14 member cities in this budget is $244,621, an increase of 11.1% over the $217,521 for 2001. This levy increase is mainly as a result of LMCD trying to restore the reserve funds to levels agreed to by the 14 cities. SeVeral years ago, the LMCD was criticized for carrying reserves that were larger than the cities carry, and we were asked to lower the levy to the cities and draw down upon those reserves. When that draw down was complete, the levy would go up to a more normal level. In addition, there is the $8,500 for the 2002 Boat Density survey which was not done in 2001. The LMCD values your input on this draft 2002 LMCD Budget,. If you are unable to attend this meeting and would like to comment on it, please mail your comments to the LMCD office or e-mail your comments ("Greg Nybeck" .qnVbeCk~lmcd.org) bY Wednesday, 6/20/0t.. Feel free to Call me if you have questions. We loOk forward to your attendance at the 6/8101 meeting. 50% Recycled content 20% Pb~t ConSUmer Waste Web page Address: httpi//vvww,lmcd.org E-mail Address: Imcd @lmCdlorg -7772- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -7773- 0 O0 0 O0 000 O~OC~ 0 C~ 0 -~ ~ 0 C~ O~ 0 C~ O) 00 000 000 000000 000 00 CDC) CD 000000 O000 C~ J~O 00 CIO ~0 000~ 000 0000 ~000000~ ~ ~ 0~0 0~ ~0~ ~ ~00 ~0~0~ O~ ~ ~0 00~ ~00 00~ ~00000~ ITl mz ~ O00000~ -7774- . ~ oo 0 O0 0 O0 0 00000 ~000 000 00000 000 00000 000 ~000000~00 ~0 0000000000 000 I; ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 O) 0 000 ~0 0 000 000 00000 000 0 000 000 0 000 000 00000 000 o ooo b~o ~ 000 000 ~0000000000~0 0000000000000 ~0~00000000~0 0000000000000 ~0000000000~0 0000000000000 -7775- m > m 0 000 0000 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000 0 0000000 0 0000000 0 I~~~ 0 0000000 0 0000000 0~ 0000 0~ 0000 000 0000 0 0~0~00~ 0 0000000 0 0000000 0 00000 0 00000 ~000000 -7776- -7777- m -7778- ~ '0 0 _. 0 t- -7779- LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT EWM1EXOTICS TASK FORCE AGENDA 8:30 A.M., Friday, June 8, 2001 LMCD Office 18338 Uinnetonka Blvd., Deephaven 1. Introductions and Welcome; 2. Review of Minutes from the 4/13/01 meeting; 3. Discussion of 2001 LMCD Eurasian Watermilfoil (EWM) Harvesting Program; 4. Discussion of Lake Minnetonka Association (LMA) Zebra Mussel Proposal for Lake Minnetonka; 5. Agency Reports: 6. Area wide lake association reports; 7. Old business; 8. New business; 9. Adjournment; -7780- Page 1 or'4 KandisHanson From: "Barbara Olson" <olsonb(~westonka.k12.mn.us> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 3:01 PM Subject: westonka.news westonka.news Vol. 1, No. 29 May 25, 2001 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. Look for it in your mailbox on Fridays. 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 --Winding Down the School Year --Nearly $35,000 Awarded at MWHS Scholarship Night --What's the Plan with Athletic Facilities? 2. Focus Topic: Progress on Bond Technology Projects 3. Upcoming Events 4. We Want to Hear from You NEWS BRIEFS **Winding Down the School Year** With less than two weeks left in the 2000-2001 school year, Westonka students and staff are busy with end-of-year activities, and are looking forward to ending the school year on a positive note. Here's a glimpse of what's going on during the next couple of weeks: Shirley Hills Super Team Day Baccalaureate at St. John's Lutheran Church Gr. 7 Recognition Celebration at Grandview Middle School Hilltop School Picnic/Field Day -7781 - 05/30/2001 Page 2 of 4 Grandview Middle School trip to Valleyfair Mound Westonka High School Graduation Hilltop Awards Ceremony June 6 is the last day of school for students in grades 5-12, and June 7 is the last day for students in grades K-4. **Nearly $35,000 Awarded at MWHS Scholarship Night** Forty-four graduating seniors shared nearly $35,000 in scholarships at Mound Westonka High School's Scholarship Awards Night, held last week. The event was enhanced this year by holding it separate from graduation, and allowing scholarship recipients to meet the donors at a post-event reception. The Mound Westonka guidance department is deeply grateful to the local organizations and individuals who make it possible for so many students to pursue higher education. The scholarship program has been in place for more than 30 years, benefitting hundreds of students. **What's the Plan with Athletic Facilities?** School district staff are continuing to work with groups that have an interest in the relocation of football/soccer athletic facilities in order to provide the smoothest possible transition from a downtown football field to the new site by the high school. Several critical parties are involved: the Westonka School Board, the City of Minnetrista, parents and student athletes, architects/construction engineers, and school district staff. They are currently exploring scenarios that might allow for continuous play so that no student would miss having a "home" season. All options appear to require a certain amount of flexibility on everyone's part, whether it relates to facilities, game locations, or timeline. As plans progress, updates will be posted either through this newsletter or in the Laker. FOCUS TOPIC **Progress on Technology Bond Projects** At its May 21 meeting, the Westonka School Board was updated by the district's technology committee regarding plans for implementing the technology portion of the bond referendum that was approved by voters in March. Over the past year, the committee has developed a technology plan that aims for excellence while remaining financially reasonable. The goal is to update equipment using an ongoing replacement process, so that only a portion of the district's computers will need replacement at -7782- 05/30/2001 Page 3 of 4 any one time. Up[Irade/replacement plans by building are summarized as follows: Districtwide, Microsoft Office Pro will be the standard office productivity software. Mound Westonka High School and Grandview Middle School will move to a WinTel platform, except where curriculum dictates otherwise, e.g. in electronic art class. The WinTel platform will allow staff to do online grading, attendance reporting, and graduation standards reporting within the district student information system. Shirley Hills and Hilltop Primary Schools will add some WinTel computers to their media labs, and will continue with the Macintosh platform due to issues related to curriculum software replacement and technology support. Over the summer, the district will proceed, through a formal bidding process, with the purchase of the first round of new equipment. Many classrooms will have new computers installed and ready for use by the first day of school next fall. During workshop week, teachers will have hands-on training; additional classes will be available throughout the school year. The district Web site will be updated shortly to reflect progress on the projects related to the $4.395 million maintenance/technology bond, which will provide approximately $1 million for technology and $3 million for maintenance needs. Westonka citizens can monitor progress on these projects by checking in at www.westonka.k12..mn.us on a regular basis. UPCOMING EVENTS --May 28, Memorial Day, No School K-12; all school district offices Closed. --May 29, Late Start for Gr. K-4 for teacher planning. No AM Kindergarten. Primary school day starts at 11:10 a.m.; bus schedules are adjusted accordingly. --May 30, Appreciation Tea for Mary Gorder, Minnesota Music Educator of the Year, 3:15 to 4 p.m., Shirley Hills Primary School, 2450 Wilshire Boulevard, Mound. WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU! We would like to hear your feedback on any of the topics above, or any 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 To unsubscribe from this list, please send a message to Barbara Olson at <olsonb@westonka.k12.mn.us> It is the mission of the Westonka Public School District, in partnership with students, parents, -7783- 05/30/2001 Page 4 of 4 and the community, to create the environment necessary to achieve quality education for lifelong learning. Westonka Public Schools 2450 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite A Mound MN 55364 tel: 952.491.8006; fax: 952.491.8043 welisten @weston ka. k 12. mn. us http://www.westonka.k12.mn.us westonka.news is published by the Community Relations Department, Barbara Olson, editor. - 7784- 05/30/2001 Page 1 of 4 KandisHanson From: "Barbara Olson" Sent: Monday, June 04, 2001 5:31 PM Subject: westonka.news westonka.news Vol. 1, No. 30 June 4, 2001 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. **Note: This is the last issue of westonka.news for the 2000-2001 school year. This issue is coming to you a bit late-delayed because of last Friday's tornado warnings. Please take a minute to provide feedback on this method of communication (see focus topic below). **To continue receiving westonka.news next year, you need do nothing. To unsubscribe, send a message to olsonb@westonka.kl2.mn.us. Know others who might enjoy receiving it? Phone a friend-and tell him/her to send a request to welisten@westonka.k12.mn.us. 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 --Educational Service Center Plans --Higher Standards Starting to Stick 2. Focus Topic: What Do You Think of westonka.news? 3. Upcoming Events 4. We Want to Hear from You NEWS BRIEFS **Educational Service Center Plans** The Westonka School Board has approved the schematic design for an Educational Service Center (ESC) to be built near Mound Westonka High School. -7785- 06/05/2001 Page 2 of 4 The building will replace some of the district uses of the former Community Center. Since Summer 1999, about 30 staff members have been housed temporarily in classrooms and other spaces in three school'buildings. The ESC will allow those spaces to be returned to their original use. The "schematic design" shows basic floor plans and general office layouts. The approved design reflects reduction of approximately 1000 square feet from preliminary drawings. The ESC is one of three aspects of an overall plan to replace the uses of the downtown property: office space, a new Haddorff football-soccer stadium, and upgrading of practice fields near the high school. Tentative project completion date for the Educational Service Center is January 2003. If you have Adobe Acrobat Reader software and would like to receive a PDF file showing actual layouts, please contact Barbara Olson at olsonb@westonka.kl2.mn.us **Higher Standards Starting to Stick** The drive to set higher educational standards has started to take hold in America's schools, according to the fourth "Reality Check Survey" by Public Agenda, a nonpartisan, nonprofit public opinion research and citizen education organization based in New York City. Public Agenda's 2001 survey found several statistically significant changes in public perception. --Fewer teachers report their schools are using social promotion. --More parents say their children have to pass standardized tests to advance in school. --The perception gap between public and private schools seems to be narrowing. Public Agenda noted an increase, compared to four years ago, in the percentage of parents who say that local public schools have higher standards than local private schools. Almost two-thirds of employers say kids don't graduate from local schools unless they have learned what was expected of them, up from 51 percent in 1999. --And although high-stakes standardized tests are often controversial, the Public Agenda survey found few signs of public backlash. There is little dissatisfaction from parents, teachers, nor students themselves with testing in their own schools. Most students say the tests they take seem fair. --Teachers are the most concerned about testing. Only 20% said they have to focus on test preparation so much that real learning is neglected, but 83 percent say they worry "teaching to the test" could become the norm. Nearly half of the teachers surveyed feared that schools will be overwhelmed with students who fail the test. For the full report, go to: http://www.publicagenda.org/specials/rc2001/reality.htm. Permission to reprint granted by the National School Public Relations Association (NSPRA). You can contact NSPRA at www.nspra.o~; nspr. a@nspra.org; 15948 Derwood Road, - 7786- 06/05/2001 Page 3 of 4 Rockville, Maryland 20855; 301-519-1221. FOCUS TOPIC **What Do You Think About westonka.news?** We're just wrapping up the inaugural year of westonka.news, a new attempt to communicate with interested parents and district residents about what's going on in the Westonka Public Schools. You can help district staff improve our communication efforts by taking just a minute of your time to answer three questions about this electronic newsletter. How to reply? Do whatever feels comfortable to you: --Cut and paste this portion of the newsletter into a new e-mail window, along with your comments, and send it to welisten@westonka.k12.mn.us or --call the district feedback line at 952.491.8260 with your comments or --print out this portion and fax it to Barbara Olson at 952.491.8043 or --print out this portion and mail it to Barbara Olson, 2450 Wilshire Blvd, Suite A, Mound MN 55364 1. In general, does westonka.news contain information you find useful? 2. Would you prefer to continue receiving it in generic text format, or as a PDF attachment? 3. How can westonka.news be improved for next year? UPCOMING EVENTS --June 5, --June 6. --June 6 --June 6 --June 6 --June 7 --June 7 --June 7 Gr. 7 Recognition Celebration, 6:30 p.m., Grandview Middle School Last Day of School for grades 5-12 HT School Picnic/Field Day GMS Trip to Valleyfair MWHS Graduation, 8 p.m., Mound Westonka High School. Last Day of School for grades K-4 Field Trips for Shirley Hills Kindergartners Hilltop Awards Ceremony, 9:15 a.m. -7787- 06/05/2001 Page 4 of 4 WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU! We would like to hear your feedback on any of the topics above, or any 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 To unsubscribe from this list, please send a message to Barbara Olson at <olsonb@westonka.k12.mn.us> It is the mission of the Westonka Public School District, in partnership with students, parents, and the community, to create the environment necessary to achieve quality education for lifelong learning. Westonka Public Schools 2450 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite A Mound MN 55364 tel: 952.491.8006; fax: 952.491.8043 welisten @westo n ka. k 12. mn. us http://www.westonka.k12, mn. us westonka.news is published by the Community Relations Department, Barbara Olson, editor. -7788- 06/05/2001 June 4, 2001 Greg Skinner City of Mound Greg, This is to inform you that I am retiring from the City of Mound, Public Works Department effective August 3, 2001. Respectthlly, J 2333 Femside Lm~e Mound, MN 55364 -7789- ea C 145 University Avenue West, St. Paul, MN 55103-2044 Phone: (651) 281-1200 ° (800) 925-1122 TDD (651) 281-1290 'LMC Fax: (651) 281-1299 ° LMCIT Fax: (651) 281-1298 Web Site: http://www.|mnc.org May 29, 2001 Christopher J. Dietzen Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, Ltd. 1500 Wells Fargo Plaza 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Bloomingtoni MN 55431 Mr~ i~J~k Perry Brings and Morgan ';~00 IDS Center 80 South 8th Street Mpls, MN 55402 Polston et al. v. City of Mound et al. Court File No. AP 01-1606 Gentlemen: Please be advised that the City of Mound has re-scheduled the Motion for Summary Judgment in the above-entitled matter to July 13, 2001 at 8:30 a.m. The hearing will be held in Courtroom C 1453 before the Honorable Judge Franklin Knoll. SMS:lmc CCl George C. Hoff, Esq. John Dean, Esq. Mark Rossow, Claim No. 11034139 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER -7790- HOFF BARRY & KUDERER ,P.A. PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION GEORGE C. HOFF* June 4,2001 TELEPHONE (952) 941-9220 1-800-989-9220 FAX (952) 941-7968 e-mail gch@wintemet.com *Also Admitted in Wisconsin CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEY/CLIENT PRIVILEGE Kandis Hanson City Clerk City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364-1627 Re; Robert polston, et al v. City of Mound Court File No. AP 01-001606 Our File No: 3200-120 Dear Kandis: Thank you for taking the time to meet with Sue Sager, John Dean and I on Friday, June 1st. Following our discussion, we have scheduled a Motion on the discovery issues, consistent with our discussion in your office for June 14, 2001 at 8:30 a.m. The hearing will be held in front of Judge Franklin Knoll at the Hennepin County Government Center in Minneapolis. HOFF, BARRY & KUDERER, P.A. GCH:baj cc: Mark Rossow, BRAC #11034139 7901 FLYING CLOUD DRIVE, #260eEDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 55344-5382 -7791 - HI-NOTES VOL IX 1',40 6 ,TUNE 2001 PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE May 21,2001 Dear Members and Friends, The construction is going along. The date for occupancy is estimated sometime in the last half of June. In order to actually even move one stick of furniture into the building we must acquire a "certificate of occupancy" and all permits must be finalized and approved. By the time this newsletter arrives the carpeting and other floor coverings will be in. The parking lot has been paved and striped, the landscaping should be either completed or underway, and kitchen equipment will have come. 'Our Project Manager, Lowell Olson, is trying very hard to not promise us dates that might not be reasonable. We are still trying to raise the last $148,000 for furniture and other important items to use the building. Please attend the "Hot Dog 'n Pop" fundraiser planned for the Memorial Day weekend (May 25, 26, 27th from 10:00 to 6:00 pm). Many thanks to Jubilee Foods for allowing us the use of the front of their building and hot dog grill for this event. Gene Adams is coordinating the event with the help of so many willing folks. We have a new staff person added to the Center this past week. Mary Hatch will be the new dining program manager. Please come and greet her one day at lunch time. We know that you must be wondering about an open house. We still have made nO plans, but be assured that you as members will have a chance to pre'view it first before the official open houses. Many thanks to all of you for being so patient. With the hazards in the building, we have not been able to have little sneak previews as we had hoped. Between the outside mud and the inside hazards Yanik was very worried about having people walking through. We also need to have furniture in the building when you come, and that is part of our fundraising. See you at the Membership Meeting on June 5th, Marilyn Byrnes President It Takes a Whole Community to Build a Center -7792- Minnesota Lawful Gambling Government Acknowledgment Form - LGS03 Use of This Form If an organization wishes to contribute gambling funds to a unit of government, the organization and unit et government must complete this form. 2. Approval of Ihe Gambling Control Board is not required. 3. The form must be kept on file by Ihe licensed organi- zation. 4. Attach a copy ol this Iorm to your Schedule C report for the month in which the funds are spent. Organization Inforn~ation Certain Contributions Prohibited Minnesola Statutes, section 349.12, subdivision 25(b)(6), prohibits "a contribution to a statutory or home rule or charter city, county, or town by a licensed organization wilh the knowledge that the governmental unit intends to use Ihe conlribulion for a pension or retirement fund." Minnesota Rules, part 7861.0120, subpart 5D(10), prohibits "ahy contribution or expenditure to the extent that it results ir~ any.net monetary gain or other pecuniary benefit Io ihe organization making the contribution or expenditure." Organization ~j ~"~ ~, \~',,,~-, "~C.~'~'.-~, ~ [.)~J~Y~\(O~.(,r"/'52.) t~'7~Ph°ne Number_ (,oO ""7 License,_,.,.,.~,_..(~)Number~ ~'~' ~ Address City State Zip Amount of lawful purpose contribution to the unit of government: ! $ I~ ~-{~0 ~ We are aware of Ihe restrictions conti~ined in Minnesota Stalules, section 349,12, subdivision 25(b)(6); and Mlnnesotq R,ull~, ~¢rt 7861.0120, ~ u~pad 5D(1w. n Sianalure~ ot ~Chie._ .k~--~,~uc live Oflic ¢ (C~0 ) Print Name ~ Dale Government Information Name of Government Address ' Cily Slale Zip Check type of government: ~.,.City [~ County [~ Township --'-J Slate of Minnesota, Department of r--] Untied slales, Department of --]Other Government Enlily - specify: Amount of lawful purpose contribution received: School Dislricl No. of Division ol Division el $ I We are aware of the restrictions contained in Minnesota Statutes, section 349.12, subdivision 25(b)(6); and Minnesota Rules, pad 7861.0120, subpart 5D(10). -'"53gnalure of Government Ager~ ' Tille Date This form will be made available in allernafive formal (i.e. large print, The information requesled on Ibis form will become public informa- Braille) upon request, If you use a 'FRY, you can call us by using Ihe lion when received by lhe Board, and will be used Io determine Minnesota Relay Service at 1-800-627-3529 and ask Io place a call your compliance wilh Minnesola slatules and rules governing law- to (612) 639-4000. ful gambling activities. (g/97) -7793- Minnesota Lawful Gambling Government Acknowledgment Form - LG503 Use of This Form If an organization wishes to contribute gambling funds to a unit of government, the organization and unit ol government must complete Ibis form. 2. Approval of the Gambling Control Board is not required. 3o The form must be kept on file by the licensed organi- zation. Attach a copy of lhis form to your Schedule C report for the month in which the funds are spent. Organization Information Organization Address Certain Contributions Prohibited Minnesota Statutes, section 349.12, subdivision 25(b)(6), prohibits "a contribution to a stalutory or home rule or charter city, counly, or town by a licensed organization with tire knowledge Ihat Ihe governmenlal unit inlands lo use Ihe contribulion for a pension or retirement fund." Minnesola Rules, part 7861.0120, subpart 5D(10), prohibils "any contribution or expenditure to the extenl Ihat il resulls in any.net monetary gain or other pecuniary benefit to Ihe organization making lhe contribution or expendilure." Number j License Number Phorre Cily Slate Zip Amount of lawful purpose contribulion lo Ihe unit of government: $ ~'C)C) "" We are aware of the restrictions contained,in Minnesola Slalules, section 349.12, subdivision 25(b)(6); and Minnesota Rule{~, pwl 7~61.0120, subpa~d/5D(10). ~ /1 ' S g atu e ol Chiel Exe~tiv~ .Ollicm' (CE~) ' Print Name ' Dale Government Information Name ol Governmenl Address Check lype o[ government: ~ity ~ Courtly ~ Township ~ Slate of Minnesota, D~artmenl ~ United Slales, Depadmenl of ~ Olher GO~ernmenl Entily - specify: Amount of lawful pbrpose conlribulion received: Phone Number Cily Slale ......... .......................... School Dishicl No. o[ ....... Division of .... Division of Zip We are aware of the reslrictions contained in Minnesota Slalutes, section 349.12, subdivision 25(b)(6); and Minnesota Rules, pad 7861.0120, subpart 5D(10). J Prinl Name - Title Dale This form will be made available in alternative iormat (I.e. large print, The information requesled on Ihls form will become public informa- Braille) upon request. If you use a TrY, you can call us by using Ihe tion when received by Ihe Board, and will be used Io determine Minnesota Relay Service al 1-800-627-3529 and ask Io place a call your cornpliance wilt3 Minnesola slalules and rules governing law- to (612) 63g-4000. ful gambling activities. (gl§7) -7794- Minnesota Lawful Gambling Government Acknowledgment Form - LGS03 Use of This Form 1. If an organization wishes to contribute gambling funds to a unit of governrnent, the organization and unit ol government must complele this form. 2. Approval of tile Gambling Control Board is not required. 3. The form must be kept on file by the licensed organi- zation. 4. Attach a copy of this form to your Schedule C report for the month in which the funds are spent. Organization Information Certain Contributions Prohibited Minnesota Statutes, section 349.12, subdivision 25(b)(6), prohibits "a contribution Io a statutory or home rule or charier oily, counly, or town by a licensed organization will~ the knowledge Ibat the governmental unit intends 1o use tim contribution for a pension or retirement fund." Minnesota Rules, part 7861.0120, subpart 5D(10), prohibits "any conbibution or expenditure to the extent that it results in any net monetary gain or other pecuniary benefit to the organization making the contribution or expenditure." Ph°ne NumberI Lic&se gtL~Ir? Organization Address City Slate Zip M4 ~.l Ss .BG~ Amount of lawful purpose contribution to the unit oI government: We are aware of the restrictions contained in Miunesola Stalules, section 349.12, subdivision 25(b)(6); and Minnesota R~lesi, part 7861.012Q,, s~bpad 5D(10). ,n Signalur~l'~Ex"ecutive Ollic~r (CEE)) Print Name Ii ~ ~J~'-~T Dale Government Information Name of Government Phone Number Address ~ ' Oily Stale Zip Check lype ol government: ~"~'City ~ County E~] Township E~ School DisIrict No. of ] Stale of Minnesola, Department of ........................................... Division of E~ United Slates, Department oi' ]Other Government Entity - specily: Amounl of lawful purpose conlribulion received: Division of We are aware of the restrictions contained in Minnesota Statutes, section 349.12, subdivision 25(b)(6); and Minnesota Rules, part 7861.0120, subpad 5D(10). [ '-~gnature of Government A~enl Print Name Date This Iorm will be made available in alternalive Iormal (i.e. large print, The inlormation requesled on this torm will become public inlorma- Braille) upon request. If you use a TrY, you can call us by using the lion when received by Ihe Board, and will be used to determine Minnesota Relay Service at 1-800-627-3529 and ask lo place a call your compliance with Minnesota slatules and rules governing law- to (612) 639-4000. fuI gambling activities. (9/g7) -7795- Minnesota Lawful Gambling Government Acknowledgment Form - LC503 Use of This Form If an organization wishes to contribute gambling funds to a unit of government, the organization and unit of government must complete this form. 2. Approval of the Gambling Control Board is not required. 3. The form must be kept on file by the licensed organi- zation. 4. Attach a copy of this form to your Schedule C repeal for the month in which the funds are spent. Organization Information Certain Contributions Prohibited Minnesota Statutes, section 349.12, subdivision 25(b)(6), prohibits "a contribution to a statutory or home rule or charter city, county, or town by a licensed organization with the knowledge that the governmental unit intends to use the contribution for a pension or retirement fund." Minnesota Rules, part 7861.0120, subpart 5D(10),' prohibits "any contributlo, n or expenditure to the extent that it results in any net monelary gain or other pecuniary benefit to the organization making the contribution or expenditure." Organization Address Phone Number ( qsz4 qq/,, -~i License Number City State Zip Amount of lawful purpose contribution Io the unit of government: We are aware of the restrictions contained in Minnesota Statutes, section 349.12, subdivision 25(b)(6); and Minnes(~a Rules, part 7861.0120, subpad 5D(10). Si~,r,r~ture of Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Government Information Name of Government C_,q,-( n%,.,,,,,, Address Check type of government: ~ily [] County [] Township ~ Stale of Minnesola, DepaHment of ~ United States, Department el ~ Other Government E~lity - specify: Phone Number City State [~] School Dislricl No. Amount of lawful purpose contribution received: $ 6 ) ~) © © "-- : Division el __, Division ol Zip t We are aware of the restrictions contained in Minnesota Stalutes, section 349.12, subdivision 25(b)(6); and Minnesota Rules, part 7861.0120, subpart 5D(10). '~gnature of G"~vern~ent Agent ' Print Name Tllle Date This form will be made available in alternative format (i.e. large print, The informalion requested on this form will become public informa- Braille) upon request. If you use a 'I-FY, you can call us by using the lion when received by the Board, and will be used to determine Minnesota Relay Service at 1-800-627-3529 and ask to place a call your compliance with Minnesota statutes and rules governing law- to (612) 639-4000. ful gambling activities. (9/97) -7796- RANDY PENNINGTON Institutional Integrity We hear leaders pro- fess the importance of integrity and then observe its apparent disregard when it comes to. action. ALL THE TALK OF INTEGRITY would lead one to believe that there is an abundant supply of leaders and organizations that W~li~'their talk. Experience paints a different picture: · 93 percent of 40,000 Americans sur- veyed admitted to lying regularly at work, according to a Fast Company mag- azine report. · 60 percent of employees whc~ saw or know about an ethical violation in their company have not reported it, accord- mg to a survey by Walker Information and the Hudson Institute. · 47 percent of the 148 secretaries to Fortune 1000 CEOs responding to a sur- vey by OfficeClick.com, had been asked by their boss to lie. Why We Don't Act with Inl'egHty Maintaining integrity is a challenge for five reasons: I. Impact of culture. The duiture is the essence of what the group believes ~s important. Company cultures are ~owerful tools fOr creating a sense of connection. In some organizations, bending the rules becomes legendary. Water-cooler conversations, promo- tions, and public recognition confer star status on those who produce the big payday. It often appears that the more dubious the tactics, the greater the recognition. The choice to go along and get along is often easier than standing for one's values. 2. Poorly designed systems. Systems promote efficiency and consistency. Poorly designed systems can promote dishonesty and a lack of integrity. What systems must people circumvent to accomplish their goals? Look at each system from a worst-case perspective to determine what habits are being pro- moted. Question the organization's com- mitment to integrity when the systems promote deceit and manipulation. 3. Doing more and more with less and less. The tension created when expectations exceed available resources may inspire creativity, but the line between innovation and a lack of integrity can be blurred when pressure to produce leads to instances of cutting comers, falsifying documentation, and withholding information. 4. Blind loyalty. History contains numerous examples of when the ability to inspire has clouded judgment. We assume that all decisions have been examined by the leaders. Employees who carry out any directive without evaluating the conse- quences can find them- selves in an abusive and unethical environment. 5. The lure of expedi- ence. Our world is built on speed. No wonder we want immediate suc- cess---defined by what we have rather than who we are. We are told that we deserve it all, and we should receive it all right now. An out-of-control desire for external symbols starts us down a slip- pery slope, making a return to the stan- dards of integrity very difficult. Making Integrity Come to Life The leader's job is to create an envi- ronment that delivers results without sacrificing integrity. There is no program for making integrity come to life. It is an ongoing process. Five ideas will assist you in meeting this never-ending challenge. 1. Talk about integrity often. How often do you say that success is ulti- mately based on the integrity of your products, services, and relationships? Hanging a values statement on the wall is not enough. Few people take the time to read a values statement when they face a difficult choice. Don't start a new program. Create stories and legends about those who achieve superior results while modeling integrity. Talk about the challenges of earning and maintaining trust. The more attention leaders give to integrity, the more important it becomes. 2. Look at the whole and align the parts. One person recently made the case for alignment with these words, "How do they expect us to trust them when the policies say one thing, but we are asked to do something different every day?" Attempts to compartmentalize functions are irrelevant. Everyth~g is ultimately connected. Deceptive marketing prac- tices influence attitudes and behaviors in other departments. Allowing disrespect in one area will affect other areas. The integrity of the whole is called into ques- tions when we see inconsistencies. 3. Welcome bad news. The test of a healthy organization is not the absence of problems. It is the ability to address them in a positive manner. The permission to share bad news without fear of retribution pro- motes an honest, open environment that strives to improve. Is someone withholding information that could make your organization even better? 4. Communicate expec- tations and develop skills. Most people want to do the right thing and will do so if they know what is expected and how to perform. A global environment brings different views on what is acceptable. Develop skills in decision-making to give people the capacity to put their good intentions into practice. 5. Create accountability and rewards. People must see that acting with integrity means something. Deal quickly with those who violate standards. Make hon- oring commitments and building trust among diverse groups criteria for promo- tion. Reward those who demonstrate integrity in a difficult situation. Behavior that is recognized is repeated. With growth, there is hope that our belief in the value of integrity can be taken to new levels of action. ~ Randy Pennington is presM~at of Penmngton Performance Group, Addison, TX; 972-980-9857, He is co-author of On My Honor, [ Will: Leading with integrity in Changing Times. LEN HARRELL Chief of Police MOUND POLICE 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Telephone 472-0621 Dispatch 525-6210 Fax 472-0656 EMERGENCY 911 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Kandis Hanson Chief Len Harrell Monthly Report for May, 2001 STATISTICS The police department responded to 905':calls for service during the month of May..There were 44 Part I offem~..:~s rePprted. Those offenses included 1 criminal sexual Conduct,. 1 rob~,' 1 ~gravated aSsault, 5 burglary, 1 vehicle theft, and 35 larcenies, There 2 child abuse, 1 4 narcotics, 14 liquor laW viOlationsi~,8-.DUI's, 5?simple assaultS, 10 domestics (3 with aSsaultS),-4 harassment~ and 18-othe~offenses. The patrol,:,diYisi~n, issUed~!30 adult~eitations aad 1 juvenile citation. Parking tickets. Warnings were issued to ~ : w ·' ' '~ ' and 17juveniles There ere 2 adUltsand 2j arrested 1 juvenile felony arrests. The injuries. There were 20 Mound assisted other asencies assistance on 12 occasions. -7798- MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT - May, 2001 II. INVESTIGATIONS The Investigators worked on 3 child protection issues and 1 erirninal sexual conduct case in May. Other cases included robbery, burglary, assault, theft, absenting, missing person, damage to property, fraud, deprivation of parental rights, NSF checks, forgery, fleeing police, malicious punishment of a child, controlled substance violation, harassment, forgery, and terroristic threats. Formal complaints were issued for gross misdemeanor DWI's, DUI 2nd & 3ra degree, domestic 2nd & 5th degree assault, disorderly conduct, worthless check, trespassing, driving after cancellation, fleeing a police officer, no insurance, marijuana in a motor vehicle, minor consumption, and barking dog. III. PERSONNEL/STAFFING The department used approximately 101 hours of overtime during the month of May. Officers used 25 hours of comp-time, 78 hours of sick time, and 84 hours of vacation and one holiday. Officers earned 47 hours of comp time. IV. TRAINING One officer attended emergency driving school, one attended PTAC, and all officers attended defensive tactics and fh:earms training in May. V. COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER CSO Salter handled 344 calls for service including 41 animal complaints, 63 ordinance violations, and 240 miscellaneous calls. Four citations were issued. VI. RESERVES No report available. -7799- Lake Minnetonka Association A Proud Sponsor of the Lake Minnetonka 4th of July 2001 Celebration[ The Lake Minnetonka Association works to make Lake Minnetonka a better place to live, work and play. ~We are an advocate for the lake and those who love the lake. In addition to our advocacy to protect and improve Lake Minnetonka, the LMA is a proud sponsor of the Lake Minnetonka 4th of July 2001 Celebration. Your contribution will help us sponsor this event, which is organized and hosted by the Excelsior Area Chamber of Commerce, for the enjoyment of all lake area residents. The Lake Minnetonka 4th of July Celebration will feature a full day of family-oriented entertainment, a live evening concert by The Minnesota Orchestra and fabulous fireworks shot over Excelsior Bay at dusk. Your tax-deductible contribution today will support the Lake Minnetonka Association and help the LMA sponsor the Lake Minnetonka 4th of July Celebration at Excelsior Commons / Bay. Individual contributions of $500 or more to the Celebration will be listed in the printed program distributed at the Celebration, as well as in all Chamber-produced publicity. THANK YOU! The Lake Minnetonka Association i$ a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization. Contributionx are tax-deductible to the extent al/owed by/aw. For more information, please contact us at: LAKE MINNETONKA ASSOCIATION DICK OSGOOD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR P.O. Box 248 952-476-0883 Excelsior, MN 55331 Lake Minnetonka~hotmail.com THANK YOU FOR YOUR TAX-DEDUCTIBLE CONTRIBUTION! PLEASE COMPLETE THIS FORM AND MAIL IT ~/ITH YOUR CONTRIBUTION TO THE LMA, P.O. BOX 24B. EXCELSIOR MN S$331. BY US/NC YOUR OI~IN ENVELOPE, MORE OF YOUR CONTRIBUTION tOE5 TO IX/ORK/ NAME ADDRESS CITY / ZIP PHONE (HOME) EMAIL PLEASE CHECK ALL THAT APPLY. MAKE YOUR CHECK PAYABLE TO 'LMA.' l. CONTRIBUTION TO SUPPORT THE LAKE MINNETONKA 4TH OF JULY CELEBRATION: __.~;25 550 __5'1OO __$250 __~;$OO __ OTHER 2. MEMBERSHIP DUES CONTRIBUTION TO SUPPORT THE LMA: __ 550 BASIC MEMBER __ 5150 SUSTAINING MEMBER __ 5250 BUSINESS MEMBER __ OTHER DUES AMOUNT -7800- ~Lake Minnetonka Association i P.O. Box 248 i Excelsi0r, MN 55331 Nonprofit Org. U.S. Postase PAID Permit//108 Excelsior. MN 12*1~*~**~***5-DIGIT 55364 Ed Shukte Mound City Administrator 5341 Maywood Rd Mound MN 55364-1627 I,l,l,,hh,,Ih,lh,,I,,h,,Ihlh,,,hlh,,hh,h,,Ihlh,I Lake Minnetonka Association A Proud Sponsor of the Lake Minnetonka 4th of July 2001 Celebration! Dear Friend of Lake Minnetonka: The Lake Minnetonka Association -- your advocate for the lake -- is proud to be a sponsor of the Lake Minnetonka 4th of July Celebration at the Excelsior Commons! In this flyer, you'll find an opportunity to make a tax-deductible contribution to the LMA to support the 2001 Celebration, including the fireworks display. Thank you in advance! The LMA also is busy working on many projects and activities to preserve and improve Lake Minnetonka for lakeshore owners, lake users and businesses on the lake. ~Je work on keeping zebra mussel out of the lake, finding better ways to control milfoil, protecting and improving the lake's water quality and assuring reasonable, safe use of the lake. ~vVJe need your help and support to keep working as the advocate for Lake Minnetonka and all who love it. If you haven't already made ~. , ~v- ,~ ~) four annual dues contribution, please do so now. Thanks! ~ ~r~o -7801 - Metropolitan Council Improve regional competitiveness in a global economy May 30, 2001 Mr. Loren Gordon Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc. 123 North Third Street Suite 100 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 City of Mound Comprehensive Plan Update Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 18287-1 Metropolitan Council District 1 Dear Mr. Gordon: At its meeting on May 16, 2001, the Metropolitan Council completed its review of the city of Mound's Comprehensive Plan Update. The Council based its review on the attached executive summary and review record. The Council found that the comprehensive plan meets all Metropolitan Land Planning Act (MLPA) requirements for 1998 plan updates, is consistent with the Regional Blueprint, is in conformity with the regional system plans for aviation, recreation open space, transportation, and water resources management; and is compatible with plans of adjacent jurisdictions. Therefore, the city may place the comprehensive plan into effect without modification. Minn. Statutes § 473.864, Subd. 1, from the MLPA, requires local governments to adopt the comprehensive plan, with any required modifications, within nine months following a final decision by the Council. For the city of Mound, the nine-month period expires in February, 2002. The MLPA, Minn. Statutes § 473.865, Subd. 1, also requires local governments to submit documentation, such as a resolution or minutes, within 30 days following adoption to indicate that the city adopted or amended any official local controls to implement the comprehensive plan. We also request that you send us tWo copies of your final plan for our records. We congratulate you and your staff for preparing a detailed and thoughtful plan that helps promote Smart Growth for housing, transportation and land use in the region. Sincere~ Ted Mondale Chair Attachment CCi Saundra Spigner, Metropolitan Council District 1 Kandis Hanson, City Manager Phyllis Hanson, Sector Representative Linda O'Connor, Principal Reviewer Linda Milashius, Referrals Coordinator www.metrocouncfl.ori! 230 East Fffih Street · St. Paul, Mirmesota55101-1626 · (651) 602-1000 · Fax602-1550 * TIY291-0904 AnF_,qu~- 7..802 C CONSENT Metro ~olitan Council Nleetin 16, 2001 Agenda Item: 2001-170 Date: Subject: District(s), Member(s): Policy/Legal Reference: Staff Prepared/Presented: Division/Department: May 1, 2001 Comprehensive Plan Update, City of Mound, Referral No. 18287-1 Metropolitan Council District 1, Saundra Spigner 612-879-3773 MN Statutes 473.864, Subd. 2 and 473.175, Subd. 1 Linda O'Connor, Principal Reviewer (651-602-1098), Phyllis Hanson, Sector Representative and Acting Supervisor (651-6012-1566), Eli Cooper, Director, Planning and Growth Management (651 602-1521) Caren Dewar, Director, Community Development 651-602-1306 Community Development Division/Planning & Growth Management Dept. Proposed Action/Motion That the Metropolitan Council adopt the attached Review Record and recommendations subject to corrections noted in the Record. Issue(s) · Should the Metropolitan Council permit the city of Mound to put its 2000 Comprehensive Plan Update into effect? · Is the city of Mound's Comprehensive Plan Update consistent with the Regional GroWth Strategy? Overview and Funding The city of Mound, located in southwestern Hennepin County along the western shoreline of Lake Minnetonka, ranks 81 st of communities expected to take additional growth to 2020. The community covers an area of 2,038 acres and is identified by the Regional Growth Strategy as entirely within the urban area. Mound is virtually fully developed with vacant land adequate to add another 72 housing units. The city is a Livable Communities Act participant with a current overall single family density of 3.59 units per acre and 20 units per acre multifamily. The plan is consistent with the Regional Blueprint, in conformity with regional system plans and compatible with the plans of adjacent governmental units and school districts. In 1999, the Council gave the city a planning assistance grant of $3510 (SG-97-166) to update its local comprehensive plan. [] Infrastructure: Existing highway capacities and waste collecion/treatment capacities support city vision. [] Quality of life: Community supports mixed use and transit-oriented design through infill and redevelopment opportunities, provides life-cycle housing opportunities and enhances lakes and trails. [] Communication/constituency building: The comprehensive plan is grounded in an inclusive public participation process and helps implement Regional Blueprint policies through intergovernmental collaboration. [] Alignment: The plan represents Smart Growth principles for redevelopment and environmental protection. -7863- -7804- -7805- -7806- -7807- ATTACHMENT A: REVIEW RECORD REVIEW OF THE CITY OF MOUND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2020 BACKGROUND The plan establishes policies to guide growth to the year 2020 and replaces the city's 1990 comprehensive plan. The city of Mound is approximately 25 miles west of downtown Minneapolis on the western shores of Lake Minnetonka and covers an area of 2,038 acres. Neighboring lake communities include Minnetrista, Shorewood, Spring Park and Orono (Map 1). Mound is physically separated by water from every community except Minnetrista, who also shares the largest border on the west. Located in Hennepin County, Mound is on the western edge of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area and within the Urban Area designation of the Regional Growth Strategy (Map 2). The city is ranked 81st on the list of communities expected to take additional growth to 2020. The community is almost fully developed and continues to experience redevelopment of lakeshore and other properties. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW The Metropolitan Land Use Planning Act, as amended, requires local units of government to submit comprehensive plans and plan amendments to the Council for review (MN.Stat. 473.864, Subd. 2). The Act requires Council review of the plans to determine their conformity with metropolitan system plans, apparent consistency with other adoPted plans of the Council and compatibility with the plans of other local jurisdictions in the metropolitan area (MN.Stat 473.175, Subd. 1). ANALYSIS Staffreviewed the plan update for consistency with the Regional Blueprint and other chapters of the Metropolitan Development Guide, for conformity with regional system plans for aviation, recreation open space, transportation and water resources management (Map 3), and for compatibility with the plans of adjacent governmental units and school districts. Regional Blueprint (Linda O'Connor, 651-602-1098) The Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) in the Regional Blueprint identifies the city of Mound as being in the urban area. In this policy area, the Council anticipates that communities will plan to support redevelopment of obsolete land uses, renovation and reuse of existing structures, as well as infill on vacant and hard-to-develop sites. New housing units ~hould reflect demographic changes, support job centers and meet the life-cycle housing needs of individuals and families. Land Use As a Minnetonka lake community, 80% of Mound's land uses are residential. The current pattern is the result of its historical development as a lakeshore cabin community with small platted lots, narrow street fight of ways, and substantial areas of park commons. The following table exemplifies the city's existing land use. -7868- Land Use Table CATEGORY ACREAGE 777 RESDENTIAL (SF, 10,000 SQ. FT. LOT SIZE) RESDENTIAL (SF, 6,000 SQ. FT. LOT SIZE) 298 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 6 HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 32 COMMERCIAL 65 INDUSTRIAL 18 PARK/OPEN SPACE 44 PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL 97 NATURE CONSERVATION AREAS 10 LAKE/MARSH 169 ISLAND 1 VACANT 24 ROW/RR 497 TOTALS 2038 ACRES Downtown Revitalized Mound, with consultant assistance, developed a plan for revitalization of the downtown area. This plan calls for redirecting County Rd. 15 through the middle of the city, expanding and enhancing the city's downtown lake front and allowing for a town center with mixed-use development that is pedestrian and bicycle friendly. The city has in the past applied for a Livable Communities Demonstration Grant funds. Forecasts Forecasts for the city of Mound through 2020 are included in the following table. The forecasts used by the city indicate a high and low range for households and population. Council forecasts fall within that range. City MC City MC City MC Hi/Low Hi/Low Hi/Low Population 9750/9875 9950 9282/9800 9850 8932/9955 9800 Households 3900/3950 3950 3950/4170 4200 4060/4525 4400 Employment 2250 2250 2600 26001 2830 2830 I * Metropolitan Council's forecasts range with the high and low households by the city. Density Of the 1067 acres of developed residential land, 1029 acres of single family detached has developed at over 3 units per acre, and 38 acres of multi-family has developed at 20 units per acre. -7809- Regional. Systems Aviation (Chauncey Case 652-602-1724) The city of Mound is not within the influence area of any metro system airport, not affected by any existing or future airport development/operation, and not affected by any helicopter/heliport planning considerations. However, the city is within the regions general airspace that needs to be protected from potential obstructions to air navigation. Lake Minnetonka permits seaplane use under MnDOT rules/regulations. The city of Mound's Comprehensive Plan Update does not include an aviation element. However, the city is essentially fully developed. Existing or future properties, available for development/ redevelopment that would provide locations for potential obstructions to air navigation, appear severely limited. Local building height control should be adequate to control tall structures in the future, especially ifa proposed project is not allowed to locate in wetland areas such as Lost Lake. If such a proposal is made, the city should notify MnDOT aeronautics for review of potential impacts to general airspace and seaplane operations. The plan is in conformance with the Aviation policy plan. Advisory Comments: The city may want to review its land use designation/zoning in several districts, and clarify language to ensure any potential heliport landing site proposal occurs in an area (if any) that is deemed appropriate by the city. Recreation Open Space (Michael McDonough 651-602-1054) The plan is in conformity with the Regional Parks and Open Space System. The proposed Southwest Hennepin (Luce-Line Lake Minnetonka) Regional Trail (abandoned Dakota Rail) is the only Regional Park System facility in Mound. Lake Minnetonka Regional Park is the closest regional park. Safe and friendly pedestrian/bicycle local connections are important. Advisory Comments: Restoring native vegetation on publicly ownedland would help water quality and also an education/conservation effort for private land on the benefits of native vegetation versus hard surfaces and mowed turf would help improve the community's natural resources (Page 6). If public land is to be disposed of, the plan could state that it should be traded for park land, preferably with higher quality natural resources (Page 7, #9). With the limited amount of undeveloped land, additional park land and more protection of natural resources is needed. The city may want to make acquisition a high priority (Page 10). Being a Lake Minnetonka community, there is a lot of pressure to access the lake both by local citizens as well as people from outside the community. Public boat access and shore fishing may be added to the plan. There may be an opportunity to significantly upgrade the Black Lake Bridge shore fishing area. By improving the site, shoreline vegetation and erosion issues could be better addressed. The Minnesota DNR has funded a number of similar projects at Coffee Channel, St.. Alban's Bay, and Tonka Narrows. There may also be more opportunities to improve other bridge crossing/shore fishing areas and address similar issues. O -7810- The natural resource element of the park mission statement could be addressed by conducting a detailed natural resources inventory of the community or of the public lands. The DNR Metro (3reenways program provides grants to support and provide funding for these efforts. A contact at the DNR is A1 Singer, 651-772-7952. (Page 82). Transportation (Ann Braden 651-602-1705) The transportation element of the Mound Comprehensive Plan is in conformity with the Transportation Policy Plan and addresses all the applicable transportation and transit requirements of a comprehensive plan. The plan has no unanticipated impacts on the metropolitan transportation system. Water Resources Management The plan is consistent with the regional Water Resources Management plan. Surface Water Management (Jack Frost 651-602-1078) The city has prepared an effective local water management plan which provides the basis for managing surface water in the city. Advisory Comments: As the'city redevelops much of these older parts of the community near the lake, the opportunity exists to reduce and treat much of the storm water entering Lake Minnetonka. In addition to on-site storm water ponds, the city should consider development options that allows for more infiltration thereby reducing the rate and volume of runoff that needs to be treated at downstream facilities. Water Supply The city has completed a water supply plan consistent with Council guidelines. V~astewater Service (Donald Bluhm 651-602-1116) The Metropolitan Council Environmental Services provides sanitary sewer service to the city of Mound via three interceptors, 6-MO-650, 6-MO-651, and MSB-7021. Wastewater treatment is at the Blue Lake WWTP in Shakopee. The city of Mound has projected a 2020 flow of 1.03 MGD. The Metropolitan Disposal System has adequate capacity to provide for the needs of the City as shown in their plan. The city's plan acknowledges that the Council has set an I/I goal for the city. The city has outlined its proposed efforts to reduce its I/I to reach this goal. The city has five years to reduce the Ill within its system to meet this goal. After the five-year period, the Council may institute an Ill surcharge rate to recover the tree costs for the collection and treatment of any I/I above the established goal. Recommendations: 1. Upon approval of the city's comprehensive plan and prior to the construction of any extensions or additions to its disposal system, the city must submit a Comprehensive Sewer Plan (Tier II Plan) to the Council for final approval. The comprehensive sewer plan shall be consistent with the city's approved comprehensive plan and reflect any modifications recommended by the Council. 2. The city should provide the Council with an annual update of their progress in meeting I/I goals. -7811- Other Metropolitan Development Guide Chapters Housing (Linda Milashius 651-602-1541) The housing element of the city of Mound's Comprehensive Plan Update is consistent with Council policy and meets the housing planning requirements of the Land Planning Act. As an LCA participant, Mound prepared an LCA Housing Action Plan that set out a number of programs and actions for achieving its LCA goals. The city has exceeded their density goals for single family. Ownership 76% 60-69% 60% Rental 47% 35-37% 35% Type (Non-single 22% 35-37% 35% Family detached) Owner/Renter Mix 75/25% (67-75)(25- 75/25% 33)% Single-hmily detached 2.5/acre 1.8-1.9/acre 2.5/acre Multihmily 22/acre 10-14/acre 14/acre Compatibility with Adjacent Jurisdictions The city forwarded the plan to adjacent jurisdictions for review. The city's plan is compatible with the plans of adjacent local governments. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The city of Mound's 2000 Comprehensive Plan Update meets all of the Metropolitan Land Planning Act requirements for 1998 plan updates. The plan is in conformity with the Regional Blueprint and the Regional Growth Strategy designations for urban areas and includes plans to achieve Regional Blueprint goals for connecting housing, transit, and jobs while protecting natural resources. 3. The plan is in conformity with the policy plans for Water Resources and Transportation. 4. The plan is consistent with the Council's housing policy and other chapters of the Metropolitan Development Guide. 5. The plan is compatible with the plans of adjacent governmental units and school districts. The plan is in conformity with the Regional Parks and Open Space System. The natural resource element of the park mission does not address a natural resource inventory of the community or of public lands. The plan also does not address restoring native vegetation on publicly owned land or -7812- education/conservation efforts for pr/vate land promoting native vegetation versus hard surfaces and mowed turf. The plan is in conformance with the Aviation policy plan. The city's land use designations and zoning text for potential and appropriate heliport landing sites is not clear and may permit use in non-designated areas. RECOMMENDATIONS That the Metropolitan Council adopt the Executive Summary and Review Record with the following recommendations: 1. That the city of Mound may place the 2000 Comprehensive Plan Update into effect with no plan modifications Upon the approval of the city's comprehensive plan and prior to the construction of any extensions or additions to its disposal system, the city must submit a Comprehensive Sewer Plan (Tier II Plan) to the Council for final approval. 3. The comprehensive sewer plan shall be consistent with the city's approved comprehensive plan and reflect any modifications recommended by the Council. 4. The city should provide the Council with an annual update of their progress in meeting their I/I goals. ATTACHMENTS -- Maps Figure 1 - Location Map Figure 2 - Regional Growth Strategy Policy Areas Figure 3 - Regional Systems Figure 4 - Proposed Land Use Plan -7813- THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK -7814-