Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2002-09-09
PLEASE TURN OFF ALL CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. MOUND CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2002 - 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 o o APPROVE AGENDA, WITH ANY AMENDMENTS *CONSENT AGENDA *A. APPROVE MINUTES: AUGUST 27, 2002 REGULAR MEETING *B. APPROVE PAYMENT OF CLAIMS COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT ON ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA. (LIMIT TO 3 MINUTES PER SPEAKER.) 2003 PROPOSED BUDGET A. ACTION ON RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2003 PRELIMINARY GENERAL FUND BUDGET IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,833,250; SETTING THE PRELIMINARY LEVY AT $2,814,110; AND APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY OVERALL BUDGET FOR 2003 4221-4226 4227-4256 4257-4261' o Bo ACTION ON RESOLUTION APPROVING A LEVY NOT TO EXCEED $83,000 OR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE COST OF OPERATION, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF MSA 469, OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF AND FOR THE CITY OF MOUND FOR THE YEAR 2003 UPDATE AND I~ISCUSSION ON PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY PROJECT, WITH ACTION ON BID PACKAGE #1 ACTION ON BIDS FOR 2002 RETAINING WALL REPLACEMENT PROJECT ACTION ON RESOLUTION ORDERING THE ABATEMENT OF CONDITIONS CREATING A HAZARDOUS PROPERTY AT 2957 CAMBRIDGE LANE 4262 4263-4271 4272-4274 4275-4278 PLEASE TURN OFF ALL CELL PHONES & PAGERS IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. 10. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION A. ACTION ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER V, SECTION 1000 - NUISANCE ABATEMENT 4279-4292 11. ACTION ON RESOLUTION TO DENY THE REQUEST FROM TIM BECKER AND DALE AND LORELL BECKER TO REZONE LOTS 5-8, BLOCK 4, REPLAT OF HARRISON SHORES, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA FROM R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO R-1A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 4293-4294 12. ACTION ON CASE #02-27: STEVE CODDEN AL CROCKER'S 1~' DIVISION WAIVER OF PLATTING 4295-4321 13. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS Ao B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. LMCD correspondence Report: Finance Department through July 2002 Report: Police Department for August 2002 Article: Tour shows different ways of building communities Article: How much is redevelopment worth? MFRA (Engineering firm) staff Notices of charitable gambling donations from VFW FYI: Notice of status with MCWD Newsletter: Springsted Newsletter: Gillespie Center Redevelopment update 4322-4349 4350-4352 4353-4374 4375 4376 4377-4378 4379-4380 4381 4382-4387 4388 4389-4391 14. ADJOURN This is a preliminary agenda and subject to change. The Council will set a final agenda at the meeting. agendas may be viewed at City Hall or at the City of Mound web site: www. citvqfmound, com. More current meeting COUNCIL BRIEFING September 9, 2002 Upcoming Events Schedule: Don't Forget!! Aug 27 - Sept 10 - Filing for candidacy Sept 9 - 6:30 - HRA regular meeting Sept 9 - 7:30 - CC regular meeting Sept 10 - Primary Election Sept 11 - 4:30 - VFW monument dedication Sept 19 - 4:00-7:00 - Mound Market Place and Village by the Bay open house Sept 20 - 6:3:0-12:00 - Taste of the Lakes (see Jodi/Kandis for tickets) Sept 24 - 6:30 - HRA regular meeting Sept 24 - 7:30 - CC regular meeting Sept 28 - 8:00-3:00- Recycling Day Oct 3 - 6:30 - Joint CC meeting with Orono CC (tentative) Oct 10 - 4:30-6:30 - Mound Magical History Tour Nov 5 - General and Local Election Nov 11 - Closed for Veteran's Day Nov 14 - Police Chief interviews Dec 2 - 7:00 - Special meeting for Truth in Taxation and other business Dec 9 - 7:00 - Continuation for Truth in Taxation and other business, if needed Absences Sept 12-22 Sept 28-Oct 2 Dec 24-29 Mayor Meisel Kandis Hanson Kandis Hanson ICMA Conference Holiday vacation No news! Have a great weekend! MOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 27, 2002 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday, August 27, 2002, at 7:30 p.m. in the council chambers of City Hall. Members Present: Mayor Pat Meisel, Councilmembers Bob Brown, Mark Hanus, David Osmek and Peter Meyer. Others Present: City Attorney John Dean, City Manager Kandis Hanson, City Clerk Bonnie Ritter, Community Development Director Sarah Smith, City Planner Loren Gordon, City Engineer John Cameron, Susan Pastuck, John Molick, Jim Turner, Mark Hagen, John Hubler, Jeff Smith, Noel Towley, Cathy Baglard, Gregg Tonigy, Betty Mesich, Dave Mesich, Ann Eberhart, Shari Erickson, Beth Erickson, Erik Stoehr, Jeff Skelton, Larry Overstreet, Tim Becker, Margie Hubler, Frank Weiland, Henry Sandoval, John Pastick, Marcie Felt, Ruth Schmuellach, Henry Lazniarz, Todd Christopherson, Miles Britz, Greg Pederson. 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 roll call 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 Mayor Meisel called to meeting to order at 7:33 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. APPROVE AGENDA Mayor Meisel asked that item 8 be placed after item 12 on the agenda. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Osmek to approve the agenda as amended. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 4. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Brown to approve the consent agenda as presented. Upon roll call vote taken, all voted in favor. Motion carried. A. Approve minutes of the August 13, 2002 regular meeting. B. Approve payment of claims in the amount of $170,866.55. C. RESOLUTION NO. 02-84: RESOLUTION APPOINTING ABSENTEE BALLOT BOARD D. RESOLUTION NO, 02-85: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SPONSORSHIP OF MATCH GRANT FUNDING PROJECT 0054-02-06A- TUCKER 2000 TRAIL GROOMER PURCHASE WITH THE SOUTHWEST TRAILS ASSOCIATION 1 -4221 - Mound City Council Minutes - August 27, 2002 5. COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT ON ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA Beth Erickson, 2098 Grandview, expressed concern to the Council about additional traffic due to the new Mound Marketplace, and speeding in the vicinity of Sunset and Grandview. Mayor Meisel will have city staff look into the matter for recommended solutions. City Manager Hanson suggested that Ms. Erickson put her request in writing and then it can be processed through the correct channels. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case #02-26: Tim Becker and Dale & Lois Becker- 5331/5341/5351/5361 Three Points Boulevard - Rezoninq Request Sarah Smith reviewed the background information on this request from Tim Becker to rezone Lots 5-8, Block 4, Replat of Harrison Shores, from R1 Single-Family Residential to R-lA Single-Family Residential. There is not a resolution included in the Council packet for this request due to the Planning Commission recommending denial of rezoning, and the staff recommending approval. The Planning Commission based their decision on the belief that 6000 square foot lots would be out of place in the neighborhood. Staff felt that the request was consistent with the neighborhood and with the lot sizes and footprints proposed, these lots could be developed individually without need for additional variances. The applicant presented examples of other variances in the area, and feels that the proposed rezoning to R-lA is consistent with the area. Mayor Meisel opened the public hearing at 8:43 p.m. Larry Overstreet, 1700 Jones Lane, stated that he is the neighbor directly to the West of the subject property. He feels that Becker's goal is to build and sell houses, whereas the neighbors' goal is to keep a nice consistent neighborhood. He stated that the neighborhood is not all of Three Points, but the lagoon area which is all zoned R1. Jeff Skelton, 1770 Baywood Shores, stated that Becker's case is a matter of greed vs. need and he has enough property there to build within the R1 regulations, and doesn't need to go to R1A. After additional discussion, Mayor Meisel closed the hearing at 8:50 p.m. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Osmek to direct staff to prepare a resolution to deny the rezoning request, and have this resolution available at the next Council meeting for consideration, and to direct staff to provide applicant with a 60-day extension on the rezoning request. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 2 -4222- Mound City Council Minutes - August 27, 2002 7. PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY UPDATE BY SEH AND AMCON Todd Christopherson, Construction Manager, updated the Council on the schedule of the public safety facility. The first of three bid packages will be opened on September 4th at 2:00 p.m. There are some soil concerns and a possible underground tank that are being dealt with at this time. Miles Britz, Architect, stated that they are currently working on materials and color selections. The groundbreaking for the Public Safety Facility is on September 17th at 6:30 p.m. The public is invited. 8. (moved on agenda for consideration after item #12) 9. CONSIDERATION/ACTION ON BIDS FOR TET WELL FOR NEW WELL John Cameron presented bids for the observation well and pump test near Sorbo Park. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus to accept the bid of Mark J. Traut Wells, Inc, for $13,264.00 to perform the work prescribed using the sonic method, with 4" casing. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 10. UPDATE ON ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION AND PURCHASE OF BALBOA OPTION PARCEL Bob Lindall of Kennedy & Graven explained the status of the option to purchase the Balboa Property. He recommends requesting an extension of 270 days on the purchase option to enable the City to obtain the No Association Determination prior to closing. If unsuccessful in obtaining the extension, he recommended filing an eminent domain petition to acquire the option parcel pursuant to the previously adopted resolution, and then proceed to exercise the City's option to purchase under the existing option agreement. This will enable the City to secure the property prior to expiration of the option. The purpose of filing the eminent domain petition is to secure the City's exemption from being construed as a "responsible person" pursuant to statutes, for environmental liability for conditions of contamination already present on the property. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Osmek to authorize filing of an eminent domain petition, exercise option to purchase, and have STS continue with environmental testing of Lots 23-28, Koehlers Addition. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Mayor Meisel called a recess at 9:10 p.m. and the meeting reconvened at 9:22 p.m. 3 -4223- Mound City Council Minutes - August 27, 2002 11. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS A. Case #02-12: John Pastuck/Natural Homes - 6385/6495 Bartlett Blvd. - Minor Subdivision. Loren Gordon reviewed the minor subdivision request, informing the Council that the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus to adopt the following resolution. All voted in favor. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 02-86: RESOLUTION APPROVING A MINOR SUBDIVISION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6380 BAY RIDGE ROAD. P & Z CASE #02-12. PID #23-117-24-32-0065 B. Case #02-29: Henry & Gina Lazniarz - 4531 Manchester Road - Final Plat for Lake Minnetonka Trails. Loren Gordon explained that the applicants have submitted a final plat for a four lot single family development named "Lake Minnetonka Trails". The preliminary plat was received on June 11,2002 and the final plat is consistent with the preliminary. MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Osmek to adopt the following resolution. All voted in favor. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 02-87: RESOLUTION GRANTING FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR THE LAKE MINNETONKA TRAILS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. P & Z CASE #02-06. 12. DISCUSSION ON PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENTS AND OVERVIEW FROM PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING Loren Gordon explained that staff and the Planning Commission have been working on the City's Land Use Plan and Zoning Maps over the past few months, and the proposed revisions are needed to comply with state statutes that state that the Zoning Map shall be consistent with the Land Use Plan. There are numerous parcels under consideration for rezoning and the question is whether to consider them all at one time or separate the two areas that there seem to be of concern to residents. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Meyer to initiate the rezoning process for all properties except where Anthony's Floral is located, and the Chateau properties. All voted in favor. Motion carried. There was input from property owners living in the Dutch Lake vicinity, expressing concern over the future use of the Anthony's property and its impact on the lake. The neighborhood group would like to be involved in future discussions regarding this topic. 4 -4224- Mound City Council Minutes - August 27, 2002 John Dean expressed that there may be legal issues if the zoning is changed now to make the existing use nonconforming. Discussion followed regarding possible solutions and combinations of zoning designations. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus to reconsider their previous motion. Those voting in favor: Brown, Hanus, Meisel and Osmek. Those voting against: Meyer. Motion carried. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus to bring all of the parcels in the proposed Zoning Map/Comprehensive Plan revisions, with the exception of the Anthony's Floral property, to public hearing for further evaluation and consideration. Those voting in favor: Brown, Hanus, Meisel and Osmek. Those voting against: Meyer. Motion carried. Mayor Meisel stated that the Anthony's Floral property would be put on the September 24th agenda for further discussion, and directed staff to contact the property owner for his input, and invite him to the meeting, along with the Dutch Lake neighborhood group. 12A. (Item 8 on agenda) REPRESENTATIVE ON SCHOOL DISTRICT REFERENDUM Hanus stated that he is uncomfortable using this forum to discuss a ballot question that's on the primary election in two weeks. If the Council lets one side use this forum they have to let the other side, and then also have to allow for a candidate to use the same forum. It has happened in the past and he is very uncomfortable with that action. MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Brown to have staff prepare a policy statement regarding the use of Council meetings for promoting any ballot question, and that the policy read that this not happen under any circumstance. This proposed policy will be presented at a future meeting for consideration. Those voting in favor: Brown, Hanus, Meisel and Osmek. Those voting against: Meyer. Motion carried. Gene Zulk, School District Superintendent, stated how pleased he was to attend the liquor store groundbreaking earlier in the day and commended the Council on their patience in the development of the downtown. He stated there is going to be a referendum levy vote on the September 10th primary ballot and that the YES Westonka Committee sent out a handbook to all residents - not to suggest they vote yes, but to educate the public on the issue. He thanked the Council and stated that he is excited to have potential for growth and wants to keep the schools competitive so new families will consider having their children attend Westonka Schools. 5 -4225- Mound City Council Minutes - August 27, 2002 13, INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS A. LMCD correspondence B. Correspondence: Westonka Healthy Community Collaborative C. W^FTA Executive Committee meeting summary D. LMCC September schedule E. Memo: LMC on 2003 City budgets F. FYI: Police Chief Profile 14. ADJOURN MOTION by Brown, seconded by Hanus to adjourn at 11:30 p.m. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk Mayor Pat Meisel 6 -4226- SEPTEMBER 9~ 2002 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 082002SUE $524.25 082202S U E $120,685.20 82302SUE $1,050.00 082602SUE $75.00 082702SUE $815.00 090402SUE $4,777.30 091002SUE $267,737.39 TOTAL $395,664.14 -4227- CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/21/02 7:35 AM Page 1 Current Period: August 2002 .~/ _ -~- .~ ! Batch Name 082002SUE User Dollar Amt $524.25 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $524.25 Refer 82002 CAMERON, JOHN G 101-22801 Deposits/Escrow 8/20/2002 Cash Payment Invoice 082002 Transaction Date $0.00 In Balance 8/20/2002 REFUND GOLF OUTING $11.75 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $11.75 Refer 82002 HARRELL, LEONARD Cash Payment Invoice 082002 Cash Payment Invoice 082002 Transaction Date G 101-22801 Deposits/Escrow G 101-22801 Deposits/Escrow 8/20/2002 8/20/2002 REFUND GOLF OUTING, HARRELL, L $11.75 REFUND GOLF OUTING HARRELL, P. $11.75 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $23.50 Refer 82002 HEI'I'Z, FRANK 8/20/2002 Cash Payment G 101-22801 Deposits/Escrow REFUND GOLF OUTING $11.75 Invoice 082002 Transaction Date 8/20/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $11.75 Refer 82002 HOFF, KATIE 8/20/2002 Cash Payment G 101-22801 Deposits/Escrow REFUND GOLF OUTING $11.75 !Invoice 082002 Transaction Date 8/20/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $11.75 Refer 82002 PEDERSON, GREG 8/20/2002 Cash Payment G 101-22801 Deposits/Escrow REFUND GOLF OUTING $11.75 invoice 082002 Transaction Date 8/20/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $11.75 Refer 82002 SMITH, SARAH 8/20/2002 Cash Payment G 101-22801 Deposits/Escrow REFUND GOLF OUTING $11.75 Invoice 082002 Transaction Date 8/20/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $11.75 Refer 82002 TIMBERCREEK GOLF 8/20/2002 Cash Payment G 101-22801 Deposits/Escrow 08-21-02 GOLF OUTING $442.00 Invoice 082002 Transaction Date 8/20/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $442.00 -4228- CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/21/02 7:35 AM Page 2 Current Period: August 2002 Fund Summary 10100 Marquette Bank Mound 101 GENERAL FUND $524.25 $524.25 Pre-Written Check $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Compute $524.25 Total $524.25 -4229- CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/21/02 8:25 AM Page 1 Current Period: August 2002 Batch Name 082202SUE User Dollar Amt $120,685.20 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $120,685.20 $0.00 In Balance DIETRICH, RODNEY 8/21/2002 Cash Payment E455-46379-495 Grants for Econ Develp SUBSIDY AGREEMENT $120,685.20 Invoice 082202 Refer 82202 Transaction Date 8/21/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $120,685.20 Fund Summary 10100 Marquette Bank Mound 455 TIF 1-2 $120,665.20 $120,685.20 Pre-Written Check Checks to be Generated by the Compute Total $o.oo $120,685.20 $120,685.20 -4230- CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/26/02 1:42 PM Page Current Period: August 2002 Batch Name Refer 82202 082302SUE User Dollar Amt $1,050.00 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $1,050.00 $0,00 In Balance ANOKA TECHNICAL INSTITUTE 8/22/2002 Cash Payment E 222-42260-434 Conference & Training REGISTRATION SEPT 7-8 GUSTAFSON $75.00 Invoice 082202 Cash Payment E 222-42260-434 Conference & Training REGISTRATION SEPT 7-8 BERENT $100.00 Invoice 082202 Cash Payment E 222-42260-434 Conference & Training REGISTRATION SEPT 7-8 MYERS, TONY $75.00 Invoice 082202 Transaction Date 8/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $250.00 Refer 82202 BERENT, BRIAN 8/22/2002 Cash Payment E 222-42260-434 Conference & Training ADVANCE SEPT 7-8 WATER RESCUE Invoice 082202 Transaction Date 8/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $350.00 $350.00 Refer 82302 FIRE SERVICE CERT OF MINNESO 8/22/2002 Cash Payment E 222-42260-434 Conference & Training CERTIFICATION TEST GUSTAFSON, BRUCE Invoice 082202 Cash Payment E 222-42260-434 Conference & Training CERTIFICATION TEST MYERS, TONY invoice 082202 )Transaction Date 8/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $50.00 $50.00 $100.00 Refer 82202 MYERS, TONY 8/22/2002 Cash Payment E 222-42260-434 Conference & Training ADVANCE SEPT 6-8 BRAINERD Invoice 082202 Transaction Date 8/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $350.00 $350.00 Fund Summaw 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES 10100 Marquette Bank Mound $1,050.00 $1,050.00 Pre-Written Check Checks to be Generated by the Compute Total $0.00 $1,050.00 $1,050.00 -4231 - CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/26/02 2:36 PM PaGe 1 Current Period: August 2002 Batch Name 082602SUE User Dollar Amt $75.00 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $75.00 Refer 82602 MINNESOTA DEPT NA TURAL RES Cash Payment Invoice 082602 Transaction Date E 675-49425-300 Professional Srvs 8/26/2002 $0.00 In Balance 8/26/2002 STORM SEWER PROJECT Marquette Bank Mou 10100 $75.00 Total $75.00 Fund Summary 10100 Marquette Bank Mound 675 STORM WATER UTILITY FUND $75.00 $75.00 Pre-Written Check $0.00 Checks to be Generated by the Compute $75.00 Tota~ $75.00 -4232- CITY OF MOUND Payments 08/28/02 11:04- AM Page 1 Current Period: August 2002 Batch Name 082802SUE User Dollar Amt $815.00 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $815.00 $0.00 In Balance Refer 82802 ANOKA TECHNICAL INSTITUTE 8/28/2002 Cash Payment E 101-41110-434 Conference & Training REGISTRATION SEPT 7-8 FLAIG $100.00 Invoice 082802 Transaction Date 8/28/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $100.00 Refer 82802 FLAIG, KEVIN M, 8/2812002 Cash Payment E 222-42260-208 Instructional Supplies ADVANCE SEPT 7-8 APPARATUS $350.00 OPERATION Invoice 082802 Transaction Date 8/28/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $350.00 Refer 82802 GUSTAFSON, BRUCE 8/28/2002 Cash Payment E 222-42260-208 Instructional Supplies ADVANCE SEPT 7-8 FIRE APPARATUS TEST $350.00 Invoice 082802 Transaction Date 8/28/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $350.00 Refer 82802 MINNESOTA COUNTYATTORNEY 8/28/2002 Cash Payment E 101-42110-208 Instructional Supplies REGISTRATION DWI, SWENSEN $15.00 Invoice 082002 PO 17439 iTransaction Date 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $15.00 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES 10100 Marquet~ Bank Mound $115,00 $7O0,0O $815.00 Pre-Written Check Checks to be Generated by the Compute Total $0.00 $815.00 $815.00 -4233- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09/04/02 12:47 PM Page 1 Current Period: September 2002 Batch Name 090402SUE User Dollar Amt $4,777.30 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $4,777.30 $0.00 In Balance AMERICAN WATERWORKS ASSO 9/4/2002 Cash Payment E 601-49400-434 Conference & Training REGISTRATION SKINNER $150.00 Invoice 090402 Refer 90402 Transaction Date 9/4/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $150.00 Refer 90402 FRONTIER/CITIZENS COMMUNICA 9/4/2002 Cash Payment E 601-49400-321 Telephone & Cells TELEPHONE $120.28 Invoice 082102 Cash Payment E 602-49450-321 Telephone & Cells TELEPHONE $120.27 Invoice 082102 Cash Payment E 281-45210-321 Telephone & Cells TELEPHONE $60.14 Invoice 082102 Cash Payment E 222-42260-321 Telephone & Cells 08-02 472-3555 $185.89 invoice 083002 Cash Payment E 101-45200-321 Telephone & Cells 08-02 472-0646 $18.92 Invoice 083002 Cash Payment E 101-43100-321 Telephone & Cells 08-02 472-0635 $343.88 Invoice 083002 Cash Payment E 601-49400-321 Telephone & Cells 08-02 472-0635 $343.88 Invoice 083002 Cash Payment E 602-49450-321 Telephone & Cells 08-02 472-0635 $343.87 Invoice 083002 Cash Payment E 101-42110-321 Telephone & Cells 08-02 472-0621 $764.17 Invoice 083002 Cash Payment E 101-41910-321 Telephone & Cells 08-02 472-0600 $1,125.95 invoice 083002 Transaction Date 9/4/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $3,427.25 Refer 90402 KENNEDYAND GRAVEN 9/4/2002 Cash Payment E 101-45200-300 Professional Srvs 05-02 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $28.30 invoice 51971 Transaction Date 9/412002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $28.30 Refer 90402 KESTNER, AL 9/4/2002 Cash Payment E 602-49450-218 Clothing and Uniforms 2002 BOOT ALLOWANCE $150.00 Invoice 083002 Transaction Date 9/4/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $150.00 Refer 90402 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS (PA/V) 9/4/2002 Cash Payment E 101-43100-321 Telephone & Cells 07-19-02 THRU 08-18-02 #16 JOHNSON, TIM $38.17 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 601-49400-321 Telephone & Cells 07-19-02 THRU 08-18-02 #17 POUNDER, $38.17 CHRIS E 602-49450-321 Telephone & Cells Invoice 082402 Cash Payment 07-19-02 THRU 08-18-02 #18 HARDINA, $38.17 DAMON Invoice 082402 Cash Payment Invoice 082402 E 602-49450-321 Telephone & Cells 07-19-02 THRU 08-18-02 #19 KIVISTO, SCOTT $38.17 -4234- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09/04/02 12:47 PM Page 2 Current Period: September 2002 Cash Payment E 101-43100-321 Telephone & Cells 07-19-02 THRU 08-18-02 #20 GRADY, DAN $38.17 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 101-43100-321 Telephone & Cells 07-19-02 THRU 08-18-02 #21 HEITZ, FRANK $38.17 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 101-43100-321 Telephone & Cells 07-19-02 THRU 08-18-02 #22 HEITZ, DON $38.18 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 601-49400-321 Telephone & Cells 07-19-02 THRU 08-18-02 #23 KESTNER, AL $38.17 invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 101-43100-321 Telephone & Cells 612-221-6812 #07 SKINNER, GREG $36.55 invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 601-49400-321 Telephone & Cells 612-221-6811 #07 SKINNER, GREG $36.55 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 802-49450-321 Telephone & Cells 612-221-6811 #07 SKINNER, GREG $36.56 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 101-45200-321 Telephone & Cells 612-221-6812 #15 FACKER, JAMES $105.54 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 281-45210-321 Telephone & Cells 612-221-6813 #16 HOFF, KATIE $45.94 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 101-413t0-321 Telephone & Cells 612-221-6814 #03 RAHN, JODI $38.94 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 101-43100-321 Telephone & Cells 612-221-6822 #02 NELSON, JOYCE $13.11 Invoice 082402 Payment E 601-49400-321 Telephone & Cells 612-221-6822 #02, NELSON, JOYCE $13.11 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 602-49450-321 Telephone & Cells 612-221-6822 #07 NELSON, JOYCE $13.10 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 101-45200-321 Telephone & Cells 612-221-8385 #13 SWARTZER, BRIAN $39.32 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 101-42400-321 Telephone & Cells 07-19-02 THRU 08-18-02 #14 GEISE, LEE $39.21 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 101-42400-321 Telephone & Cells 612-282-5889 #15 SIMONEAU, MATT $80.48 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 101-42400-321 Telephone & Cells 612-363-5888 NORLANDER, JILL $33.67 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 601-49400-321 Telephone & Cells 602-282-3599 ANDERSON, MIKE $39.21 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 101-45200-321 Telephone & Cells BERENT, BRIAN $25.40 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 101-45200-321 Telephone & Cells TAFTE, JOHN $17.30 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 601-49400-321 Telephone & Cells 612-292-1375 DENICE $34.13 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 602-49450-321 Telephone & Cells 612-292-1375 DENICE $34.13 Invoice 082402 Cash Payment E 281-45210-321 Telephone & Cells 612-292-1375 DENICE $34.13 Invoice 082402 Transaction Date 9/3/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $1,021.75 -4235- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09/04/02 12:47 PM Pa[;le 3 Current Period: September 2002 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES 281 COMMONS DOCKS FUND 601 WATER FUND 602 SEWER FUND 10100 Marquette Bank Mound $2,863.43 $185.89 $140.21 $813.50 $774.27 $4,777.30 Pre-Written Check Checks to be Generated by the Compute Total $0.00 $4,777.30 $4,777.30 -4236- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09/05/02 9:39 AM Page 1 Current Period: September 2002 Batch Name 09t002SUE User Dollar Amt $267,737.39 Payments Computer Dollar Amt $267,737.39 $0.00 In Balance A & B AUTO ELECTRIC, INCORPO 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 222-42260-409 Other Equipment Repair REGULATOR, DIODES $112.50 Invoice 44989 Refer 91092 Transaction Date 8/29/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $112.50 Refer 91002 AAA NURSERYAND LANDSCAPIN 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 601-49400-224 Street Maint Materials DIRT $70.00 Invoice 082002 Transaction Date 8/27/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $70.00 Refer 91002 AMERICAN EXPRESS 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-42110-430 Miscellaneous 060802 MEETING $47.86 Invoice 060802 Transaction Date 9/3/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $47.86 Refer 91002 ANDERSON, ANDY 9/10/2002 Cash Payment R 281-34705 LMCD Fees REFUND LMCD EFEE $3.75 Invoice 081502 Transaction Date 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $3.75 Refer 91002 ARCTIC GLACIER PREMIUM ICE 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $72.00 Invoice MB224307 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $90.00 Invoice MB224213 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $132.60 Invoice MB223812 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $37.80 Invoice MB223609 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $87.00 Invoice MB223515 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $126.60 Invoice MB223116 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R ICE $64.80 invoice MB222908 Transaction Date 9/4/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $610.80 Refer 91002 ASSURED SECURITY 8/30/2002 Cash Payment E 101-41910-401 Repairs/Maint Buildings KEY CUT $11.27 Invoice 29569 Transaction Date 9/3/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $11.27 Refer 91002 AT&T 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-41310-321 Telephone & Cells 07-25-02 THRU 08-24-02 250-0429 $38.58 Invoice 082602 Transaction Date 9/4/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $3&58 91002 BELLBOY CORPORATION 9/10/2002 3ash Payment E 609-49750-25t Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 24500500 $3,922.25 -4237- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09/05/02 9:39 AM Page 2 Current Period: September 2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R MISCELLANEOUS $215.94 Invoice 36046500 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R MISCELLANEOUS Invoice 35978600 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 24452000 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale CREDIT-LIQUOR Invoice 24400500 Transaction Date 9/4/2002 Marquette Bank Mou $92.09 $3,190.55 -$82.90 10100 Total $7,337.93 Refer 91002 BERGERSON - CASWELL, INCORP 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-45200-223 Building Repair Supplies BALANCE DUE Invoice 000088490000-B Transaction Date 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou cUL' ....................... Refer 901002 BROWN, JIM URED SOD FAR 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 675-49425-440 Other Contractual Servic SOD Invoice 7763 Transaction Date 9/3/2002 Marquette Bank Mou $40.00 10100 Total $40.00 $43.13 10100 Total $43.13 Refer 91002 CARLSON TRACTOR AND EQUIPM 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-43100-220 Repair/Maint Supply SWITCH $24.31 Invoice 2007290 Transaction Date 9/3/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $24.31 Refer 91002 COCA COLA BOTTLING-MIDWEST .9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $96.92 Invoice 61350258 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $331.30 Invoice 61266086 Transaction Date 9/4/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $428.22 Refer 91002 CRETE WORKS, INCORPORATED 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-43100-440 Other Contractual Servic WILSHIRE SIDEWALK ETC, $2,565.00 Invoice 081302 Transaction Date 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $2,565.00 Refer 91002 DA Y DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $18.40 Invoice 189455 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $844.40 Invoice 189444 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $1,544.27 Invoice 188552 Transaction Date 9/4/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $2,407.07 Refer 91002 DMJ CORPORA TION 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials ASPHALT PAVING $2,224.00 Invoice 5107 Cash Payment E 601-49400-229 Street Repairs ASPHALT PAVING $4,448.00 Invoice 5107 Cash Payment E 601-49400-229 Street Repairs FINAL PAYMENT BREEZY RD $2,623.00 Invoice 5105 -4238- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09/05/02 9:39 AM Page 3 Current Period: September 2002 Transaction Date 8/27/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $9,295.00 Refer 91002 DOSSETT, SINDI 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-49840-300 Professional Srvs 08-13-02 VIDEO MEETING Invoice 082702 Transaction Date 8/27/2002 $20.00 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $20.00 Refer 91002 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER invoice 292419 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 292418 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 289771 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 288247 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 288246 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 286634 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 285801 )Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER Invoice 285250 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER invoice 282843 Transaction Date 9/4/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Refer 91002 EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 401-46580-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 FIRE STATION Invoice 19876 Cash Payment E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 POST OFFICE PROJECT Invoice 19785 Cash Payment G 101-22855 MetroPlains Develop 00-64 07-02 METRO PLAINS DEVELOPMENT Invoice 19784 Cash Payment E 455-46380-300 Professional srVs 07-02 PROJECT MANAGEMENT Invoice 19783 Total $19.60 $1,758.80 $339.00 $32.5O $6,756.45 $234.00 $273.00 $4,312.20 $581.25 $14,306.80 $675.0O $112.50 $112.50 $2,287.50 Transaction Date 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $3,187.50 Refer 91002 ESS BROTHERS AND SONS, INCO 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 602-49450-220 Repair/Maint Supply MANHOLE RINGS, ETC $1,968.12 Invoice EE2957 PO 17331 Transaction Date 8/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $1,968.12 Refer 91002 EXTREME BEVERAGE 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 73861 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 70615 Date 9/5/2002 Marquette Bank Mou $64.00 $32.00 10100 Total $96.00 ~efer 91002 FASTSIGNS 9/10/2002 -4239- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09/05/02 9:39 AM PaGe 4 Current Period: September 2002 Cash Payment E 101-42400-200 Office Supplies PUBLIC TRAILWAY SIGNS $351.45 invoice M-40238 Transaction Date 8/27/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $351.45 Refer 91002 FRANKLIN COVEY COMPANY 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-42110-200 Office Supplies PLANNER HOLDER $27.43 invoice 30359470 PO 17432 Transaction Date 8/27~2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $27.43 Refer 91002 G & K SERVICES 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-43100-218 Clothing and Uniforms 08~20-02 UNIFORMS $31.80 Invoice 307718 Cash Payment E 601-49400-218 Clothing and Uniforms 08-20-02 UNIFORMS $31.80 Invoice 307718 Cash Payment E 602-49450-218 Clothing and Uniforms 08-20-02 UNIFORMS $31.80 Invoice 307718 Cash Payment E 101-43100-230 Shop Materials 08-20-02 MATS $16.20 Invoice 307718 Cash Payment E 601-49400-230 Shop Materials 08-20-02 MATS $16,20 Invoice 307718 Cash Payment E 602-49450-230 Shop Materials 08-20-02 MATS $16.20 Invoice 307718 Cash Payment E 101-41910-460 Janitorial Services 08-20-02 MATS $104.70 Invoice 307720 Cash Payment E 609-49750-460 Janitorial Services 08-20-02 MATS $21.29 Invoice 307722 Cash Payment E 101-43100-218 Clothing and Uniforms 08-13-02 UNIFORMS $30.12 Invoice 300748 Cash Payment E 601-49400-218 Clothing and Uniforms 08-13-02 UNIFORMS $30.12 Invoice 300748 Cash Payment E 602-49450-218 Clothing and Uniforms 08-13-02 UNIFORMS $30.13 Invoice 300748 Cash Payment E 101-43100-230 Shop Materials 08-13-02 MATS $26.22 Invoice 300748 Cash Payment E 601-49400-230 Shop Materials 08-13-02 MATS $26.22 Invoice 300748 Cash Payment E 602-49450-230 Shop Materials 08-13-02 MATS $26.22 Invoice 300748 Cash Payment E 101-43100-218 Clothing and Uniforms 08-27-02 UNIFORMS $35,46 Invoice 314690 Cash Payment E 601-49400-218 Clothing and Uniforms 08-27-02 UNIFORMS $35.46 Invoice 314690 Cash Payment E 602-49450-218 Clothing and Uniforms 08-27-02 UNIFORMS $35.46 Invoice 314690 Cash Payment E 101-43100-230 Shop Materials 08-27-02 MATS $14.58 invoice 314690 Cash Payment E 601-49400-230 Shop Materials 08-27-02 MATS $14.58 Invoice 314690 Cash Payment E 602-49450-230 Shop Materials 08-27-02 MATS $14.58 Invoice 314690 Transaction Date 9/5/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $589.14 -4240- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09105102 9:39 AM Page 5 Current Period: September 2002 Refer 91002 GARY'S DIESEL SERVICE 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 222-42260-409 Other Equipment Repair BRAKES $2.70 Invoice 56249 Cash Payment E 222-42260-409 Other Equipment Repair CLAMP $11.59 Invoice 56169 Transaction Date 9/3/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $14.29 Refer 91002 GIBSON, SAM 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 601-49400-440 Other Contractual Servic WOODLAND REPAIR Invoice 01130 Transaction Date 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 $150.00 Total $150.00 Refer 91002 GME CONSULTANTS 9/10/2002 Cash Payment G 101-22890 2957 Cambridge Retain Wall 05-14-02 THRU 08-06-02 PROFESSIONAL $4,038.95 , SERVICES Invoice 14422 Transaction Date 8/27/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $4,038.95 Refer 91002 GRIGGS COOPER AND COMPANY 9/1012002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 590015 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 589879 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE 586992 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 586900 Transaction Date 9/5/2002 Marquette Bank Mou $787.43 $420.76 $297.87 $338.00 10100 Total $1,844.06 Refer 91002 HACH COMPANY 8/20/2002. Cash Payment E 601-49400-227 Chemicals SPADNS REAGENT SOL $50.10 Invoice 3162055 PO 17338 Transaction Date 9/3/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $50.10 Refer 91001 HANSON, KANDIS 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-41310-321 Telephone & Cells DSL LINE $49.95 invoice 091002 Cash Payment E 101-41310-434 Conference & Training TRAIN TRANSPORT SWEDEN $31.64 Invoice 091002 Transaction Date 9/3/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $81.59 Refer 91002 HATCH, JIM SALES COMPAY 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101--43100-221 Equipment Pads STROBE LIGHT $138.19 Invoice 3830 Cash Payment E 601-49400-221 Equipment Pads STROBE LIGHT $138.19 Invoice 3830 Cash Payment E 602-49450-221 Equipment Pads STROBE LIGHT $138.19 Invoice 3830 Transaction Date 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $414.57 91002 HAWKINS, INCORPORATED 9/10/2002 E 601-49400-227 Chemicals CONTAINERS (3) $15.00 Invoice DM77444 -4241 - CITY OF MOUND Payments 09/05/02 9:39 AM Page 6 Current Period: September 2002 Cash Payment E 601-49400-227 Chemicals HYDROFLUOSILIClC ACID $1,205.07 Invoice 484074 Transaction Date 8/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $1,220.07 ~~OuNTM SHERIFF'S A 9/10/2002 Cash Payment Invoice 081302 Transaction Date E 101-41600-450 Board of Prisoners 8/27/2002 Refer 91002 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASUR (R Cash Payment Invoice 000660 Transaction Date E 101-41600-450 Board of Prisoners 8/26/2002 07-02 BOOKING FEE Marquette Bank Mou 10100 $571.54 Total $571.54 9/10/2002 07-02 ROOM AND BOARD $285.75 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $285.75 Refer 91002 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 9/10/2002 $50.00 $50.00 Total $100.00 Cash Payment E601-49400-455 Permits Invoice UTIL00264 Cash Payment E602-49450-455 Permits invoice UTIL00264 Transaction Date 8/22/2002 $981.00 $695.80 $37.50 $187.50 $56.25 $1,801.19 $168.75 $525.00 $393.75 $1,568.00 $2,121.50 2ND QTR UTILITY PERMITS 2ND QTR UTILITY PERMITS Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Refer 91002 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP, I 9/10/2002. Cash Payment E 401-46540-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 LOST LAKE GREENWAY CD'S Invoice 080802-A Cash Payment E 455-46377-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 CTY RD 15 STREETSCAPE invoice 080802-B Cash Payment E 455-46379-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 POST OFFICE RELOCATION Invoice 080802-C 1 Cash Payment G 101-22857 Three Points, Becker Proper[ 07-02 BECKER PROPERTY ISSUES Invoice 080802-C2 Cash Payment E 101-41500-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 VOICESTREAM 911 ANTENNA Invoice 080802-C3 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 PLANNING MISCELLANEOUS Invoice 080820-C4 Cash Payment G 101-22899 Pastuck Natural Homes ~O2- 07-02 PASTUCK MINOR SUB-DIVISION Invoice 080802-D1 Cash Payment E 401-46580-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING Invoice 080802-D2 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 PLANNING CASES MISCALLENOUS Invoice 080802-D3 Cash Payment E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 MOUND VISIONS Invoice 080802-E Cash Payment E 455-46379-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 POST OFFICE RELOCATION Invoice 080802-F Transaction Date 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $8,536.24 Refer 91002 HOME DEPOT/GECF 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-45200-223 Building Repair Supplies WATER SEAL $24.24 Invoice 000454/6022039 PO 17258 Transaction Date 8/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $24.24 Refer 91002 IKON OFFICE MACHINES 9/10/2002 -4242- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09105102 9:39 AM Page 7 Current Period: September 2002 Cash Payment E 101-42110-202 Duplicating and copying 08-24-02 THRU 09-24-02 COPIER $128.17 MAINTENANCE Invoice 23368333 Transaction Date 9/4/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $128.17 Refer 91002 INFRATECH 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 601-49400-210 Operating Supplies BLUE PAINT AND FLAGS $108.47 invoice 021024P PO 17322 Cash Payment E 602-49450-221 Equipment Paris LAMPS $174.93 Invoice 021319P Cash Payment E 602-49450-440 Other Contractual Servic TELEVISE HOUSE SERVICE $495.00 Invoice 020499S Transaction Date 8/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $778.40 Refer 91002 IRRIGATION ENGINEERING, INC. 9/10/2002 Cash Payment G 101-22855 MetroPlains Develop 00-64 IRRIGATION SYSTEM METRO PLAINS $10,753.00 Invoice 7879 Transaction Date 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $10,753.00 Refer 91002 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX Invoice 1449380 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 1449379 E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 1449378 Cash payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 1449377 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 1449376 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 1446377 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE Invoice 1446376 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR Invoice 1446375 Transaction Date 9/5/2002 Marquette Bank Mou $23.99 $159.20 $2,290.75 $66.00 $840.20 $62.25 $507.30 $734.54 10100 Total $4,684.23 Refer 91002 Cash Payment Invoice 53007-A Cash Payment E 101-41600-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 53007-B Cash Payment E 455-46377-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 53007-C 1 Cash Payment E 101-41500-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 53007-C2 Cash Payment E 101-41500-300 Professional Srvs Invoice 53007-C3 ;ash Payment E 101-41500-300 Professional Srvs 53007-C4 KENNEDY AND GRAVEN 9/10/2002 G 101-22857 Three Points, Becker Propert 07-02 BECKER PERMIT REQUEST 07-02 PRIVATELY DEDICATED COMMONS 07-02 CTY RD 15 REALIGNMENT 07-02 BALBOA LAND PURCHASE 07-02 XCEL 07-02 VOICE STREAM $48,00 $348,00 $167.19 $1,403.19 $293,19 $60.00 -4243- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09~05/02 9:39 AM Page 8 Current Period: September 2002 Cash Payment E 101-43100-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 R/W ORDINANCE $816.00 Invoice 53007-D1 Cash Payment E 101-41500-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 VERIZON 911 ANTENNA $9(~.00 Invoice 53007-D2 Cash Payment G 609-16200 Fixed Asset-Buildings 07-02 NEW LIQUOR STORE $368.55 Invoice 53007-E Cash Payment E 401-46580-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 PUBLIC EMERGENCY BLDG $697.54 Invoice 53007-F Cash Payment E 101-41600-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 DREAMWOOD LAWSUIT $513.24 Invoice 53007-G Cash Payment E 101-41600-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 EXECUTIVE $1,218.00 Invoice 53007-H Cash Payment E 101-41600-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 ADMINISTRATIVE $324.00 Invoice 53007-1 Cash Payment E 101-42110-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 GILLESPIE NOISE COMPLAINT $30.00 Invoice 53007-J1 Cash Payment E 101-41500-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 WELL SITE LAND PURCHASE $42.00 Invoice 53007-J2 Cash Payment E 401-46580-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 PUBLIC EMERGENCY BLDG $30.00 Invoice 53007-K1 Cash Payment E 101-43100-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 STREETS MISCELLANEOUS $48,00 Invoice 53007-K2 Cash Payment E 601-49400-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 WATER MISCELLANEOUS $48.00 Invoice 53007-K3 Cash Payment E 602-49450-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 SEWER MISCELLANEOUS $48.00 Invoice 53007-K4 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 SKAALERUD ISSUES $90,00 Invoice 53007-K5 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 AQUILINA PROPERTY ISSUES $472.00 Invoice 53007-L1 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 HENTGES ANNEXATION $184.00 Invoice 53007-L2 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 P/Z MISCELLANEOUS $658.00 Invoice 53007-L3 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 CODDON WAIVER PLAT #02-27 $190.00 Invoice 53007-L4 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 STEIN WAIVER PLAT #02-22 $18,00 Invoice 53007-L5 Cash Payment E 281-45210-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 DOCKS MISCELLANEOUS $630.24 Invoice 53007-M1 Cash Payment E 101-41500-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 XCEL $240.00 Invoice 53007-M2 Cash Payment E 101-41110-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 MISCELLANEOUS BILLABLE $61.18 Invoice 53005-A1 Cash Payment E 101-41110-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 HRA MISCELLANEOUS BILLABLE $83.19 Invoice 53005-A2 Cash Payment E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 LONGPRE BUILDING $192.50 Invoice 53005-B1 Cash Payment E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 REDEVELOPMENT PROJ AREA #1 $797.50 Invoice 53005-B2 -4244- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09~05~02 9:39 AM Page 9 Current Period: September 2002 E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 POST OFFICE RELOCATION $50;'.87 Cash Payment Invoice 53005-C Cash Payment Invoice 53005-D Cash Payment Invoice 53005-E Transaction Date E 354-43140-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 DEFICIENCY AGREEMENT UNITED PROPERTIES $28,75 G 101-22908 Landform Development 07-02 LANDFORM AGREEMENT $1,018.59 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $11,765.72 Refer91002 LAKERESTORATION, INC. 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 675-49425-440 Other Contractual Servic BEACHWOOD POND $403,50 Invoice 24107 Transaction Date 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $403.50 Refer 91002 LAKER NEWSPAPER 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-42400-351 Legal Notices Publishing 08-24-02 ORD #16-12002 SIGNS $101.49 Invoice 318 Cash Payment E 101-42110-351 Legal Notices Publishing 08-24-02 #15-2002 EE BACKGROUND CHECK $101.49 Invoice 319 Cash Payment E 101-41t10-351 Legal Notices Publishing 08-24-02 FILING DATES $23,00 Invoice 313 Cash Payment E 101-41410-351 Legal Notices Publishing 08-31-02 ACCURACY TEST $15.92 OInvoice 324 Transaction Date 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Refer 91002 LANO EQUIPMENT, INCORPORAT 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-45200-409 Other Equipment Repair BELT WITH PUMP Invoice 74936 Transaction Date 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $241.90 $173.29 Total $173.29 Refer 91002 LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC 9/1 O/2002 Cash Payment E 101-43100-230 Shop Materials MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $121.19 Invoice 9560779 Cash Payment E 601-49400-230 Shop Materials MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $t21.19 Invoice 9560779 Cash Payment E 602-49450-230 Shop Materials MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $121.19 Invoice 9560779 Transaction Date 8/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $363.57 $23.51 $23.51 $23.50 Refer 91002 Cash Payment Invoice 038238 Cash Payment Invoice 038238 Cash Payment Invoice 038238 Transaction Date LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT 9/10/2002 E 101-43100-230 Shop Materials E 601-49400-230 Shop Materials E 602-49450-230 Shop Materials 8/27/2002 CHAIN AND GUAGE CHAIN AND GUAGE CHAIN AND GUAGE Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $70.52 Refer 91002 LUTHENS, JANNETTE 9/10/2002 Cash Payment R 281-34725 Dock Permits REFUND DOCK FEE $132.50 invoice 081502 Date 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $132.50 Refer 91002 MARK VII DISTRIBUTOR 9/10/2002 -4245- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09/05/02 9:39 AM Page 10 Current Period: September 2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 451460 Cash Payment Invoice 448931 Cash Payment Invoice 446396 Cash Payment Invoice 440560 Cash Payment Invoice 438490 Cash Payment Invoice 437868 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice XXXXXX Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale Invoice 448932 Transaction Date 9/5/2002 E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $4,773.60 BEER $3,059.11 BEER $2,861.55 BEER $3,598.25 BEER $450.00 BEER $2,804.56 CREDIT-BEER -$10,000.00 BEER $97.50 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $7,644.57 Refer 91002 MARLIN'S TRUCKING DELIVERY Cash Payment Invoice 11357 Cash Payment Invoice 11371 Cash Payment Invoice 11394 Cash Payment invoice 11401 Cash Payment Invoice 11422 Cash Payment Invoice 11454 Cash Payment Invoice 11462 Cash Payment Invoice 11480 Transaction Date E 609-49750-265 Freight E 609-49750-265 Freight E 609-49750-265 Freight E 609-49750-265 Freight E 609-49750-265 Freight E 609-49750-265 Freight E 609-49750-265 Freight E 609-49750-265 Freight 9/5/2002 9/10/2002 08-01-02 DELIVERY CHARGE 08-05-02 DELIVERY CHARGE 08-08-02 DELIVERY CHARGE 08-13-02 DELIVERY CHARGE 08-15-02 DELIVERY CHARGE 08-22-02 DELIVERY CHARGE 08-26-02 DELIVERY CHARGE 08-29-02 DELIVERY CHARGE Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Refer 91002 MCCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCI Cash Payment Invoice 40614 Cash Payment Invoice 40615 Cash Payment Invoice 40616 Cash Payment Invoice 40617 Cash Payment invoice 40618 Cash Payment Invoice 40619 E 401-43100-300 Professional Srvs E 601-49400-300 Professional Srvs E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs E 675-49425-300 Professional Srvs $132.40 $30.40 $43.00 $20.80 $164.40 $99.60 $27.20 $100,70 Total $618.50 $2,406.10 $1,719.80 $49.50 $594,00 $247.50 $18,40 ~10/2002 07-02WESTEDGE MISC ENGINEERING Proje~07827 07-02WESTEDGEWATERMAIN EXTENSION Project07953 07-02 LIQUOR STORE Project08900 07-02 BLDG MISC ENGINEERING Pr~ect08901 07-02 P/ZMISC ENGINEERING Proje~08902 07-02 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT Pr~e~ 10293 -4246- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09/05/02 9:39 AM Page 11 Current Period: September 2002 Cash Payment G 101-22857 Three Points, Becket Propert 07-02 BECKER PROPERTY GRADING $147.90 PERMIT Invoice 40620 Project 12162 Cash Payment G 101-22855 MetroPlains Develop 00-64 07-02 METRO PLAINS DEVELOPMENT $346.50 Invoice 40621 Project 12252 Cash Payment E 455-46379-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 POST OFFICE DEMOLITION $99.00 Invoice 40622 Project 12379 Cash Payment E 455-46377-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 CTY RD 15 RELOCATION $594.00 invoice 40623 Project 12533 Cash Payment E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 DOWNTOWN TIF DISTRICT $247.50 Invoice 40624 Project 12534 Cash Payment G 101-22854 Langdon Bay Major Sub-Divi 07-02 LANGDON BAY DEVELOPMENT $1,102.80 Invoice 40625 Project 12754 Cash Payment E 455-46379-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 POST OFFICE RELOCATION $185.50 Invoice 40626 Project 12879 Cash Payment G 101-22869 Landgon Woods, 00-35 07-02 LANGDON WOODS DEVELOPMENT $77.10 Invoice 40627 Project 12911 Cash Payment E 602-49450-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 MCES LIFT STATION $742.50 Invoice 40628 Project 13132 Cash Payment E 455-46380-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 XCEL SUB-STATION $148.50 Invoice 40629 Project 13190 Cash Payment E 101-45200-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 SKATE PARK $1,098.70 Invoice 40630 Project 13207 Cash Payment E 401-43110-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 RETAINING WALL REPLACE $8,130.50 Invoice 40631 Project 13215 Cash Payment E 281-45210-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 SHORELINE FOOTAGE $318.50 Invoice 40632 Project 13223 Cash Payment E 601-49400-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 WELL/PUMPHOUSE $1,307.10 Invoice 40633 Project 13313 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 1733 GULL LANE MODIFICATION $730.20 Invoice 40634 Project 13379 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 2420 WESTEDGE GRADING $148.50 Invoice 40635 Project 13462 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 6384 WALNUT LANE GRADING $198.00 Invoice 40636 Project 13488 Cash Payment G 101-22860 2642 Commerce, Bristol Clas 07-02 MAHOGNAY BAY CUP $99.00 invoice 40637 Project 13495 Cash Payment G 101-22890 2957 Cambridge Retain Wail 07-02 SKAALERUD LOT SURVEY $3,834.49 Invoice 40638 Project 13501 Cash Payment E 401-46540-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 LOST LAKE/AUDITOR RD GREENWAY $321,50 Invoice 40639 Project 13566 Cash Payment E 101-41500-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $0.00 Invoice 40614 Cash Payment E 402-43120-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 MSA & MISC REPORTS $99.00 Invoice 40639 Project 13566 Cash Payment G 101-22855 MetroPlains Develop 00-64 07-02 METRO PLAINS DEVELOPMENT $796.90 Invoice 40641 Project 13646 Payment E 675-49425-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS $5,593.34 40642 Project 13677 -4247- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09/05/02 9:39 AM Page 12 Current Period: September 2002 Cash Payment E 401-46580-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING $1,143.60 Invoice 40643 Project 13747 Cash Payment G 101-22899 Pastuck Natural Homes NO2- 07-02 PASTUCK SUB-DIVISION $343.00 Invoice 40644 Project 13770 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 SPRUCE ROAD CODDON PROPERTY $49.50 Invoice 40645 Project 13827 Cash Payment G 101-22908 Landform Development 07-02 LANDFORM DEVELOPMENT $198.00 Invoice 40646 Project 13832 Cash Payment E 101-41600-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 DREAMWOOD LAWSUIT $49.50 Invoice 40647 Project 13887 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 STEIN WAIVER PLATTING $49.50 Invoice 30648 Project 13898 Transaction Date 9/3/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $33,235.43 9/10/2002. 071-01-02 THRU 09-20-02 WASTEWATER Refer 91002 MINNESOTA DEPT OF HEALTH Cash Payment R 601-37170 State fee - Water Invoice 091002 Transaction Date 8/22/2002 $4,605.00 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $4,605.00 Refer 91002 MINNESOTA VALLEY TESTING LA Cash Payment Invoice 133033 Transaction Date E 601-49400-470 Water Samples 8/27/2002 9/10/2002 COLIFORM, MF - WATER $72.50 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $72.50 Refer 91002 MINNESOTA, STATE TREASURER ..9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-42400-434 Conference & Training REGISTRATION 11-12,11-13 BLDG CODE Invoice 082102 PO 16977 Transaction Date 8/27/2002 Refer 91002 MOUND, CITY OF Cash Payment Invoice 081902 Transaction Date E 609-49750-382 Water Utilities 8/26/2002 $70.00 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $70.00 9/10/2002 07-02 WATER AND SEWER $18.81 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $18.81 Refer 91002 MUELLER, WILLIAM AND SONS 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials 08-06-02 BLACKTOP $310.95 Invoice 66495 Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials 08-14-02 BLACKTOP $136.82 Invoice 67466 Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials 08-13-02 BLACKTOP $86.18 Invoice 67220 Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials 08-09-02 BLACKTOP $51.32 Invoice 66861 Cash Payment E 101-43100-224 Street Maint Materials 08-08-02 BLACKTOP $189.47 Invoice 66993 Transaction Date 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $774.74 Refer 91002 NATIONAL RECREATION PARK AS 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-45200-208 Instructional Supplies CONFERENCE, ANNUAL $320.00 Invoice 082902 PO 17261 Transaction Date 8/30/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $320.00 Refer 91002 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS (POLl 9/10/2002 -4248- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09/05/02 9;39 AM Page 13 Current Period: September 2002 Cash Payment E 101-42110-321 Telephone & Cells 07-19-02 THRU 08-18-02 CELL PHONE $450.30 Invoice 082402 Transaction Date 9/3/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $450.30 Refer 91002 NORTHERN WATER WORKS SUPP 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 601-49400-220 Repair/Maint Supply METER $1,005.27 Invoice 3131658 Transaction Date 9/3/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $1,005.27 Refer 91002 ONE CALL CONCEPTS, INCORPO 9/10/2002. Cash Payment E 601-49400-395 Gopher One-Call 07-02 LOCATES Invoice 2070534 Cash Payment E 602-49450-395 Gopher One-Call Invoice 2070534 Transaction Date 8/22/2002 Refer 91001 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 07-02 LOCATES $183.68 $183.67 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $367.35 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa CREDIT-MIX -$11.00 Invoice 34775287 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $64.56 Invoice 34775286 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $53.20 Invoice 34775248 Transaction Date 9/5/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $106.76 Refer 91002 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS, INC 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale CREDIT-WINE -$4.89 Invoice 3264842 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $120.75 Invoice 867498 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $148.60 invoice 867497 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $202.25 invoice 865333 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $388.35 Invoice 865332 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $310.25 Invoice 865331 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $182.00 Invoice 865330 Transaction Date 9/5/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $1,347.31 Refer 91002 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R CIGARETTES Invoice 67580 Cash Payment Invoice 67070 Cash Payment Invoice 66629 Payment nvoice 66600 Transaction Date E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R CIGARETTES E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R CIGARETTES E 609-49750-255 Misc Merchandise For R CIGARETTES 9/5/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 $1,021.46 $814.96 $t5.25 $890.41 Total $2,742.08 -4249- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09/05/02 9:39 AM Page 14 Current Period: September 2002 ~-~~!~._ , -, --~.. - .., Refer 91002 PLUNKETT'S, INCORPORATED 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-440 Other Contractual Servic AUG SEPT OCT PEST CONTROL $40.80 invoice 564276 Transaction Date 9/4/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $40.80 Refer 91002 PROTECTION ONE 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-440 Other Contractual Servic 07-30-02 LABOR CHARGES $90.53 Invoice 073002 Transaction Date 8/27/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $90.53 Refer 91002 QUALITY WINE AND SPIRITS 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $92.95 Invoice 162734-00 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $497.67 Invoice 162080-00 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $3,748.58 Invoice 161937-00 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $39.25 invoice 161925-00 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale CREDIT-WINE -$44.95 invoice 159048-00 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale CREDIT-LIQUOR -$6.67 Invoice 154259-00 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa CREDIT-MIX -$2.01 Invoice 153566-00 Cash Payment E 609-49750-253 Wine For Resale WINE $404.07 Invoice 160238-00 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $2,845.39 Invoice 159622-00 Cash Payment E 609-49750-254 Soft Drinks/Mix For Resa MIX $83.42 Invoice 159615-00 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $202.63 Invoice 160070-00 Cash Payment E 609-49750-251 Liquor For Resale LIQUOR $1,382.09 Invoice 159463-00 Transaction Date . 9/5/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $9,242.42 Refer 91002 R.C. ELECTRIC, INCORPORATED .9./10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-41910-401 Repairs/Maint Buildings REPAIR EMERGENCY LIGHTS $1,105.00 Invoice 081902 Transaction Date 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $1,105.00 Refer 91002 RANDY'S SANITATATION 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-41910-384 Refuse/Garbage Dlspos 08-02 GARBAGE SERVICE $114.54 Invoice 1790 Transaction Date 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $114.54 Refer 91002 ROBERTS, COLLETTE 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-41500434 Conference & Training REIMBURSE EXPENSE $321.18 Invoice 082302 Transaction Date 8/30/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $321.18 Refer 91002 ROTARY CLUB OF MOUND 9110/2002 -4250- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09/05/02 9:39 AM Page 15 Current Period: September 2002 Cash Payment E 101-42110-331 Use of personal auto 07,08,09, 2002 CLUB DUES $182..00 Invoice 070102 Transaction Date 8/30/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $182.00 Refer 91002 SERVICE MASTER CLEAN 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-41910-460 Janitorial Services 07-02 CLEANING SERVICE $1,096.95 Invoice 11474 Cash Payment E 101-43100-440 Other Contractual Servic 07-02 CLEANING SERVICE $39.05 Invoice 11474 Cash Payment E 601-49400-.440 Other Contractual Servic 07-02 CLEANING SERVICE $39.05 Invoice 11474 Cash Payment E 602-49450-440 Other Contractual Servic 07-02 CLEANING SERVICE $39.05 Invoice 11474 Cash Payment E 101-41910-460 Janitorial Services 09-02 CLEANING $1,096.95 Invoice 091002 Cash Payment E 101-43100-440 Other Contractual Servic 09-02 CLEANING $39.05 Invoice 091002 Cash Payment E 601-49400-440 Other Contractual Servic 09-02 CLEANING $39.05 Invoice 091002 Cash Payment E 602-49450-440 Other Contractual Servic 09-02 CLEANING $39.05 Invoice 091002 Transaction Date 9/3/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $2,428.20 Refer 91002 SHOREWOOD TREE SERVICE 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-45200-533 Tree Removal 4801 TUXEDO TREE $351.45 Invoice 4185 Cash Payment E 101-45200-533 Tree Removal 5324 WATERBURY MAPLE $1,014.95 Invoice 4186 Transaction Date 8/29/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $1,366.40 Refer 91002 SHORTELLIOTTHENDRICKSON, I 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 401-46580-300 Professional Srvs 07-02 PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING $78,949.31 Invoice 0090207 Transaction Date 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $78,949.31 Refer 91002 SPEEDWAYSUPERAMERICA (P/W 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-43100-212 Motor Fuels THRU 08-26-02 GASOLINE CHARGES $629.48 Invoice 091002 Cash Payment E 601-49400-212 Motor Fuels THRU 08-26-02 GASOLINE CHARGES $570.99 Invoice 091002 Cash Payment E 602-49450-212 Motor Fuels THRU 08-26-02 GASOLINE CHARGES $236.92 Invoice 091002 Transaction Date 8/30/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $1,437.39 Refer 91002 SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA (PAR Cash Payment E 101-45200-212 Motor Fuels Invoice 091002 Cash Payment E 101-42400-212 Motor Fuels Invoice 091002 Jmnsaction Date 8/30/2002 SOUR 9/10/2002 THRU 08-26-02 GASOLINE CHARGES THRU 08-26-02 GASOLINE CHARGES $586.22 $21,64 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $607.86 ,9/10/2002 -4251 - CITY OF MOUND Payments 09/05/02 9:39 AM Page 16 Current Period: September 2002 Cash Payment E 101-42110-404 Repairs/Maint Machinery 06-01 THRU 08-01-02 CAR WASHES $424.94 Invoice 1001-A Transaction Date 9/3/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $424.94 Refer 91002 STS CONSULTANTS 9/10/2002 Cash Payment G 101-22855 MetroPlains Develop 00-64 METRO PLAINS UTILITY TESTING $60.00 invoice 233510 Cash Payment E 101-42400-300 Professional Srvs THRU 08-10-02 MAXWELL PROPERTY $784.00 invoice 233923 Transaction Date 8/26/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total Refer 91002 SUPERIOR PLUMBING AND HEATI 5/16/2002 Cash Payment E 10t-43100-223 Building Repair Supplies FLUSH VALVE $844.00 $83.84 Invoice 566 Cash Payment E 601-49400-223 Building Repair Supplies FLUSH VALVE $83.84 Invoice 566 Cash Payment E 602-49450-223 Building Repair Supplies FLUSH VALVE $83.84 Invoice 566 Transaction Date 9/3~2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $251.52 Refer 91002 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPAN 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $5,339.00 Invoice 272316 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $63.70 Invoice 272315 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $2,909.70 Invoice 271582 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $7,623.75 Invoice 271581 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $25.70 Invoice 271580 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $5,120.60 Invoice 270828 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $175.60 invoice 270827 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $214.00 Invoice 231793 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $358.00 Invoice 231287 Cash Payment E 609-49750-252 Beer For Resale BEER $452.00 Invoice 230807 Transaction Date 9/5/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $22,282.05 Refer 91002 TRI-STATE PUMP AND CONTOL, I 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 602-49450-400 Repairs & Maint Contract SEALS, BEARINGS, ETC $1,830.71 Invoice 23198 Transaction Date 8/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $1,830.71 Refer 91002 TRUE VALUE, MOUND 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-43100-200 Office Supplles 07-02 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $35.04 Invoice 073002 Cash Payment E 101-45200-220 Repair/Maint Supply 07-02 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $7.89 Invoice 073002 -4252- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09~05~02 9:39 ANI Page 17 Current Period: September 2002 Cash Payment E 101-45200-210 Operating Supplies 07-02 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $41.86 Invoice 073002 Cash Payment E 609-49750-200 Office Supplies 07-02 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $4.36 Invoice 073002 Cash Payment E 602-49450-220 Repair/Maint Supply 07-02 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $76.64 Invoice 073002 Cash Payment E 602-49450-221 Equipment Pads 07-02 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $35.30 invoice 073002 Cash Payment E 101-45200-223 Building Repair Supplies 07-02 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES $37.20 Invoice 073002 Cash Payment $9.57 Invoice 073002 Cash Payment $29.33 Invoice 073002 Cash Payment $29.33 Invoice 073002 Cash Payment $20.96 Invoice 073002 Cash Payment $70.77 Invoice 073002 Transaction Date 9/3/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $398.25 Refer 91002 TWIN CITY FIL TER SERVICE, INC. 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 101-41910.-401 Repairs/Maint Buildings PLEATED FILTERS $81 invoice 267666 PO 17256 Transaction Date 8/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $81.58 E 101-43100-220 Repair/Maint Supply E 101-43100-230 Shop Materials E 601-49400-230 Shop Materials E 602-49450-230 Shop Materials E 222-42260-210 Operating Supplies 07-02 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES 07-02 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES 07-02 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES 07-02 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES 07-02 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES Refer 91002 TWIN CITY OFF/CE SUPPLY Cash Payment E 101-41310-200 Office Supplies Invoice 354356-0 Cash Payment E 101-41500-200 Office Supplies Invoice 354356-0 Cash Payment E 101-42110-200 Office Supplies Invoice 354356-0 Cash Payment E 101-42400-200 Office Supplies Invoice 354356-0 Cash Payment E 101-45200-200 Office Supplies invoice 354356-0 Cash Payment E 101-43100-200 Office Supplies Invoice 354356-0 Cash Payment E 609-49750-200 Office Supplies Invoice 354356-0 Cash Payment E 601-49400-200 Office Supplies Invoice 354356-0 Cash Payment E 602-49450-200 Office Supplies Invoice 354356-0 Cash Payment E 101-42110-200 Office Supplies Invoice 353864-0 PO 17429 Payment E 101-42110-200 Office Supplies Invoice 354722-0 9/10/2002 MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES CARTRIDGE, MESSAGE PADS INK JET CARTRIDGE $8.06 $8.06 $8.06 $8.06 $8.06 $2,69 $2.69 $4.03 $4.03 $245.92 $174.60 -4253- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09/05/02 9:39 AM Page 18 Current Peri°d: September 2002 Cash Payment E 101-41500-200 Office Supplies Invoice 353884-0 Cash Payment E 101-41500-200 Office Supplies Invoice 352996-0 Cash Payment E 101-41310-200 Office Supplies Invoice 354782-0 Cash Payment E 101-41500-200 Office Supplies Invoice 354782-0 Cash Payment E 101-42110-200 Office Supplies Invoice 354782-0 Cash Payment E 101-42400-200 Office Supplies Invoice 354782-0 Cash Payment E 101-45200-200 Office Supplies Invoice 354782-0 Cash Payment E 101-43100-200Office Supplies Invoice 354782-0 Cash Payment E 609-49750-200 Office Supplies Invoice 354782-0 Cash Payment E 601-49400-200 Office Supplies Invoice 354782-0 Cash Payment E 602-49450-200 Office Supplies Invoice 354782-0 Cash Payment E 101-41110-200 Office Supplies Invoice 355621-0 Cash Payment E 101-42400-200 Office Supplies invoice 354801-0 Cash Payment E 101-41110-200 Office Supplies Invoice 355169-0 Cash Payment E 101-42110-210 Operating Supplies Invoice 354786-0 PO 17436 Cash Payment E 222-42260-200 Office Supplies Invoice 355484-0 PO 17375 Cash Payment E 101-41310-200 Office Supplies invoice 355441-0 Cash Payment E 101-41500-200 Office Supplies Invoice 355441-0 Cash Payment E 101-42110-200 Office Supplies Invoice 355441-0 Cash Payment E Invoice 355441-0 Cash Payment E Invoice 355441-0 Cash Payment E Invoice 355441-0 Cash Payment E Invoice 355441-0 Cash Payment E invoice 355441-0 Cash Payment E Invoice 355441-0 101-42400-200 Office Supplies 101-45200-200 Office Supplies 101-43100-200 Office Supplies 609-49750-200 Office Supplies 601-49400-200 Office Supplies 602-49450-200 Office Supplies BINDERS $82.12 CABLE MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES BINDERS CALCULATOR BINDERS DISKE~-FES PAPER MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES MISCELLAENOUS OFFICE SUPPLIES $11.53 $6.42 $6.42 $6.42 $6.42 $6.42 $2.14 $2.14 $3.21 $3.18 $22.83 $7.5O $41.68 $17.57 $33,97 $47,77 $47.77 $47.77 $47.77 $47.77 $15.92 $15.92 $23.88 $23,87 -4254- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09/05/02 9:39 AM Page 19 Current Period: September 2002 Cash Payment E 222-42260-200 Office Supplies STAMPS Invoice 355400-0 Transaction Date 9/412002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total Refer 91002 US FILTER Cash Payment E 601-49400-220 Repair/Maint Supply Invoice 8590603 PO 17330 Cash Payment E 601-49400~220 RepaidMaint Supply Invoice 8668369 PO 17337 Transaction Date 8/22/2002 Refer 91002 V & S JEWELERS Cash Payment E 101-41110-430 Miscellaneous Invoice 082202 Transaction Date 9/4/2002 Refer 91002 WATERTOWN PARTS CENTER 9/10/2002 LIDS, PLUGS, ETC HAMMER FLARE, ETC $43.04 $1,095.71 $378.25 $57.92 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $436.17 9/10/2002 RETIREMENT GIFT $133.13 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $133.13 9/10/2002 Cash Payment invoice 325017 Cash Payment Invoice 326754 Cash Payment Invoice 326754 Cash Payment Invoice 326754 Transaction Date E 602-49450-220 Repair/Maint Supply E 101-43100-230 Shop Materials E 601-49400-230 Shop Materials E 602-49450-230 Shop Materials 8/23/2002 GROMMET, ETC $31.44 OIL FILTERS $23.24 OIL FILTERS $23.24 OIL FILTERS $23.25 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 Total $101.17 Refer 91002 WESTONKA MECHANICAL 9/10/2002 Cash Payment E 602-49450-220 Repair/Maint Supply PVC STREET Invoice 29050 Cash Payment E 601-49400-400 Repaim & Maint Contract 2873 CAMBRIDGE CURBSTOP Invoice 6217 Transaction Date 8/22/2002 Marquette Bank Mou 10100 $10.85 $175,00 Total $185.85 -4255- CITY OF MOUND Payments 09/05/02 9:39 AM Page 20 Current Period: September 2002 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 222 AREA FIRE SERVICES 281 COMMONS DOCKS FUND 354 Commerce Place Tif 1-1 401 GENERAL CAPITAL PROJECTS 402 MUNICIPAL ST AID ST CONSTUCT 455 TIF 1-2 601 WATER FUND 602 SEWER FUND 609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND 675 STORM WATER UTILITY FUND 10100 Marquette Bank Mound $54,226.28 $274.57 $1,084.99 $28.75 $93,859.55 $99.00 $9,757.36 $19,526.05 $6,558.58 $76,263.89 $6,058.37 $267,737,39 Pre-Wdtten Check Checks to be Generated by the Compute Total $0.00 $267,737.39 $267,737.39 -4256- CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 02-XX RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2003 PRELIMINARY GENERAL FUND BUDGET IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,833,250; SETTING THE PRELIMINARY'LEVY AT $2,814,110; AND APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY OVERALL BUDGET FOR 2003. does hereby BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, adopt the following preliminary 2003 General Fund Budget appropriations: City Council 77,920 Cable TV 50,000 City Manager/Clerk 260,850 Elections/Registration 1,080 Assessing 79,630 Finance 215,100 Computer 28,640 Legal 135,550 Police 1,219,220 Emergency Preparedness 7,130 Planning/Inspections 270,010 Street 662,950 City Property/Buildings 194,650 Parks 361,130 Contingencies 25,000 Transfers 244,390 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 3,833,250 -4257- Resolution No. 02-XX BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, does hereby direct the County Auditor to levy the following preliminary taxes for collection in 2003: SPECIAL LEVIES HRA Lease Revenue Bonds- Lease Payment Bonded Indebtedness- 2001A Judgment Bond G.O. Improvement 2001C Unfunded Accrued Liability of Public Pension Funds 381,830 22,56O 2,600 33,350 Total Special Levies 440,340 PRELIMINARY REVENUE LEVY 2,373,760 Preliminary Certified Levy 2.814.'100 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, does hereby adopt the preliminary overall budget for 2003 as follows: GENERAL FUND As per above 3,833,250 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Area Fire Service Fund Cemetery Fund Dock Fund TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS 480,380 9,140 139,460 628,980 ENTERPRISE FUNDS Recycling Fund Liquor Fund Water Fund Sewer Fund Storm Water Utility Fund TOTAL ENTERPRISE FUNDS 163,310 495,850 679,880 1,117,680 82,750 2,539,470 -4258- Resolution No. 02-)0( SUMMARY General Fund Special Revenue Funds Enterprise Funds TOTAL ALL FUNDS 3,833,250 628,980 2,539,470 7.001.70~0 The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Councilmember The following voted in the affirmative: The following voted in the negative: Adopted by the City Council this 9th day of September, 2002. and seconded by ,. and Mayor Pat Meisel Attest: Bonne Ritter, City Clerk 3 -4259- CITY OF MOUND TAX LEVY RECAP TAX LEVIES * REVENUE - GENERAL PURPOSE~ REVENUE - LEASE PAY MENTS 2001A JUDGMENT BOND FIRE RELIEF G.O. IMPROVEMENT 2001C PUBLIC WORKS LEVY TOTAL LEVY 2000 2001 2002 PROPOSED 2003 1,859,210 1,947,860 2,252,500 2,373,760 0 0 0 381,830 0 0 23,000 22,560 33,350 33,350 33,350 33,350 0 0 0 2,600 82,770 84,590 86,020 Q 1.975.330 2,065,800 2,394,870 2,814,100 SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT) 24.000 53,000 53.000 83.000 *THE 1991 LEG ISLATURE CAPPED THE LEVY AMOUNT FOR FIRE PENSION CONTRIBUTIONS AT THE 1991 LEVY AMOUNT. THE 2003 FIRE BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF MOUND CONTRIBUTION TO THE FIRE RELIEF PENSION IS $52,640 THE $19,290 INCREASE F ROM 1991 CONTRIBUTION WILL BE FUNDED BY THE GENERAL TAX LEVY. NOTE: THE TRUTH IN TAXATION LEVY NOTICE WILL cOMPARE THE 2002 AND 2003 LEVY AMOUNTS AFTER STATE PAID CREDITS. 2001 2O02 2003 TOTAL LEVY 2,065,800 2,394,870 2,814,100 HACA AID (502.920) 0 0 CERTIFIED LEVY 1,562,880 2,394,870 2,814,100 FISCAL DISPARITY (193.840) (193.000) (233.190) NET LEVY 1,369.040 2.201.870 2.580.910 CITY PROPERTY TAX RATE 17.687 35.477 35.127 (Estimate) -4260- GENERAL FUND SUMMARY OF REVENUE8 AND EXPENDITURE5 REVENUE GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE LICENSES NON-BUSINESS LICENSES & PERMITS GENERAL GOVT. CHARGES OTHER REVENUE INTERFUND TRANSFERS/BONDS TOTAL REVENUE EXPENDITURES CITY COUNCIL PROMOTIONS CABLE T.V. CITY MANAGER/CLERK ELECTIONS & REGISTRATION ASSESSING FINANCE COMPUTER LEGAL POLICE EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PLANNING & INSPECTION STREET CITY RETAINING WALLS CITY HALL BLDG & SRVS PARKS RECREATION CONTINGENCIES TRANSFERS 2000 2001 2002 ACTUAL ACTUAL APPROVED 2OO3 REQUESTED 2003 PROPOSED 1,399,902 1,480,196 2,253,520 2,297,070 2,297,070 973,702 963,197 461,130 503,370 503,370 3,515 7,425 6,300 6,930 6,930 172,768 283,962 188,450 263,250 263,250 142,708 152,926 137,550 180,340 180,340 255,264 344,469 255,400 242,650 242,650 59,650 490,432 141,000 14,000 14,000 3.007,509 3,722,607 3.443.350 3,507,610 3,507,610 79,280 0 48,000 235,100 11,030 79,7OO 201,260 28,250 122,000 1,164,600 6,780 266,030 576,610 25,470 89,110 322,240 0 60,860 207,840 98,495 4,000 30,198 206,824 10,418 71,391 180,731 13,360 121,546 1,018,485 9,355 249,839 559,904 0 68,304 205,647 39,57O 256,972 166.120 77,920 7,500 50,000 266,850 1,080 79,630 215,550 28,640 135,550 1,375,920 32,130 296,510 1,047,950 0 742,150 594,390 0 25,000 244,390 80,944 4,000 60,059 202,360 179 78,159 188 326 77 830 117 985 1,072 927 9 347 289 229 545 041 0 129,807 224,384 42,260 66,649 206.740 77,920 0 50,000 260,850 1,080 79,630 215,100 28,640 135,550 1,219,220 7,130 270,010 662,950 0 194,650 361,130 0 25,000 244,390 TOTAL EXPENDITURES INCREASE (DECREASE) FUND BALANCE, JANUARY 1 ADJUSTMENT TO AUDIT FUND BALANCE, DECEMBER 31 3.311.159 (303,650) 1,191,456 (9,748) 878.058 3,396,226 326,381 878,058 (16,332) 1,188,107 3,524,160 (80,810) 717,380 636,570 5,221,160 (1,713,550) 1,107,300 (606,250) 3,833.250 (325,640) 1,107,300 781,660 -4261 - CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION NO. 02- RESOLUTION APPROVING A LEVY NOT TO EXCEED $83,000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE COST OF OPERATION, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF MSA 469, OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF AND FOR THE CITY OF MOUND FOR THE YEAR 2003 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mound is the governing body of the City of Mound; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received a resolution from the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of and for the City of Mound, entitled "Resolution Approving the Mound Housing and Redevelopment Authority Budget for the Year 2003 pursuant to MSA Chapter 469"; and WHEREAS, the City Council, pursuant to the provisions of MSA 469, must by resolution consent to the proposed tax levy of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Mound. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, that a special tax be levied upon real and personal property within the City of Mound in the amount not to exceed $83,000. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the said levy, not to exceed $83,000 is approved by this Council to be used for the operation of the Mound Housing and Redevelopment Authority pursuant to the provisions of MSA 469, and shall be certified as a tax levy to the County Auditor of Hennepin County on or before September 15, 2002. The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember Councilmember and seconded by The following voted in the affirmative: The following voted in the negative: Adopted by the City Council this day of ,2002. Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk Mayor Pat Meisel -4262- CITY OF MOUND Meeting Minutes Mound Public Safety Facility Meeting held on 08/2602 Date printed 08/27/02 The meeting was convened at 4:00 PM Monday, August 26, 2002 at Mound Fire Station: Present: Jeff Andersen City JA John McKinley City Todd Christopherson Amcon TC Miles Britz SEH Kandis Hanson City KH JM MB Temporary fire station - lease agreement is not quite final. There is an issue with the overhead door that appears to be a $15,000 issue. The landlord does not want to pay for this. The City may consider a cost sharing, however, the majodty of the cost is assumed to be that of the landlord. GP to follow up with United Properties. Fire Department is leaning toward renting the existing office space in lieu of using portable trailers. 2. Work on floor plan layouts is ongoing. The fax/copier areas have been updated to accommodate the shared areas by police and fire and also the security/privacy concerns of the PD. The new layout does not quite meet all criteria - adjustments were discussed for further work by SEH. 4. Mechanical/Electrical will need additional review and coordination meetings with owner to make sure that all needs are addressed. 5. Soil conditions - TC reviewed steps taken by SHE/Amcon to get competitive bids on soil correction with Geopier and Hayward/Baker systems as bid alternates. 6. Red color scheme has been selected for the precast. A range of options in this family of colors will be reviewed. The other building elements 7. MB will try to set up a tour of Hanson Spancrete to look at finishes and colors in person. He will attempt to set this up by E-mail tomorrow with a tour day next week. 8. Retaining wall - select colors. Part of the walls will need to be built this fall and the balance next spring. The material will need to be ordered early, so color will need to be determined early. 9. The front entry retaining walls are planned to be limestone. 10. Discussed the front monument and signage, Trent Luger to get some options available for next week's meeting. 11. KH reported that Sarah Smith was successful in getting local permit authority for the watershed district. 12. Discussed bidding. Progressing per schedule. BP 2 is being developed with tentative issue date of 9/10/02. 13. Discussed the file cabinet system that requires a recess in the concrete floor for the rail system. Decided on a construction detail that will accommodate the system in the most cost effective manner. 14. Discussed schedule. VVhen the Iow bidders are determined, we will be able to confirm precast delivery and estimated soil correction times with the respective bidders. 15. Project finance was discussed. JA related a letter that was published in local paper regarding the Orono position on involvement with this project. C:\WINDOWS\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.lE5~A/IBO5CHI7WIPS 08 26 02.doc -4263- Page 1 of 2 CIT~ OF MCPJHD Meeting held on 08/2602 Date printed 0~V27/02 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. TC and Gino to get together on the cash flow process and payment tracking for construction. Relocation of well - controls are being relocated. KH to check with Skinner and Cameron to determine status. As long as work is done by 9/16/02 we are OK. The previous target date was 0/1 Strommen has sent a letter to the utility requesting a breakdown and cost for burying electric utility. Council was not in favor of requesting that Xcel absorb these costs. Council prefers to petition that Xcel pay for downtown work. GP and KH to meet with next door property owner regarding procurement of additional property. KH gave an update on the communications pieces. The ground breaking will include gold plated sledge hammers, safety glasses, and hard hats. No shovels. Building Committee ended at 5:30. Molly Olivier of SEH joined meeting for Design at this point. Tim Palm and three other fire fighters also joined the meeting. 22. Discussed flooring in the lobby area. Fritz tile is a nice alternative to terrazzo that is more cost effective than terrazzo. 23. Discussed Cambria as another option for the front entry. 24. Porcelain tiles were discussed as a middle of the road cost material that gives excellent maintenance and long term wear characteristics. Installed cost is in the $8 to 10 per SF range. 25. Marmoleum was discussed. This material is less expensive than porcelain and also has excellent wear characteristics. MO said that this material is installed in the $3 to 4 per SF range. All agreed to use this material for the front entry. 26. Discussed entry vestibule. We will utilize the floor mats as provided by a service. This is in lieu of installing recessed floor mats. 27. Discussed carpeting. A $20 per SY is assumed which is a reasonable allowance. 28. MO suggests choosing a carpet color first and then working the rest of the pallet out around that selection. TC and SEH to work out bid specs to keep competitive bidding. 29. MB suggested that MO would work out a couple of options for review and consideration by owner. 30. Discussed flooring surfaces for the various rooms. 31. KH stressed importance of using a color scheme that will last a long time, Something that looks nice and is pleasing, however, not trendy. 32. MO presented some options for the front entry counters and wall surfaces as viewed from the lobby. Discussed at length ways to make this feel open and inviting and yet also provide a secure and safe work environment for the receptionist(s.) 33. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 PM. Minutes by TC. Call if any missing items or discrepancy. C:\WINDOWS\Local SeEings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.lE.~lP, O5CHI7~,lPS 08 26 02.doc -4264- Page 2 of 2 i -4265- -4266- -4267- CITY OF MOUND Meeting Minutes Mound Public Safety Facility Meeting held on 09/0302 Date prfnted 09/04/02 The meeting was convened at 4:00 PM Monday;- September-3-¢-2002 at Mound-FireStation: .................... Present: Todd Christopherson Amcon TC Matt Simoneau City Kandis Hanson City KH Greg Palm John McKinley City JM Miles Britz SEH MB MS FD GPa 1. Lease is ready to go. Agreements have been made regarding the square footage, the overhead doors, and the ramp. It will not be signed until we know for sure when the construction will start. 2. JC has raised a concern about the slope of the proposed ramp at the temporary fire station. GP to talk with him. 3. Electrical design is on going. 4. Mechanical design needs to look at heat calculations for the possibility that the window awnings do not get included in the project. Food service consultant has looked at existing equipment. Some of the items planned to be relocated to the new building will not meet the new health department codes and standards. As an example, the pass through window has a weld seam that is unacceptable. 6. The hood is not adequately sized for the new building and also has the older style mesh filtering. 7. The refrigerator has a large amount of rust and probably would not be re-usable. 8. Monument design - landscape designer has some ideas that MB will bring to the design meeting Thursday. 9. The design meeting this week will be Thursday in lieu of tonight. The committee will be meeting at Spancrete on Thursday to tour the plant and look at colors and finishes. 10. MB presented another precast sample. It is from Wells Concrete and is from a building in Faribault (Harley Davidson Dealership) that the group liked. It is a deeper red than those previously submitted. 11. Financial - money is invested while waiting for the project to start. 12. The well will be capped by the same firm that was hired to cap the test well. It is believed that the test wells have already been capped. 13. Discussed the purchase of the adjacent property. The owner has determined that the value is about $75,000. This is based upon input from their realtor and includes some value for each of the maple trees that would be lost. MB said that 3,118 SF of property are in question. This equates to $24.05 per SF. Using the same unit cost on the 989.8 SF that the City would transfer to the neighbors in this transaction amounts to $23,805. The net difference is about $52,000. SEH to evaluate additional parking made available so that an analysis can be done on cost per additional parking stall gained. KH to include legal and closing cost estimates with this analysis. TC suggested that SEH provide a plan of exactly how many additional parking spaces can be gained from this additional property so that an analysis of cost per space can be made. 14. Communications - KH reported on the plans for the ceremony on 9/17. A band through the school and some other festivities are being considered. Laurie Hamm from The Laker will do an article. C:\WINDOWS\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.lES\K52JC9UFAMPS 09 03 02.doc -4268- Page 1 of 2 CFI'Y OF MOUNCD Meeting held on 09/0302 Date printed 09/0#/02 15. Asbestos will be removed week of 9/9. 16. Land use approval is all done and in place as previously discussed. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. The bid opening is tomorrow at 2 PM at City Hall. There is a Council Workshop on Thursday this week to discuss the fire contracts with the other cities. The City Council will meet on Monday to review and accept the bids. Amcon will open the bids, record them, and prepare a tabulation sheet and get to the City for the Council packets by Thursday. MB handed out a map for the design committee to show them how to get to Hanson Spancrete for the tours on Thursday. Discussed the soil correction and the possibility of starting the project in the spring in lieu of the current schedule. Reviewed the 8 19 02 memo from Amcon "Consideration of Project Schedule Change." MB and TC gave background on various methods considered for soil correction. The Fall start creates potential for wet clays to heave in winter which creates a more conservative soil correction design for the Fall start than for the Spring Start. The original estimate for site grading contract C-2 was $80,000. The soil correction was first thought to be about $100 - 150,000 additional cost. The design for a fall start is another $200 - 250,000 in cost estimated. By starting in spring, the last component may be eliminated or greatly minimized. The actual bids will determine the cost and may be greatly influenced by any particular contractor's need for work and/or their availability of fill needs with other projects. 24. Meeting adjourned at 6:15 PM. Minutes by TC. Call if any missing items or discrepancy. C:\WINDOWS\Local Seffings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.lE5\K52JC9UF~v1PS 09 03 02.doc -4269- Page 2 of 2 CITY OF MOUHD Date printed 09/04/02 Mound Public Safety Facility Consideration of Project Schedule Change Up to this point we (Amcon, SEH, and Mound Building Committee) have been aggressively pushing forward on our initial June project schedule which calls for a construction start in September 2002 and completion in June 2003. At this point, based upon the concerns of the project designers related to soft soils, we are considering delaying the project start until March 2003. The following is a list of discussion points for consideration. Pro - in favor of delaying project start until March 2003: Elimination of "winter construction costs." These are normal costs associated with building during the winter and include such items as rental of heaters, blankets, propane fuel, temporary enclosures, heated concrete, etc. These costs vary greatly depending on type of construction, time of construction, and severity of winter weather. We have assumed that these costs would be included in the project from the start based upon the schedule. Delaying the project would result in a savings in this area of approximately $50,000. Shortening of the overall construction schedule. Our current schedule calls for a nine month construction schedule. All projects include a cost component referred to as "general conditions" which is almost directly proportional to the duration of the on site construction work. These costs include such items as field office trailer rental, field supervision personnel (Amcon Superintendent), port-a-potties, temporary water, temporary utilities, safety barricades, and safety fencing. By moving the construction start date to March, 2003 (and if keeping the current design/procurement schedule) about one month could be saved from the total construction duration. This would result in a cost savings of approximately $15,000 in reduced general conditions. Modification of the Soil Correction design: SEH has indicated that the anticipated soil correction methods are more conservative when a fall start is assumed than if a Spring Start is assumed. Their current design calls for a six foot deep layer of well draining material to be placed below the entire building pad to accommodate the fall and winter construction. If we re-design and re-bid for Spring construction, we would anticipate a substantial reduction in the soil correction design and corresponding costs. Potential cost savings for this could be as much as $200,000. If we do move forward on this basis, the additional dollars must be taken from contingency and/or the building must be scaled back. Ability to bid the project out as one complete bid package in lieu of the currently planned 3 or 4 separate bid packages. This will greatly reduce the potential for errors in design documents due to the challenge of coordinating multiple bid packages. This is an intangible; however, we would anticipate fewer construction change orders under a single bid package than with multiple. Con - in favor of starting the project as planned in September 2002: Inflationary costs of waiting until March to start construction will be realized in the bidding. The labor unions have all negotiated increases in their pay rates that take affect in June 2003. These increases will be seen in bidding under the new schedule even if the bids are opened this fall. These increases could be in the order of $50,000 to $100,000. Political implications. The owner has expressed a strong desire from the start to start this project in September and complete it by June 5 2003. Also, if construction is delayed, tax payers will be paying for the project beginning in March, without any construction started. The Lease for a temporary facility needs to be considered, The space is available right now. If the lease is not signed, it may not be available in March. If it is signed up now, there is the added cost of a longer lease. The added cost is approximately $25,000 for 6 additional months. It may be possible to tie up the space until March for some amount less than $20,000. C:\WlNDOWS\Local SeEings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.lE5~K52JC9UFWIPS pro con.doc -4270- Page 1 of 2 CITY OF MOUND Date printed 09/~4/02 The Fish Fry will be planned for the new facility in June 2003. In our current schedule, we are tracking toward completion by 6/6/2003; however, there is no guarantee that we will make that date. Unforeseen conditions related to soil have jeopardized the ability to meet that date. Additional schedule delays can not be ruled out (weather, strikes, etc.) Delaying the project start to March 2003 will definitely require changing the location and possibly the date of the 2003 Fish Fry. Neutral - Other Factors to Consider: The Biddinq market: This spring and summer has been the lightest in terms of construction activity and bidding in our region in the last 4 to 5 years. This has been reflected in favorable bid results and schedules for the projects that have gone ahead this year. This was a factor originally considered by the City of Mound in deciding to start this project in September, 2002. In recent previous years, waiting to bid in the winter for a spring start would have been advisable this time of year due to high levels of ongoing construction. This year, favorable bidding has been seen through the summer and continues. We do anticipate that a fall bidding schedule for an early spring construction start will also yield very favorable results. If the spring start is pursued, we will push for a schedule that puts the entire project out for bid as one bid package with a bid date in mid or late November. This will allow us to get all contractors on board, get early shop drawings completed and approved, and order long lead items such as precast concrete, steel, and others. 10. Public, City Council, Police/Fire Departments and administration have prepared for and are ready to move now. The momentum that has been generated in this process would be lost. C:\WlNDOWS\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content. lE5\K52JC9UF~VIPS pro con.doc -4271 - Page 2 of 2 September 6, 2002 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364-1627 SUBJECT: City of Mound 2002 Retaining Wall Replacement MFRA #13215 Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: Bids were opened on Wednesday, September 4, 2002, for the first phase of the City's Retaining Wall Replacement Program. Even though we had six plan holders, only two bids were submitted. The low bid of $189,837.90 was submitted by Sunram Construction, Inc. of Corcoran, Minnesota. Attached is a copy of the bid tabulation. The Engineer's estimate for this first phase was$212,800. Sunram is a company that specializes in retaining wall construction and they have completed many city, county, and state projects over the years. Reference checks with some other west metro cities indicate they are a reputable company doing satisfactory work. Therefore, we are recommending that Sunram be awarded a contract in the amount of $189,837.90. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact us. Sincerely, John Cameron, City Engineer JC:pry Enclosure s:Lmain:LMou 13215:\Correspondencekmayor9-6 -4272- -4273- Oo 0 O0 o oo 0 O0 0 oo o o0000000000o 0 o -4274- RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ORDERING TI-I~ ABATEMENT OF CONDITIONS CREATING A HAZARDOUS PROPERTY AT 2957 CAMBRIDGE LANE WHEREAS, the real estate at 2957 Cambridge Lane, legally described as Lots 9 and 10, Block 33, "Wychwood" ("Subject Property") was at some point improved by a construction project and WHEREAS, in order to prepare the Subject Property for construction, it was necessary to perform significant grading of the soil; and WHEREAS, the Subject Property abuts a platted road ("Cambridge Lane") to the east and a platted fire lane ("Fire Lane") to the north; and WHEREAS, the difference in the grade between the City right of ways and the Subject Property is as much as thirteen feet; and WHEREAS, the grading which was necessary for the construction on the Subject Property compromised the lateral support of the abutting City right of ways; and WHEREAS, the owners of record of the Subject Property are Gene and Theresa Skaalemd; and WHEREAS, a previous owner constructed a concrete block retaining wall ("Wall") on the Subject Property along the entire east border with Cambridge Lane on Lot 9 and a portion of lot 10 as well as a portion of the north border with the Fire Lane on Lot 9 to preserve the lateral support for the City right of ways; and WHEREAS, utilities including a City water line and a Metropolitan Council Environmental Service Sanitary Sewer Force Main are buried in Cambridge Lane; and WHEREAS, a garage is constructed on the southern-most portion of the lot abutting the Fire Lane on the north; and WHEREAS, the Fire Lane is frequently used recreationally by other citizens as an access to nearby Lake Minnetonka; and WHEREAS, approximately thirty feet of the Wall on Lot 9 abutting Cambridge Lane to the east has collapsed; and WHEREAS, the remaining portions of the Wall have not yet collapsed but have been found by the City structural engineer to be lacking structural integrity; and BDS-219840vl 1 MU200-109 -4275- WHEREAS, the present condition of the collapsed Wall presents an immediate risk to the lateral support of Cambridge Lane and thus poses an immediate risk to the integrity of the City water line and the Metropolitan Council Sewer Force main; and WHEREAS, the remaining, standing portions of the Wall constitute an mediate risk to the lateral support of the Fire Lane and Cambridge Lane and thus po.s_? an_immediate risk to the garage located across the Fire Lane t~om the Subject improvements on the Subject Property; and Property to the north and the other existing WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.16 authorizes the governing body of any city or town to order the owner of any hazardous property within the municipality to correct or remove the hazardous condition; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.15 subd. 3 defines a "hazardous property" as "any...property, which because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, physical damages, unsanitary condition, or abandonment, constitutes a fire hazard or a hazard to public safety or health"; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.161 et seq. authorizes the City to correct or remove a hazardous condition of any hazardous property if the owner of record fails to do so after a reasonable time and the district court enters a Judgment sustaining the City's Order (attached as Exhibit A); NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound as follows: 1. The Subject Propertyis a Hazardous Property as defined by Minnesota Statutes Section 463.15; 2. An Abatement Order substantially similar to that attached hereto as Exhibit A shall be served upon all required parties in order to effectuate this Resolution; The City Attorney is authorized to take all necessary legal steps to secure compliance with the Order and to obtain authority to remove the hazardous conditions on the Subject Property by court order or consent and assess the costs against the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mound this 9th day of September, 2002. ATTEST: Pat Meisel, Mayor Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk BDS-219840vl MU200-109 2 -4276- STATE OF MINNESOTA EXHIB~ A Case Type: Condemnation DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF HENNEPIN In the Matter of the Hazardous Property Located at 2957 Cambridge Lane in the City of Mound, Minnesota FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Court File No. ORDER FOR ABATEMENT OF HAZARDOUS PROPERTY TO: GENE AND THERESA SKAALERUD, HUSBAND AND W~E, OWNERS OF RECORD. The City Council of the City of Mound orders that within twenty (20) days of service of this Order you abate the conditions as described below which exist on property located at 2957 Cambridge Lane in the City of Mound, which property is legally described as: Lots 9 and 10, Block 33, "Wychwood". The City of Mound, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 463.15 et. Seq., and based on the authorization of Resolution No. __, adopted on September 9, 2002, which is hereby incorporated by reference and attached hereto as Exhibit A, and all prior findings, conclusions, and determinations referenced in Resolution No. , finds that the above-referenced property constitutes a "hazardous property" within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.15, subd. 3. Pursuant to the above-referenced statutes, it is hereby ORDERED that within twenty (20) days of service of this Order you must remove and replace the existing, standing portions of the concrete block wall on Lots 9 and 10 abutting the Fire Lane and Cambridge Lane and replace the BDS-219840vl 3 MU200-109 -4277- approximately 30 feet of concrete block wall on Lot 9, abutting Cambridge Lane that has collapsed, all in conformity with generally recognized structural engineering standards, in order to provide sufficient lateral support for Cambridge Lane and the Fire Lane. In addition, you must remove all debris from the collapsed portion of the Wall on Lot 9. You are further advised that unless such corrective action is completed or an Answer is served on the City and filed with the Hennepin County District Court Administrator within twenty (20) days of the date of service of this Order upon you, a motion for summary enforcement of this Order will be made to the Hennepin County District Court. You are further advised that if you do not comply with this Order and the City is compelled to take any corrective action, all necessary costs incurred by the City in the corrective action will be assessed against the property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.21. In connection thereto, the City intends to recover all its expenses incurred in carrying out this Order, including specifically but not exclusively, filing fees, service fees, publicatiOn fees, attorneys' fees, appraisers fees, witness fees, including expert witness fees and traveling expenses incurred by the City from the time this Order was originally made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 463.22. Dated: September ,2002 KENNEDY & GRAVEN CHARTERED By: Bryan D. Shirley, 312964 470 Pillsbury Center 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 ATTORNEYS FOR THE CITY OF MOUND BDS-219840v 1 MU200-109 4 -4278- 534t Maywood Rind Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-3190 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO: MOund council, Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: September 4, 2002 SUBJECT: City Code Chapter 1000 - Nuisance SUMMARY As requested by the City Council, City staff and members of the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed draft of the Nuisance Ordinance that was prepared by City Attorney Craig Mertz in cooperation with City staff. DISCUSSION Members of the Planning Commission were very supportive of the proposed new ordinance and also requested that additional research be done to address temporary storage units (ie. plastic hoop houses and PODS.) which are becoming more commonly used but agreed that this matter needed to be addressed separately. City staff is in the process of contacting neighboring communities to see if they have addressed these types of units. The Planning Commission expressed strong support for the clean-up efforts made by the Community Service Officer and also requested an update regarding Operation Clean Sweep. Members of the City Council are advised that an updated report was recently provided by Interim Police Chief McKinley that will be forwarded to the Planning Commission as part of its 9/16 agenda packet. 3. The level of enforcement was also discussed and it was suggested that enforcement activities may be enhanced through neighborhood groups. ADDITIONAL STAFF COMMENTS City Attorney Mertz also prepared some additional language to the Zoning Ordinance as recommended by City staff to address screening of equipment through the use of tarps. Be advised that these proposed ordinance amendments require that a public hearing is held prior to adoption. If appropriate, this section(s) should be remanded to the Planning Commission for public hearing and formal review. -4279- 2. The' propOsed new chapter may need: additional: formatting by the city Clerk for consistency with the Mound City Code. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the proposed new draft of the Nuisance Ordinance. -4280- Excerpts from the MINUTES MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 19, 2002 NUISANCE ORDINANCE Discussion ensued regarding the "hoop houses" and POD units. Commission agreed that they clearly needed to be deemed "temporary" and must be addressed specifically. A concern was voiced regarding the status of Operation Clean Sweep that was initiated last year. The Commission would like an update. The need for enforcement of codes was an area of greatest concern and was discussed at length. Councilman Meyer suggested we not strongarm people but try to go into smaller neighborhood groups and encourage conformance, i.e. discouraging the use of vacant public land for dumping leaves, brush, etc. MOTION by Clapsaddle, seconded by Burma, to move this Ordinance to the City Council for approval. MOTION approved unanimously. -4281 - Proposed Amendments to "Screening" Requirements First Proposed Amendment "350,710 Exterior Storage. In residential districts, all materials and equipment shall be stored within a building or fully screened so as not to be visible from adjoining properties, except for the following: laundry drying, recreational vehicles, and recreation equipment (see definitions in Subsection 350.310), construction and landscaping materials and equipment cun'ently (within a period of 30 days) being used on the premises, off-street parking of licensed and operative passenger automobiles and pick-up trucks. Required screening may be achieved with fences, y~alls, earth berms, or hedges, or other landscape materials, employed in such a manner as to provide a visual barrier during all seasons. For purposes of this section, screening may n(~t be achieved by employing tam. s, fabric sheeting, or plastic sheeting. Storage of recreational vehicles shall be subject to the following..." Second Proposed Amendment Amend Section 350:720 by adding the following new paragraph at the end of the section: "For purposes of this section, screening may not be achieved by employing tarps, fabric sheeting or plastic sheeting." T:XNETBACK\6678\SCREEN.ORD -4282- CHADWICK AND MERTZ, P.S.C. FAX: {952) 975,-9963 E.MAIL: CHADLAW~PCLINK. COM TELEPHONE: (952) 975-9960 May 22, 2002 ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW AMERICANA COMMUNITY BANK BUILDING 600 WEST 79TH STREET, SUITE 240 P.O. BOX 623 CFIANHASSEN, MINNESOTA $5317 TAX ID NO, 41-2007760 Richard J. Chadwick* Craig M. Mertz Lynette M. Biedsaw** Of Counsel: Larry Gansen *Also licensed in Wisconsin '*Also licensed In Michigan Sarah Smith' Community Development Director 5341 Maywood Rd. Mound, MN 55364 Re: Nuisance Ordinance Amendments Our File No.:6678MZ Dear Sarah: After our last me.eting at City Hall I was 'asked to re-work the draft of the proposed Nuisance Ordinance. First, I was asked to expand the provisions relating to derelict vehicles. You will fred the new language in proposed section 1000.40. The new language expands the definition of vehicle so as to include motor vehicles, cars, trucks, recreational vehicles, watercraft and trailers. Second, I was asked to insert a provision which would specifically provide that equipment covered with tarps are not considered "screened." To address that concern I enclose (on a separate sheet) proposed changes to sections 350.710 and 350.720 of the zoning code. Very truly yours, P.S.C. Craig M. Mertz ClvlM/emm Enclosure T:kNETBACK\6678\CORk2002kSMITH3 .LTK -4283- Mound City Code ' Section 1000:00 CHAPTER V. NUISANCES SECTION 1000 - Nuisances - Abatement Section 1000:00. Public Nuisance Defined. Whoever by his or her act or failure to perform a legal duty does any of the follow is guilty of maintaining a public nuisance, which is a misdemeanor: (a) Maintains or permits a condition which unreasonable annoys, injures, or endangers the safety, health, morals, comfort, or repose of any considerable number of members of the public, or (b) Interferes with, obstructs, or renders dangerous for passage, any public property, public highway or right-of-way use, or waters used by the public, or (c) Is guilty of any other act or omission declared by law or this Section to be a public nuisance and for which no sentence is specifically provided. (d) ' Permits or allows real property under his/her control or ownership to be used to maintain a pubhc nuisance. Sections 1000:05, 1000:10, and 1000:15 relating to nuisances and abatement are hereby repealed in their entirety. (Ord. #29-1989 - 06-26-89). Section 1000:02. DEFINITIONS. The following words, when used in this ordhaance, shall have the meanings ascribed to them: Garbage includes all putrescible animal, vegetable or other matter that attends the preparation, consumptio, n, display, dealing in or storage of meat, fish, fowl, birds, fruit, or vegetables, including the cans, containers or wrappers wasted along with such materials. Rubbish is nonputrescible solid wastes such as wood, leaves, trimmings from shrubs, dead trees or branches thereof, shavings, sawdust, excelsior, wooden waste, printed matter, paper, paper board, paste boards, grass, rags, straw, boots, shoes, hats and all other combustibles not included under the term garbage. Section 1000:05A. Public Nuisances Affecting Health. The following are hereby declared to be public nuisances affecting health: (a) Carcasses of animals not buried or destroyed within 24 hours after death; -4284- (b) The keeping of any animal over six (6) months of age which has not been vaccinated against rabies with an approved vaccine as determined by the official Comprehendium of Animal Rabies Vaccines published by the Conference of State Public Health Veterinm'ians and the Center for Disease Control of the ;Department of Health and Human Services. (c) All public exposure of persons having a communicable disease as defined in Minn. Stat. Section 144.4172 and any building, conveyance, or place where contagion, infection, filth or other source of cause of communicable disease exists; (d) Accumulations of stagnant water, manure, animal feces, or rubbish which are likely to become breeding places for flies, mosquitoes, or vermin; (e) Depositing manure upon any city street, city sidewalk, or city property. (f) Garbage not stored in rodent free and fly-tight containers, or; garbage stored so as to emit foul and disagreeable odors, or; garbage stored so as to constitute a hazard to public health. (g) Accumulations of rubbish as defined herein. Accumulation of junk, disused furniture, appliances, machinery, automobiles, and parts thereof or any matter which may become a harborage for rats, snakes, or vermin, which creates a visual blight, or which may be conducive to fire, or which endangers the comfort, repose, health, safety or welfare of the public. Section 1000:10A. Public Nuisances Affecting Morals .and Decency. The following are hereby declared to be public nuisances affecting public morals and decency: (a) All gambling devices, slot machines and punch boards, unless approved as a legal device by the State of Minnesota; (b) Betting, bookmaking, and all apparatus used in such occupations; (c) Ail houses kept for the purpose of prostitution or promiscuous sexual intercourse, gambling houses, houses of ill fame, and bawdy hours; (d) Ail places where controlled substances, narcotics or intoxicating liquor is manufactured or disposed of in violation of law or where, in violation of law, persons are permitted to resort for the purpose of drinking intoxicating liquor or use of controlled substances or narcotics, or where intoxicating liquor, controlled substances, or narcotics are kept for sale or other disposition in violation of law, and all liquor controlled substances, and narcotics and other property used for maintaining such a place; 2 -4285- (e) Any vehicle used for the transportation of intoxicating liquor, or for promiscuous sexual intercourse, or any other immoral or illegal purpose; (f) The use of any fish house, warming house, or other similar structure for any activity listed in (a) through (d) above. (g) Any building or premises to which there has been three or more police responses in a six month period (1) regarding illegal possession, and/or illegal consumption, and/or illegal sale of alcohol, or controlled substances, or (2) regarding noisy parties or noisy gatherings when disturb the peace, quiet, or repose of another person, or (3) regarding illegal discharge of fireworks and/or fn-earms. Section 1000:15A Public Nuisances Affecting Peace and Safety. The following are declared to be public nuisances affecting public peace and safety. (a) All snow and ice not removed from public sidewalks 12 hours after the snow or other precipitation causing the condition has ceased to fall. (b) All wires and limbs of trees or bushes which are so close to the surface of a sidewalk or street as to constitute a danger to pedestrians or vehicles, any limbs or bushes which block the clear view of traffic signs and all limbs of trees closer to the street surface than 15 feet and all limbs of trees closer to the surface ora sidewalk than eight feet. (c) Obstructions and excavations affecting the ordinary use by the public of streets, alleys, sidewalks, or public grounds except under such conditions as are permitted by the Section or other applicable law; (d) Radio aerials, radio towers, television antennae, television towers or satellite dishes erected or maintained in a dangerous manner; (e) Any use of property abutting on a public street or sidewalk or any use of a public street or sidewalk which causes large crowds of people to gather, obstructing traffic and the free uses of the streets or sidewalks; (f) All hanging signs, awnings, and other similar structures over streets and sidewalks so situated so as to endanger public safety, or not constructed and maintained as provided by this Section; (g) The allowing of rain water, ice, or snow to fall from any building or structure upon any street or sidewalk or to flow across any sidewalk; (h) Waste water cast upon or permitted to flow upon streets or other public property; (i) Accumulations in the open of discarded or disused machinery, household -4286- (k) (1) (m) (o) (p) (cO (s) (t) (u) appliances, automobile bodies, or other materials, in a manner conducive to the harboring of rats, mice, snakes, or vermin, or to fire, health, or safety hazards from such accumulation or from the rank growth of vegetation among the items so accumulated;. Noxious weeds, as that term is defined in Section 18.77 of Minnesota Statutes, and any excessive growth of other weeds; excessive growth of weeds means weeds or grass which are 12 inches or more in height; Any wire, except clothes line wire, which is strung less than 15 feet above the surface of the ground; Any fence or other structure maliciously erected or maintained for the purpose of annoying the owners or occupants of adjoining property; All buildings, walls, and other structures which have been damaged by fire, decay, or otherwise, and which are so situated as to endanger the safety of the public; All dead standing trees which present a hazard to like or property, all elm or other trees found harboring the Dutch elm beetle, all dead standing elm wood, and all cut elm or other wood found harboring the Dutch elm beetle; All dangerous, unguarded machinery, including derelict autos, derelict boats, and derelict refrigerators and freezers, in any public place, or so situated or operated on private property as to attract the public; Swimming in a channel or swimming or diving from a channel bridge; Operating any water craft, motor vehicle, or powered device or propelled device, on the open water, or upon the ice of a body of water, in such a manner as to endanger life, limb, or property; Standing upon any street bridge or raikoad bridge for the purposes of fishing therefrom; Causing to be made any fire on any public beach area or park except in fireplaces designated for that purpose; Any well, hole, or similar excavation which is left uncovered or in such other condition as to constitute a hazard to any child coming on the premises where it is located; Obstruction to the free flow or water in a natural waterway of a public street, drain, gutter, or ditch with trash or other materials; 4 -4287- (v) (w) (x) (y) (z) (AA) The Placing or throwing on any street, sidewalk, or other public property of any glass, tacks, nails, bottles, or other substance which may injure any person or animal or damage any pneumatic tire when passing over such substance; The depositing of garbage or refuse on a public right-of-way or on adjacent private property; Conditions which, in the opinion of the Enforcement Officer, are conducive to the harborage or breeding of vermin including materials stored less than 12 inches off the ground; Improper Storing of Firewood: All firewood shall be stored in neat stacks. The' height of a woodpile over three feet shall be no more than twice its width but in no event shall the height exceed six feet. The stack of wood is to be piled in a regular orderly arrangement that is stable and reasonably resistant to collapse. No firewood shall be stored on the street side of the yard. The total amount of firewood stored on the premises is to be no more than two fireplace cords. Firewood may be stored upon resident/al premises solely for the use on the premises and not for resale. Any bUilding or premises to which there has been three or more police responses in a six month period (1) regarding illegal possession and/or illegal consumption, and/or illegal sale of alcohol on controlled substances, on (2) regarding noisy parties or noise gatherings which disturb the peace, quiet, or repose of another person. The parking and/or storage of construction equipment, farm vehicles, and eqUipment, or any commercial vehicle with a length greater than 21 feet, or a height greater than 8 feet, or a gross vehicle weight greater than 9,000 pounds, continuously for more than two hours on any property within a resident/al zoning district. Such equipment and vehicles shall include, but are not limited to, the following: dump trucks, construction trailers, · back hoes, front-end loaders, bobcats, well drilling eqUipment, farm trucks, combines, thrashers, tractors, tow tracks, truck-tractors, step vans, cube vans, and the like. The prohibitions of this section (AA) shall not apply to the following: 1) Any equipment or vehicle described above being used by a public utility, governmental agency, construction company, moving company or similar company which is actually being used to service a residence not belonging to or 5 -4288- occupied by the operator of the vehicle. (BB) 2) Any equipment or vehicle described above which is actually making a pick-up or delivery at the location where it is parked. Parking for any period of time beyond the time reasonably necessary to make such a pickup or delivery and in excess of the two hour limit shall be lawful. The outside parking and/or storage on vacant property of usable or unusable vehicles, trailers, watercraft, snowmobiles, recreational vehicles, all-terrain vehicles, construction vehicles and equipment, or similar vehicles, materials, supplies, equipment, ice fish houses, skateboard ramps, play houses, or other nonpermanent structures except as may be permitted by the Zoning or Sign Ordinances. (cc) The outside parking and/or storage on occupied residentially used property of usable or nonusable vehicles, trailers, watercraft, snowmobiles, recreational vehicles, all terrain vehicles and similar vehicles, materials, supplies, equipment, ice fist houses, skateboard ramps, or other nonpermanent structures unless they comply with Zoning and Sign Ordinances. Ail vehicles, watercraft and other articles allowed to be stored outside in an approved manner or occupied residentially used property must be owned by a perSon who resides on the property. Persons who are away at school or in the military service for periods of time but still claim the property as their legal residence, shall be considered residents on the property. (DD) Breeding sites of the Aedes Tris Eriams (tree hole mosquito) including but not limited to: the basal holes of trees, unused tires (not mounted on wheels), pots, pans, cans, pails, bottles, or °ther containers left outdoors in which water or debris may accumulate. (Ord. #29-1989- 6-26-89) Section 1000:20. Duties of Ci.ty Officers. The Police Department shall enforce the provisions relating to'nuisances. Such officers shall have the power to inspect private premises and take all reasonable precautions to prevent the commission and ma/ntenance of public nuisances. Section 1000:25. Abatement. The City may abate the nuisance by the procedure descried below: (a) Order. The Enforcement Officer shall serve a written warning upon the owner as 6 -4289- provided herein. The written warning shall also be served upon any responsible party or property owner known to the officer and may be served upon any party known to have caused the nuisance. The written waming may be served by personal delivery or certified mail, or if the premises are unoccupied and the ma/ling address of the owner is unknown, by posting the warning in a conspicuous location on the premises. The written warning shall contain the following: 1. A description of the real estate sufficient for identification; 2. A description and location of the nuisance and the remedial action 3. The abatement deadline, to be determined by the Enforcement Officer, allowing a reasonable time for the performance of any act required. 4. A statement that the order may be appealed at a hearing before the City Manager by filing a written request containing the owner's mailing address, with the City Clerk before the abatement deadline designed in the order; and 5. A statement that if the remedial action is not timely completed nor a request for an appeal hearing filed with the City Clerk within the time specified, the City will abate the nuisance and charge all costs incurred therein against the real estate as a special assessment to be collected in the same manner as property taxes. (b) Setting Hearing Date. In the even that an appeal is timely filed with the City Clerk, the City Manager shall promptly fix a date for an appeal. (c) Notice. The City Clerk shall mail a notice of the date, time, place and subject of the hearing to the owner and known responsible parties. The City Clerk shall also notify the Enforcement Officer. (d) ~ At the time of the appeal hearing, the City Manager shah hear from the Enforcement Officer, and any other parties who wish t° be heard.. At~er the heating, the City Manager may confirm or modify the order of the Enforcement Officer. if the City Manager's determination requires abatement, the City Manager shall, his/her decision, fix a time within which the nuisance must be abated and shall provide that if remedial action is not completed within the time specified, the City may abate the nuisance. The City Clerk shall mail a copy of the City Manager's decision to the owner and any other party that was provided notice of the appeal hearing. (e) Abatement. If the remedial action is not completed nor an appeal filed within the time specified by the Enforcement Officer, or if the remedial action .is not completed within the time specified by the City Manager after an appeal hearing, the City may abate the nuisance. 7 -4290- Section 1000:30. Recovery. of Cost. Subd. 1. Personal Liability.. The owner of premises on which a nuisance has been abated by the City shall be personally liable for the cost to the City of abatement, including administrative costs and attorneys fees. As soon as the work has been completed and the cost determined by the City Clerk or other official designated by the City Manager shall prepare a bill for the cost and mail it to the owner. Thereupon the mount shall be immediately due and payable at the office of the City Clerk. Subd. ~. Any unpaid charges by the City for the cost of elimination of the public nuisance may be collected as a special assessment pursuant to Section 370 of the City Code. Section 1000.35 No Election of Remedies. The notice and abatement of above provided in Section 1000.25 above shall not be deemed the exclusive method for the enforcement of Section 1000. Without notice, a proceeding may be instituted in a proper tribunal for the prosecution of a misdemeanor, and the judge in such a criminal case may impose the fine or penalty authorized by law in such case made and provided, including that contained in Section 347.04 of Minnesota Statutes for the disposition of dogs constituting a public nuisance. The civil remedies at law and equity shall be deemed available at all times, without notice. The Health Officer may, concurrently with any such procedures, condemn such structures as unfit for habitation pursuant to Section 1005. Section 1000.40 Derelict Vehicle Public Nuisance. Subdivision 1. Derelict Vehicles are declared to be a public nuisance and are subject to the abatement provisions of this Chapter. Subdivision 2. As used in this Section 1000.40 the terms defined in this section have the meanings given to them in this Section: a. "Vehicle" means a motor vehicle as defined in Section 169.01 of Minnesota Statutes, motor cycle as defined in Section 169.01 of Minnesota Statutes, motorized bicycle as defined in Section 169.01 of Minnesota Statutes, electric assisted bicycle as defined by Section 169.10 of Minnesota Statues, truck-tractor as defined in Section 169.01 of Mirmesota Statutes, farm tractor as defined in Section 169.01 of Minnesota Statutes, road tractor as defined in Section 169.01 of Minnesota Statutes, trailer as defined in Section 169.01 of Mirmesota Statutes, semi-trailer as defined in Section 169.01 of Mirmesota Statutes, self-propelled recreational vehicle as defined in Chapter 168 of Minnesota Statutes, water craft as defined by Chapter 86B of Minnesota Statutes, any contrivance used or designed for navigation on water, off-road recreational vehicle as deft_ned by Chapter 169A of Minnesota Statutes, snowmobile as defined by Chapter 84 of Minnesota Statutes, and/or all-terrain vehicle as defined by Chapter 84 of Minnesota Statutes. 8 -4291 - b. "Derelict Vehicle" means a vehicle, as defined in this subdivision: 1. that has remained for a period of more than 48 hours on public property illegally, or 2. that lacks vital component parts, or 3. that has remained on private property with out the consent of the persons in control of such property, or 4. that is in an inoperable state such that it has no substantial further use consistent with its usual functions, or 5. that is not currently licensed to the owner or occupant of the property upon which it is being stored, or 6. in the case of motorized vehicles, that is not capable of movement under its own ..................... power. Subdivision 3. No person shall park, store, or leave, or pen'nit the parking, storing or leaving of any derelict vehicle upon any property, including private property, within the city for a period in excess of 48 hours, unless: (1) such vehicle is completely enclosed within a building, (2) such vehicle is under the control of the City or its agent, (3) such vehicle is stored, or parked on private property in connection with a business or commercial enterprise, operated and conducted in a lawful manner and when such parking or storing of such vehicle is necessary to the operation of the business or the commercial enterprise, or (4) such vehicle is stored or parked on private property of the owner thereof, or a member of the owner's family, for the purpose of making repairs thereto, provided that at all times such vehicle is so stored that at least one-half of the total number of wheels of such vehicle are in contact with the ground, and only one such vehicle may be so stored or parked at any one time. In the event of a vehicle stored as provided in this Section, such vehicle may be stored for a period not to exceed 14 days, after which time, such vehicle is deemed to be a derelict vehicle. Any person who stores or maintains a derelict vehicle on any public or private property, is guilty of a misdemeanor. T:~qETBACK\6678kNUISANCE.ORD -4292- CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION # 02- A RESOLUTION TO DENY THE REQUEST FROM TIM BECKER AND DALE AND LORELL BECKER TO REZONE LOTS 5-8, BLOCK 4, REPLAT OF HARRISON SHORES, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA FROM R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO R-lA SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL P & Z CASE # 02-26 PID # 13-117-24-22-0046 PID # 13-117-24-21-0050 PID # 13-117-24-21-0051 PID # 13-117-24-22-0052 WHEREAS, the applicant, Tim Becket and Dale and Lorell Becker, has requested that Lots 5-8, Block 4, Replat of Harrison Shores, Hennepin County, Minnesota be rezoned from R-1 Single-Family Residential to R-lA Single Family Residential; and WHEREAS, the property is currently zoned R-1 Single Fanfily Residential District and subject to the provisions of City Code Chapter 350:620 Subd. 2; and WHEREAS, the Plamfing Commission reviewed the request at a public hearing held on August 5, 2002 and unanimously recommended that the City Council deny the rezoning application; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the request at a public hearing held on August 27, 2002 and unanimously recommended denial of the rezoning application and requested that City staff a prepare a resolution denying the application for rezoning for review and consideration at the September 9, 2002 meeting and also directed City staff to execute a 60-day extension on the rezoning request pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 15.99. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City does hereby deny the rezoning request based on the following findings of fact: The subject property is surrounded on the east side, west side and south side by R-1 Single-Family Residential. -4293- The minimum lot size requirement of the R-IA Single-Family Residential District is inconsistent with the neighborhood. There was no mistake in the original zoning of the property. Additionally, no evidence was provided by the applicant that indicated that a mistake was made in the original zoning. There is no change in the community or neighborhood that necessitate the need for rezoning of the property. The purpose of the R-IA District is for areas tlmt have been historically platted with small lots. At the time the subject property was platted, the lots were much larger than the minimums of the R-iA District and more closely resembled the minimums of the R-1 District. Three (3) of the four (4) lots exceeded the R-1 District's 10,000 square foot mimmum as platted, the fourth is within (52) square feet of the minimum. The infonnation comained in the rezoning application dated July 5, 2002 expressed that the reason for the application was because of the erosion that had occurred on the subject property thereby reducing the lot area. Rezoning the property to R-lA would provide benefits to the property beyond the detriments suffered by erosion and would allow greater flexibility with setbacks mad would also create the risk of additional infill development due to the substantially reduced lot size requirements. This additional development creates the potential for negative impacts to wetland mad floodplain areas on the property. Keeping current R-1 District zoning provides a greater opportunity to reduce the environmental impacts that result from development of the property. 2. This rezoning application is denied for the following legally described property as stated in the Hennepin County Property Information System: Lots 5-8, Block 4, Replat of Harrison Shores, Hennepin County, Minnesota The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember seconded by Councilmember and The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Adopted September 9, 2002 Pat Meisel, Mayor Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk -4294- 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-3190 PLANNING REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director DATE: September 4, 2002 SUBJECT: Request for waiver of platting approval APPLICANT: Steve Codden PLANNING CASE NUMBER: 02-27 LOCATION: Lots 23, 24, 25, 39, and 40, Block 3, Lake Side Park, A.L. Crocker's 1st Division, Mound, Minnesota ZONING: R-2 Residential COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential SUMMARY The City Council will review a request from Steve Codden, applicant and property owner of Lots 23, 24, 25, 39, and 40, Block 3, Lake Side Park, A.L. Crocker's lst Division for "waiver of platting" approval pursuant to City Code Chapter 330:12 to reconfigure the subject property and create the following three (3) parcels: Parcel A Parcel B Parcel C Lot 23 and Lot 40 Lot 38 and Lot 39 Lot 24 and Lot 25 BACKGROUND INFORMATION Property Details. 1. An updated survey of the subject property was prepared by DeMars-Gabriel Land Surveyors, Inc. on August 6, 2002. The subject property is approximately 24,181 SF (.51 acres) and was a former tax-forfeit parcel that was sold via public auction by Hennepin County and purchased by the applicant. 3. There are presently no structures on the property. -4295- While the current application does not involve any construction activities, the applicant has demonstrated a proposed building pad on the subject lot(s) which meets the requirements of the R-2 District. 5. Excel Energy maintains a fifty (50) foot permanent easement that runs through portions of the subject property (Document No. 434209.) There is a small wetland located on portions of Lots 23, 39, and 40. The applicant has prepared a wetland delineation report that has been included as an attachment. It is City staff's understanding that the wetland is not affected by the current proposal. In the event that alterations are proposed in the future, the applicant and/or any future owner/representative will be responsible for all appropriate permitting pursuant to the 1991 Wetland Conservation Act (WCA.) Property Tax Status. According to Hennepin County property tax records, the subject property is considered to be one parcel. A Copy of the current property information from Hennepin County has been included as an attachment. SUBDIVISION REVIEW PROCEDURE City Code Chapter 330:12 states that any parcel of land, either platted or unplatted that has been combined for tax purposes or other reasons, cannot be re-separated or divided without an approved subdivision or a waiver of the platting requirements of the subdivision ordinance. A waiver of the platting requirement may be granted by the City Council after receipt of the background information provided by City staff. The waiver of platting and release of the tax combination may be approved if it is determined to be in compliance with all City codes. The City may impose conditions to the waiver. Applications for waiver of platting do not require review by the Planning Commission. However, if it so desires, the City Council may remand the application to the Planning Commission if it determines that their advice will be helpful in determining if the request meets the City's planning and zoning objectives. ISSUES ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan. The Future Land Use Map included in the Mound Comprehensive Plan guides the property for future low-density residential use (1-6 units / acre.) -4296- Zoning. The subject property is zoned R-2 Single and Two Family Residential. Single-family homes are a permitted use in the R-2 District. The following table includes the lot area, width and setback requirements for the R-2 District: Lot Area Width Depth Front Setback Side Setback(s) Rear Setback R-2 6,000 SF 40 FT 80 FT 20 FT 10 FT 15 FT (Note: Corner lots have double front setbacks of 20 ft.) Parcel A 8065 SF 40.23 FT 195 FT 20 FT 16 FT / 10 FT 120 FT ParcelB 8036 SF 80.5 FT 100 FT 20FT 10 FT/46FT 35 FT Parcel C 8079 SF 80FT 95FT 20FT 10FT/46FT 31FT Non-Lot of Record Status. In the event the waiver of platting request is approved, the subject property will lose its "lot of record" status and therefore will be subject to the standard provisions of the R-2 zoning district including minimum side yard setbacks ten (10) feet. Adjacent Land Uses - Draft Land Use Plan. The subject property is surrounded on all sides by low-density residential use. ltardcover. Impervious surface coverage on residential lots shall not exceed (30) percent of the lot area. Proposed Parcel A, Parcel B, and~arcel C will not exceed (30) percent hardcover. Please refer to the survey dated August 6, 2002 which was submitted by the applicant which includes the proposed hardcover information. CITY DEPARTMENT REVIEW Copies of the request and all supporting materials were forwarded to all City departments for review and comment. All written comments received to date have been summarized below: Fire ChiefPederson No comment. Acting Police Chief McKinley No comment. Public Works Director Skinner City records show sewer service for Lots 38 and 39. No water services found. Refer to any and/or all comments from City Engineer. Building Official Simoneau A building permit(s) will be required including submittal of all required information. City Engineer Cameron See memorandum provided as separate attachment. 3 -4297- City Engineer Bopray A delineation report for the small wetland on the site was prepared by Schoell & Madson on or about June 13, 2002. A site visit was conducted in June 2002 by City staff following submittal of' the report. There are no wetland issues associated with the current waiver of platting application. The applicant may request a "No Net Loss" decision by the City if the wetland will not be impacted. In the event any alteration of the wetland is undertaken as part of a future construction project, the project will need to ~ follow the rules and procedures of the 1991 Wetland Conservation Act. Parks Director Fackler No comment. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS Approval of the proposed waiver of platting does not constitute or guarantee future approval of any building permit(s) or any other necessary approval by any other public agency. In the event the waiver request is approved, the property will no longer qualify for "lot of record" status. RECOMMENDATION City staff' recommends that the City Council approve the application from Steve Codden for a waiver of platting for Lots 23, 24, 35, 38, 39 and 40, Block 3, Lake Side Park A.L. Crocker's Division, Mound, Minnesota subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the land use request. No future approval of any development plans, land use applications, and/or building permits is included as part of this land use action in the event the waiver of platting request is approved. 3. Applicant shall be required to submit all required information upon submittal of the building permit applications, when appropriate. 4. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and/or permits including the submittal of all appropriate information. 4 -4298- 5. All conditions from City Engineer Cameron and City Engineer Bopray. 6. (3) park dedication fees are paid. 5 -4299- CITY OF MOUND RESOLUTION # 02- RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REQUEST FROM STEVE CODDEN FOR WAIVER OF PLATTING APPROVAL TO COMBINE LOTS 23, 24, 25, 38, 39 AND 40, BLOCK 3, LAKE S/DE PARK A.L. CROCKERS 1sa" DIVISION, MOUND, MINNESOTA AND CREATE THREE (3) LOTS PID #13-117-24-32-0062 PLANNING CASE # 02-27 WHEREAS, the applicant, Steve Codden, has submitted a request for waiver of platting approval pursuant to City Code Chapter 330:12 to combine Lots 23, 24, 25, 38, 39 and 40, Block 3, Lake Side Park A.L. Crocker's 1~t Division and create three (3) new lots; WHEREAS, the property is zoned R-2 and single-family residential is a permitted use; and WHEREAS, Lots 23, 24, 25, 38, 39 and 40, Block 3, Lake Side Park A.L. Crocker's 1~t Division are platted lots and were combined previously for tax-purposes; and WHEREAS, proposed Parcel A, Parcel B and Parcel C meet the lot size, width, and depth requirements of the K-2 District; and WHEREAS, City Code Chapter 330:12 states that a waiver of the platting request may be granted by the City Council if it is determined that the proposal is in compliance with all City codes. -4300- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota as follows: A. The City does hereby approve the waiver of platting request with the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the land use request. No future approval of any development plans, land use applications and/or building permits is included as part of this action in the event the waiver of platting request is approved. Applicant shall be required to submit all required information upon submittal of the building permit applications, when appropriate. 4. Applicant shall be responsible for procurement of any and/or permits. In the event any alteration of the existing wetland is undertaken as part of a future construction project, the project will need to the follow the rules and procedures of the 1991 Wetland Conservation Act. Applicant shall provide drainage and utility easements along all new lot lines, five feet wide on side and rear lot lines and ten feet in width along the front lot lines. 7. Final grading and drainage plan to be approved by the City Engineer at time of building permit application. The installation of a new water service for Parcel B and relocation of existing water service for Parcel A, must either be completed or some type of financial guarantee provided, such as cash escrow, letter of credit, or performance bond. 9. Two (2) deficient street unit charges in the amount of $1,170.90 each, for a total of $2,341.80 shall be paid. 10. Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Area Trunk Charges of $1,500 each shall be paid when building permit applications are made for each of the three (3) new parcels. -4301 - 11. Written approval from Excel Energy for the proposed driveway located to be located in their easement must be provided. 12. Three (3) park dedication fees are paid. B. This waiver of platting request is hereby approved for the following described property: Refer to Exhibit A The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative: The following Councilmembers voted in the negative: Adopted September 9, 2002 Pat Meisel, Mayor Attest: Bonnie Ritter, City Clerk -4302- City of Mound WAIVER OF PL T TII G APPLICATION City Coundl Date: ~ · Application Fee: PAID R'ECE! VED JUL 1 7 2002 JUL 7 Z00Z · ' ' : City Planner DNR Deficient Unit Charges? Delinquen~ Required? I~ariance r~ease R type or pti t clearly PROPERTY Subject Address /'~E$S (.,)/¢~/Z~/~¢/_/'4' ~) INFQ EXISTING Lot(s)2 ~) ~ ~ ) 2 ¢~ ~ ~) ~ ?/ ~¢ Block ~ Subdivision ~¢~ ~~¢ ~=~ LEGAL DESCRIPTION PID~ ~ ~ ~//7 -- ~ ? -- ~ 2 -- ~ Plat ~ PROPOSED A. Lot(s) ~ ~ Block ~ LEGAL DESCRIPTION B. Lot(s) ~ ~ ~ ? ~&oc~ ~,Z~S~ ~?~ ~ Block ..... ~ ZONINGDisTRiCT Circle: R-1 R-lA ~ R-3 B-1 B-2 B-3 PROPERTY Are there existing structures on the prope~? yes / ~ Do the exi~ing structures comply with the zoning ordinance for setbacks, hardcover, etc.? yes / no APPLICANT The applicant is: ~owner other: OWNER Name ~ ~ ¢ O ~ ~ (If other than applicant) Address ~O, ~ ~ / ~ ~ ~~ O ./ ~ ~~ ENGINEER Address ~OZ~ ~ ~0~ ~ ~ ~Y~~ ~ ~7~ Phone (") ~ (W)~Z~--7--O~O e (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. Application must be signed by all owners of the subject property, Or explanation given why this is not the case. I certify that all of the statements above and statements contained in any required papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate· I acknowledge that I have read all of the information provided and that I am responsible for all costs incurred by the City related to the processing of this application consent to the entry in or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized official of the City of Mound f_or._tthe/purpose of i~sting' maintaining and removing such notices as may be ' law· Applicant Signature ,, Date Owner's Signature--~~t~~- ""~,_4~30~30 Date I~e¥'1 s ecl. 06/28/02 " This Page. Is Left Intentionally Blank · -4304- "'% X °' .-.%~ ~4~ 5 x '// ~ecv ./ I -I~ o I MEMORANDUM DATE: September 5, 2002 TO: Sarah Smith, Community Development Director FROM: John Cameron, City Engineer SUBJECT: City of Mound Coddon Waiver of Platting Spruce Road and Tonkawood Drive Case #02-27 MFRA #13827 As requested, we have reviewed the Coddon Waiver of Platting request and have the following comments and recommendations: Comments General This parcel is comprised of six (6), 40-foot wide by 100-foot deep platted lots, running between Spruce Road and Tonkawood Drive. A 50-foot wide Xcel Energy easement for the transmission line bisects the parcel. The parcel also contains a wetland that has been delineated and appears on the survey. The original plat of"Lake Side Park A.L. Crocker's 1st Division, Mound, Minnetonka" did not include any drainage and utility easements along lot lines. Therefore, these easements as shown on the survey will need to be provided along all new parcel lines. Grading and Drainage The survey submitted with the application shows only tentative house locations and proposed building elevations. A more complete grading and drainage plan will need to be submitted when applications are made for building permits. The delineated wetland shown on the survey will need to be protected from any grading activity. -4306- Sarah Smith, Community Development Director September 5, 2002 Page 3 Utilities The City's record plans indicate that sewer services are available for all three new parcels. The water services are a little more complicated. The City records show two water services with curb boxes located in the boulevard in front of Lot 24. The westerly one can be used for Parcel C and the easterly curb box will need to be relocated to serve Parcel A. A new water service will need to be installed for Parcel B; however the City watermain is located well behind the curb, which will avoid excavating the street to make the new connection. Miscellaneous The combination of these six (6) lots were assessed only one (1) unit charge when the streets in this area were reconstructed in 1978. It has been City policy to collect deferred unit charges when properties are re-divided and additional building units are created; therefore this property should be charged for two (2) additional units at $1,170.90 per unit, for a total of $2,341.80. Recent revisions to the City Code requires that sanitary sewer and watermain area trunk charges in addition to the connections must be paid on new building sites. The present area trunk charges are $1,500 each for sewer and water and a connection fee of $240 each for sewer and water per new parcel created by the waiver of platting. The survey shows the proposed driveway for Parcel C located within the Xcel Energy easement. We have checked with Xcel and they do allow "temporary" installations, such as driveways, to be located within their easements. No permanent structures, such as homes, are allowed. Recommendations 1. Provide drainage and utility easements along all new lot lines, five feet wide on side and rear lot lines and ten feet in width along the front lot lines. 2. Final grading and drainage plan to be approved by the City Engineer at time of building permit application. 3. The installation of a new water service for Parcel B and relocation of existing water service for Parcel A, must either be completed or some type of financial guarantee provided, such as cash escrow, letter of credit, or performance bond. 4. Two (2) deficient street unit charges in the amount of $1,170.90 each, for a total of $2,341.80 shall be paid. 5. Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Area Trunk Charges of $1,500 each shall be paid when building permit applications are made for each of the three (3) new parcels. 6. Written approval from Xcel Energy for the driveway located in their easement must be provided. s:hnain:\Mou 13827:\CorrespondenceLqmifl~9-4 -4307- H A RTER E D 470 Pliisbury Center 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 telephone (612) 337-9310 fax http://www, kennedy-graven.com JOHN B. DEAN Attomey at. Law Direct Dial (612) 33%9207 Email: j dean@kenn edy-graven.eom July 25, 2002 Sarah Srnith Community Development Director City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Coddon Waiver of Platting Dear Sarah: In your fax to me yesterday you provided me with information on the application-and asked me two questions: 1. Does this qualify as a waiver under City Code § 330.127 Based upon the information provided, it appears that the property was originally platted as six separate lots. Sometime later, the six lots were combined by assigning a single tax parcel number to them. Under the Code, the re-separation or d/vision of those lots may qualify for waiver of platting treatment. To qualify, the resulting lots must comply with "all planning and zoning standards and objectives"; and any assessments that were deferred or forgiven as a result of the original combination must be resolved. I am assuming that the resulting three parcels do meet current zon/ng requirements, and that all of the other preconditions contained in the code can be met. The only remaining issue to the waiver of plat is created by the fact that the division creates three lots rather than the original six lots. In other words, does the waiver only apply to situations where the re-separation or division simply reverts to the original parcels? The ordinance does not furnish a clear answer. The only indication of an answer may come from the statement in the second paragraph of the section that "[t]he City has many old subdivisions with small platted lots which standing alone do not meet current zoning regulations...[m] any of these lots have been combined ...." It would seem that it would not be possible for those lots to be re-separated back into the original lots which would almost certainly not be conforming. Consequently, it would seem reasonable that it was intended that a re-separation of the lots into exactly the original form may not have been a requirement for the waiver, especially when the initial lots are not themselves being divided. -4308- Sarah Smith July 25, 2002 Page 2 of 2 Finally, it should be pointed out that even though the waiver of platting route may be available, nothing prevents the City Council, in its discretion, from determining that it would be more appropriate for the land to be platted at this time. 2. If the waiver of platting applies, are the re-separated parcels entitled to the "lot of record" status. Generally, sideyard se'ft)acks will turn on whether the re-separated lots are entitled to '!tot of record" treatment. Because the parcel configuration (three parcels each containing two of the originally platted lots) will be new when the resolution waiving the plat is recorded, those new parcels will be subject to the current setback requirements of the code, and will not be entitled to "Lot of record" treatment. This conclusion also makes sense fi:om a pure land use policy standpoint. The reduced setbacks for the smaller original lots were probably necessary to allow the construction of reasonable size structures. The combination of those lots into a larger parcel would mitigate the need to allow reduced setbacks to accommodate a reasonable sized structure. In the event that a reduction of the setback is still necessary in this case, the applicant has recourse to seek a variance. I hope that these comments will assist you in formulating your response. If I can provide you with any further information or comments, please advise. Respe. c~tfully ygurs, ~Iol~ B. Dean JBD:js JBD-218043vl MU220-5 -4309- Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineering · Surveying · Planning Soil Testing · Environmental Services www. schoellmadson, corn June 13,2002 Mr. Steve Coddon PO Box 175 Mound, MN 55 Dear Mr. Coddon: Thank you for the opportunity to conduct a wetland delineation on the property in Mound, Minnesota. We have completed our delineation of the wetland basin on Lots 23, 24, 25, 38, 39 and 40 of Block 3, Lakeside Park A.L. Crocker's Ist Division, Mound, Minnesota. During our field investigation of the site, we identified one wetland basin as a PEMA, type 1 wetland based on soils, vegetation and hydrology. The wetland is not a DNR Protected Water. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife National Wetland Inventory map and the City of Mound's wetland identify the wetland on the subject site as a PEMC, type 3 wetland. The wetland on the subject site may qualify for the "de minimis" exemption, based on the classification, size and location of the wetland. This exemption applies to wetlands that are less than 2,000 square feet; are classified as a type 1, 2, or 6 wetland; and are located outside of the shoreland. A replacement plan for the draining or filling of a wetland under the "de minimis" exemption is not required. We trust that the attached analysis we have provided will be useful in your planning efforts and look forward to working with you on future aspects of this project. Please contact us if you have any questions. Sincerely, Director of Natural Resources Kris Wingen Environmental Specialist attachments Affirmative Action-Equal Opportunity Employer 10580 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite I · ~":~l"~.':s, MN 55305-1525 Office (952) 546-7601 · F~,~-'-~, ~46-9065 Wetland Delineation, Classification and Identification for Lots 23,24,25,38,39 and 40, Block 3 Lake Side Park A. L. Crocker's 1 st Division Mound, Minnesota ~CHOIELL & M~O~D~ON~ iNC. ENGINEERS · SURVEYORS · PLANNERS SOIL TESTING · ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES MN [1~1~] 546-7501 · FAX [612] ,~4311 - Project 63514-002 Wetland Delineation June 2002 Wetland Classification, Identification and Delineation for Lots 23, 24,25,38,39 and 40, Block 3 Lake Side Park A. L. Crocker's 1st Division Mound, Minnesota Summary Based upon the boundaries indicated on the site map provided to Schoell and Madson, Inc., we have identified one wetland basin. The wetland was field identified on June 12, 2002. Total recorded rainfall at the Minneapolis International Airport for the week preceding the delineation was 2.75 inches. Total recorded rainfall for the month of May was 2.83 inches; 0.41 inches below normal. Review of U.S. Fish and Wildlife National Wetland Inventory maps indicate a PEMC wetland exists on this property. There are no DNR Protected Waters on the property. Project Location and Site Description The subject site, Lots 23, 24, 25, 38, 39 and 40, Block 3, Lake Side Park A. L. Crocker's 1st Division, Mound, Minnesota, is located in a residential area in Mound, east of Commerce Boulevard, between Spruce Road and Tonkawood Drive. The property is approximately 24,000 square feet in size, with one wetland basin located close to the eastern property boundary. The lot is wooded, with a power line clearing creating an open swath down the center. The defined wetland basin is located within this clearing. Characteristics of Wetland Basin The wetland on the property was delineated according to the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manuel. The wetland basin is 620.5 square feet in size. Basin Wetland 1 consists of a Type 1 (seasonally flooded) basin as defined in Wetlands of the United States (USFWS Circular 39; Shaw and Fredine 1971). Basin 1 is classified as a PEMA (Palustrine Emergent Temporarily Flooded) wetland based on the Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (FWS Publication 79/31; Cowardin et al). -1- Schoell & Madson, Inc. -4312- Pr~ect63514-002 Wetland Delineation June 2002 A transect was placed at wetland boundary flag 5 to observe hydrology characteristics, soil types and vegetation within the wetland, wetland boundary and upland areas. Vegetation Observed vegetation along the wetland boundary consisted of garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), a facultative plant; reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), a facultative wetland (+) plant; stinging nettle (Urtica dioica) a facultative (+) plant; and ground ivy (Glechoma hederacea), a facultative upland plant. Vegetation inside the wetland boundary consisted of primarily reed canary grass and je. welweed (Impatiens pa#ida), a facultative wetland plant. Observed upland vegetation consisted of ground ivy; Canada thistle (Circium arvense) a facultative upland plant; garlic mustard; and reed canary grass. Soils The 1974 USDA Soil Survey of Hennepin County classifies the area of the subject site as fill land. Boundary, wetland and uplands soils were all field identified as a very dark brown (10YR 2/2) loam to a minimum depth of 12 inches below the surface. Hydrology No water was encountered within the wetland, boundary or upland soil pits. The drainage pattern of the basin was used as the primary indicator of its hydrology. The FAC-Neutral test was used as a secondary indicator. -2- Schoell & Madson, Inc. -4313- Project 63514-002 Wetland Delineation June 2002 Wetland Conservation Act The site lies within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District boundaries. According to the Wetland Conservation Act of 1996, wetlands on this site come under the jurisdiction of the Board of Water and Soil Resources. The responsibility for administering the provisions of this legislation is up to the local unit of government (LGU). In this case, the City of Mound will oversee as the LGU. The project must be certified by the LGU as having complied with the provisions of the Act. -3- Schoell & Madson, Inc. -4314- CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1667 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www. cityofmound.com August l9,2002 Steve Codden P.O. Box 175 Mound, MN 55364 Waiver of Platting Application - Lots 23, 24, 25, 38, 39, 40, Block 3 PID # 13-117-24-32-0062 This letter is in regard to the waiver of platting application you submitted on August 6, 2002 to subdivide and combine Lots 23, 24, 25, 38, 39 and 40, Block 3, Lakeside Park A.L. Crocker's 1st Addition intO three (3) parcels. Based upon review of the application materials that were submitted, you are advised that the application has been deemed to be complete and will be forwarded to the City Council for review at its September 9, 2002 meeting. If you have any questions regarding any of this information, please contact me at 952-472-3190. Community Development Director ~) printed on recycled paper -4315- Hennepin County Map gerver l Iennepin County,- MN Click on map to view information on adjoining properties Scroll down to see property address, value & tax info Page 1 of 1 Last update: 08/07/'2002 at 1:00:00 PM Approximate Approximate Property ID Property Perimeter Property Area 13-117-24-32'0062 629 ft. 23,522 sq.ft. = 0.54 acres property Address Market Value Total Tax (2002) ADDRESS UNASSIGNED $ $ . 00 MOUND, MN 0 Click on Property Information Button below to view main tax information page for the property you have selected guarantee the Thi~ m[ormaflo is to be usad for reference purposss only. Hennepin Gounty does not accuracy o! the material hsrein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of th}s information or its derivatives. If map discrepancies are found, please contact Bob Mouldar with tho Bennepin County Surveyors Office at (6~2) 348-25~ g or email him directly at Bob. Moulder~co.hennapin mn.us The quality of the display may be influenced by your screen size and resolution setting, and is best viewed at 800x600 screen resolution. This application requires Interact Explorer 3.02 or Netscape 2.01 or later Version for proper operation Copyright © 2000 Hennepin County htto://www19.co.hennepin,mn.us/scripts/esr_43.1 6_,name=Hennepin&cmd=Find&VALU... 9/3/2002 Hennepin County Map Server Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County, MN Click on map to view information on adjoining properties Scroll down to see property address, value & tax info Property ID 13-117-24-32-0062 Property Address ADDRESS UNASSIGNED MOUND, MN 0 Last update: 08/07/2002 at I:00:00 PM Approximate Property Perimeter 629 ft. Market Value Approximate Property Area 23,522 sq.ft. = 0.54 acres Total Tax (2002) $ $ .oo Click on Property Information Button below to view main tax information page for the property you have selected This information is to be used for reference purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of the material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives. If map discrepancies are found, please contact Bob Moulder with the Hennepin County Surveyors Office at (612) 348-2618 or email him directly at Bob,Moulderi~.co.hennepin.mn.us The quality of the display may be influenced by your screen size and resolution setting, and is best viewed at 800x600 screen resolution. This application requires Internet Explorer 3.02 or Netscape 2.01 or later version for proper operation Copyright © 2000 Hennepin County -4317- Property Information Search by' Pr~'~erty ID Result page Page 1 of 2 Search By: Property ID: Property ID: Address: Municipality: School Dist: Watershed: Sewer Dist: Owner Name: Taxpayer Name & Address: Hennepin County, MN Property Information Search Result The Hennepin County Property Tax web database is updated daily (Monday - Friday) at approximately 9:15 p.m. (CST) Parcel Data for Taxes Payable 2002 ............. ' *':: '""" ....... ' .... :"~: '"'""~'~?':'~'~'i; ......... '.:' ~i 13-117-24-32-0062 85 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED MOUND 277 Construction year: 3 Parcel Size: 120 X 1~c HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND STEVE D CODDON P O BOX 175 MOUND MN 55364 Most Current Sales Information Sales prices are reported as listed on the Certificate of Real Estate Value and warranted to represent arms-length transactions. Sale Date: May, 2002 Sale Price: $70,000 Transaction Type: Vacant Land ~ Addition Name: Lot: Block: Metes & Bounds: Tax Parcel Description LAKE SIDE PARK A L CROCKERS 1ST DIV OO3 LOTS 23 24 AND 25 ALSO LOTS 38 39 AND 40 EX STREET Value and Tax Summary for Taxes Payable 2002 Values Established by Assessor as of January 2, 2001 Estimated Market Value: Limited Market Value: Taxable Market Value: · Total Improvement Amount: Total Net Tax: Total Special Assessments: Solid Waste Fee: Total Tax: -4318- Property Information Search by Property ID Result page. Page 2 of 2 Property Information Detail for Taxes Payable 2002 Values Established by Assessor as of January 2, 2001 Values: Land Market Building Market Machinery Market Total Market: Land Limited Building Limited Total Limited: Qualifying Improvements Classifications: Property Type Homestead Status Relative Homestead Agricultural Exempt Status VACANT LAN D RESIDENTIAL NON- HOMESTEAD EXEMPT 3732 Hennepin County is providing this information as a public service. Have a tax related question? Send e-mail to taxinfo@co.hennepin.mn.us Experience a problem searching database, have a technical question or wish to cot Hennepin County Tax web site? Send e-mail to Don. Kopel@co.hennepin.mn.us Have a comment on any of Hennepin County's web sites or E-Commerce applicati¢ Send e-mail to Henn. Net@co.hennepin.mn.us :,,~.,..~r~.,..= :ii. ~ ~;:~:~'~,i..'.;.*,'.':~. :~[~ ! h;~..'.,;,~,'er ::..,~'~,:;-,.';,.t:~;. ~i-~': -:: .,...-..¢..,- ........ ,., Copyright © 1998 - 2001 Hennepin County http://www2.co.hennepin.mn.us/pins/pidresult -4319- 9/3/2002 Mound City Code 330.05, Subd. 17 Subd. 17. Subdivider - Any person, commencing proceedings under this ordinance to effect a subdivision of land for himself/herself or for others, Subd. 18. Subdivision - The separation of an area, parcel or tract of land into two or more parcels, tracts, lots or long-term leasehold interests where the creation of the leasehold interests necessitate the creation of streets, roads or alleys for the residential, commercial, industrial or other use or any combination thereof, except those separations when a new street is involved, any division of a parcel of land. The term includes re- subdivision and, when appropriate to the context, shall relate to the process of subdividing or to the land subdivided or adjustment of boundary lines. 330.10 Procedural Requirements. Before dividing any tract of land into two or more lots or parcels, or adjusting any boundaries not covered by M.S.A. 462.352-, Subd. 12, or the procedures set forth in Subsection 330.15 et seq. shall be followed. 330.12 Waiver of Platting. Any parcel of land, either platted or un-platted, that has been combined for tax purposes or for other reasons, cannot be re-separated or divided without an approved subdivision or a waiver of the platting requirements of this code. The City has many old subdivisions with 'small platted lots which standing alone do not meet current zoning requirements. Many of these lots have been combined for tax purposes and for various other reasons, i.e., to create a building site, to indicate a desire to combine to avoid or reduce special assessments for improvements, etc. A waiver of the platting requirement may be granted by the City Council after receipt of background information provided by City staff. A request for waiver of the platting requirements shall be signed by the property owner on forms prepared for and approved by the City Council, which shall include a provision to reimburse the City for all of its costs. This request or application for a waiver shall be referred to City Staff for review. The review ,by staff_shall.be conducted to determine if the division or rele, ee of the tax combination and the cre~:'ng '-~' new pro?e~vty Ident~Wmatmn parc~ls for tax and bmld~ng purposes is in compliance .with C,.'B, C~de~ ~nd ,all planni, ng and zoning standards and objectives. The staff shall prepare written findings and revco-mmenda~ons, for the Council's consideration. The waiver of platting and the release of the tax combination may be approved if it is determined to be in compliance with all City codes. The Council may impbse-cotidifions to the waiver and shall require the payment of any deferred or forgiven special assessments that have been avoided by a tax combination. · The waiver may be granted without public hearings or without referral to the Planning Commission. Nothing herein shall preclude the staff or Council from referring the matter to the Planning Commission if it is determined that their advise will be helpful in determining if the request meets the City's planning and zoning objectives. 4 7/16/00 -4320- Mound City Code. 330.15 If the application for a waiver of platting requests or requires any varianc6s from any' City Code requirement, the waiver application shall be processed in accordance with SUbsection 330.170 of ~the City Code and the request shall be referred to the Planning Commission and processed as any other v~ane, e request under this subdivision code. (ORD. 79-1996 - 8-27-96) 330.15 General Procedure. Whenever any subdivision of land is proposed, before any contract is made for the sale of any pan thereof and before any permit for the erection of a structure on such proposed subdivision shall be granted, the subdividing owner, or his authorized agent, shall apply for and secure approval from the City of Mound .of such proposed subdivision in acc. ordanee with the following procedure which includes two steps for a minor subdivision and three steps for a major subdivision. A. Minor Subdivision 1. Sketch plan 2. Final subdivision plat B. M~jor Subdivision 1. Sketch Plan 2. Preliminary plat 3. Final Subdivision plat 330.20 Classification of Subdivisions. Any division or land that is subject to these regulations shall be considered either a major subdivision or a minor subdivision. The classification shall be determined under the following criteria: Subd. 1. Minor Subdivisions. The followifig shall be considered minor subdivisions: · R~idential5 Any subdivision of land creating not more than three residential lots. Such lots must conform to all of'the following: : 1. Have frontage on an existing public' road. 2. Not require the construction of any new public facilities' Or public improvements. 3. 'Them will be no adverse effect on remaining or adjoining property. 5 7/16/00 -4321 - DRAFT LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT EWM/EXOTtCS. TASK FORCE MINUTES 8:30 a.m,, Friday, July 12, 2002 LMCD Office, 18338 Mtka Bivd., Deephaven, MN Present: Chip Welling, MN DNR; MN DNR; Dick Osgood, Lake Minnetonka Association (LMA); Greg Nybeck, LMCD Executive Director. Minutes, The Task Force accepted the mir~utes_from the 5110/02 EWMIExoticsTask Force meeting as submitted.- Update of2Q02 LMCD Eurasian Watermilfoil (EWM) Harvestinq Proqram Nybeck made the foJlowing comments on the 2002 EWM Harvesting Pregram: The harvesting'program has been interesting due to the higher take tevels in 2002, noting that the lake level on Lake Minnetonka had been around 930.00 NGVD since late JUne. A Mid-Season Report was being prepared by staff that WOUld summarize key Statistical information for the program. Key statistical information included harvester loads, truck loads, and acres harvested, noting that he believed that these statistiCs were Slightly down when compared to recent years. He estimated that seven to eight loads were being harvested daily by the four harvestere that were being operated. Daily truck loads appeared to be slightly down; however, this was anticipated due to the 25% increase the cubic yard capacity of the truck specifications in 2002 from 20to 25 cubic yards. The Lower Lake North OptiOn was implemented in 2002 and he re'vieWed what bays and areas of Lake Minnetonka had been harvested to date. He entertained comments or feedbabk from Task Force members. Osgood asked if the cooler spring contributed to a later growth of milfoil this year. Welling stated that the MN DNR does not have an organized monitOring :bff0~ to addreSs Whether milfOil was grower later this year compared to other years. ' Nybeck asked Welling to comment on his recent communications with Brian Jacobson from MiSs0u~i: Welling stated that there has been a 2-4 D herbicide m-registration Task Force since the late 1980's. One of the things being conducted by this Task Force is the repeating or conducting of new studies regarding· dissipation of the product for re-registration. Brian Jacobson, from the COnsul§ng 'fi'~ :waterbOm~ Environmental, is attempting to coordinate a study this year on Lake Minnetonka. He believed that the study in 2002 appears to be premature and they propose to use a liquid product that is labeied' f~::~e'bdi'Y on milfoil in waters in the Tennessee Valley Adrriinis[ratlori, add that itls nd[ 'iegal for USein the state of Minnesota. There are a number of issues that need to be addressed and he stated that he would keep the Task Force informed on this potential project. : Nybeck stated that he advised Mr. Jacobson that he needed to address and resolve any issues that the MN DNR would have with the potential project. If the study is proposed for Lake Minnetonka, Jacobson was informed that an overview of the project should be presented to the District Board of Directors. He concurred with Welling that the timing for the 2002 season did not appear to be practical. -4322- EWM/EXOTICS TASK FORCE, 7/12/02, PAGE 2 · Update of "Let's Keep Zebra Mussels Out of Lake Minnetonka" Project Nybeck stated that the 2002 pilot project to conduct watercraft inspections of boats before they enter Lake Minnetonka appears to be moving forward in the near future. Details between the MN DNR and the District are currently being finalized. Staffing of the project will include re-allocation of already hired MN DNR inspectors in the west-metro area and possibly newly hired MN DNR employees. Welling asked Osgood for an update on the LMA fundraising for this project. Osgood stated that a limited amount of funds, approximately $3,000, had been raised to date. A number of corporate sponsors had expressed interest in the project; however, none of them had donated funds to date. The LMA will be re-evaluating the fundraising.effort in thenear future, . Nybeck stated that District wanted to implement a'pilot project in 2002 to.get exposure'and to learn-from it. A State of Minnesota Income Contract has been finalized with the MN DNR for this project in 2002 and the District has committed a maximum of $8,000 of funds for inspections at Spring Park Bay, Maxwell Bay, and North Arm public accesses, He informed the Task Force that they would get an update on this project in the next few months through a final report. Osgood stated that samples for eight of the nine included in the zebra mussel veliger testing program were recently completed and he was awaiting the results from the lab. The samples for round two will be conducted in the near future. A.clencv Reports. Welling stated that the feedback from Nybeck that early season growth of milfoil on Lake Minnetonka was Iow compared to other years was consistent with feedback from around the State of Minnesota, with a few isolated exceptions. The fluridone applications have been applied and survey work is being conducted by the MN DNR on three lakes selected for the study. Milfoil was recently discovered in Lake Ossawinnamake near the Whitefish Chain of Lake near Brainerd. Area wide lake association reports. Osgood updated the Task Force on Minnesota Lakes Association (MLA) activities and he encouraged the District to become a member of the MLA, Old business. There was no old business. New business. There was no new business. Adjournment. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:45 a.m. Respectfully Submitted, Greg Nybeck Executive Director -4323- LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA 7:00 PM, Wednesday, August 28, 2002 Tonka Bay City Hall CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Chair Foster READING' O:FMINU~S, 7124/02 :EM-CD ~eguiar B°ard Meeting 8/14/02 LMCD Regular Board Meeting PUBLIC COMMENTS - Persons in attendance, subjects not on agenda (5 min.) PUBLIC HEARING · Hendrickson/Windenburg and Finney, variance application from LMCD Code for side setback and dock length requirements, plus an adjusted dock use area. 1. Public Hearing 2. Discussion and/or Consideration WATER STRUCTURES A) Fredrick & Michelle Pacovsky, vadance application from LMCD Code for side setback and dock length requirements, plus an adjusted dock use area (Public Hearing conducted at 6/26/02 Regular Board Meeting); B) Additional Business; LAKE USE & RECREATION A) Ordinance Amendment, Discussion of an ordinance prohibiting the use of motorized watercraft on certain parts of Lake Minnetonka; amending Section 3.022; B) Additional Business; 3. FINANCIAL A) July financial summary and balance sheet; B) Additional Business; 4. EWM/EXOTICS TASK FORCE 5. ADMINISTRATION 6. SAVE THE LAKE -4324- 7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT 8. OLD BUSINESS 9. NEW BUSINESS 10.ADJOURNMENT -4325- DRAFT LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS 7:00 PM, Wednesday, July 24, 2002 Tonka Bay City Hall CALL TO ORDER Foster called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Memberspresent:. Ber;t. Foster,:.Deep.haven; Craig:Ne son/SpringPark; Lii MoM lan~.Oron'o; Tom Skramstad-, . Shorewood; Bob Amb[ose, Wayzata; Doug Babcock, Tonka Bay; Paul Knudsen, Minnetdsta; Herb Suerth, Woodland; Katy Van Hercke, Minnetonka. Also present: Members absent: Orv Burma, Mound; Tom Gilman, Excelsior; Tom Seuntjens, Minnetonka Beach; Sheldon Wed, Greenwood. Victoria has no appointed Board member. CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Chair Foster There were no Chair Announcements. READING OF MINUTES. 6/26/02 LMCD Regular Board Meeting Foster stated that Nybeck had informed him that the minutes had not been finalized and that they would be finalized for review by the Board at the 8/14/02 Regular Board Meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS. Persons in attendance, subjects not on the agenda. Mr. Greg Smith, 3804 Farmhill Drive, stated that his legal counsel was in route to the meeting and he would like to address the Board on the recently adopted ordinance that impacts usage of Six Mile Creek. Foster stated that Smith had discussed with him before the meeting the idea of discussing and refocusing the wetlands protection ordinance that was adopted at the 6/24102 Regular Board Meeting. He has sent the Board material for review, noting this discussion was not planned for the agenda at this meeting. He suggested that it might be more appropriate to hold off from discussing this request to the 8/14102 Regular Board Meeting to allow the request to be placed on that agenda and to allow the Board to review the material sent out by Smith in the past few days. He asked the Board how they wanted to address the request made by Smith. Babcock stated that he had received a significant amount of materials from Smith and did not have enough time to review it. He supported the idea of scheduling this discussion as an agenda item for the 8/14/02 Regular Board Meeting. Skramstad stated that he would support the opportunity for Smith to make his comments at this meeting, limiting their comments to around five minutes. LeFevere has prepared a memo that addresses the comments that have been raised by Smith and believed a brief overview by LeFevere at this meeting would be beneficial. After brief comments from both Smith and LeFevere, he believed an agenda item should be scheduled for the 8/14/02 Regular Board Meeting. -4326- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting July 24, 2002 Page 2 McMillan stated that she had some recommendations for preparations for the next Board Meeting if an agenda item is scheduled for it. The consensus of the Board was to move the request made by Greg Smith to "Old Business" later in the meeting. CONSENT AGENDA. Consent agenda items with a (*) 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. Skramstad moved, Babcock seconded to approve the consent agenda as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. Items so approved include: lB, Foxhill Association, staff recommends approval of $113.60 of $250 application deposit for approved' dOCk' length'~and'~Side setback variance, and-2B, June financial summarY and balance sheet. PUBLIC HEARING · Terry Nagel, variance application from LMCD Code for side setback requirements plus an adjusted dock use area. Foster opened the public hearing at 7:06 p.m. and asked for background on the proposed application from staff. Nybeck made the following comments: · The applicant has submitted an application for variance from Code for the residence at 21895 Byron Circle in the City of Greenwood on St. Albans Bay. The applicant has proposed a variance from Code for side setback requirements for a canopy and an adjusted dock use area. The physical hardship identified for the proposed variances is a converging, oblique lot line. · In 1991, the applicant submitted an application at this site for vadance from Code for side setback requirements for a canopy and an adjusted dock use area, with a physical hardship of converging lot lines that were generally oblique. The Board denied the request for a side setback variance for canopies for his property and the parcel to the south owned by Wilhemine Saucier, 21915 Byron Circle. However, both.of the side site lines from the Nagel site were granted an adjusted dock use area. Richard Pards owned the abutting site to the north, 21885 Byron Circle. The Nagel/Saucier side site line was deflected 23 degrees to the north and the Nagel/Parris side site line was deflected 28 degrees to the north, both from the 929.4' NGVD shoreline. · The applicant has submitted a new vadance application because three conditions that existed in 1991 have changed. First, the ownership of the two abutting sites has changed. The applicant currently owns the Pards site and the Saucier site is currently owned by Paul Boedecker. Second, the 929.4' NGVD shoreline at the proposed site, 21895 Byron Circle, has increased approximately 27', from 53' to 80', when the applicant purchased the Pards property, and there is a need to update the adjusted dock use area between the two sites owned by Nagel. Third, the dock installed at the applicant's site has recently changed from a permanent to a seasonal dock structure and it was not installed consistent with the site plan approved with the 1991 Variance Order. Babcock stated based on the proposed site plan, it appeared that the Boedecker dock was not meeting the 10' side setback from the adjusted side site line extension granted in 1991. He asked if the dock had changed since 1991. Nybeck stated that he believed the dock had not changed because it is a permanent dock. A drawback of the approved site plan associated with the 1991 Variance Order was that it was hand drawn rather than through a survey. -4327- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting July 24, 2002 Page 3 Mr. Terry Nagel, 21895 Byron Circle, stated that the dock at the Boedecker site is a permanent structure and was constructed in 1988 without a permit from the District. It was constructed illegally and was discovered during the review process for his previous variance request. Nybeck continued his comments: The proposed site plan would maintain the adjusted dock use area on the south end of the site by deflecting the Nagel/Boedecker side site line 23 degrees to the north. The proposed dock would be "H" shaped and would extend approximately 45' into the Lake from the 929.4' NGVD shoreline, with a slip that would be approximately 12' x 32'. The proposed dock would include a canopy and the number of watercraft to be stored at it is unclear. The proposed site plan would take into consideration the increase in shoreline at the site and deflect the Nagel/Nagel side site line 33 degrees to the north. Code Section 2.01 that requires docking and watercraft to be contained within an authorized dock use area, and Section 1.07 that allows the Board to consider applications for vadance from Code, were reviewed. The Board may permit a variance from Code if there is a practical difficulty or a physical hardship. A typical hardship considered the Board for variance from Code for side setback requirements and an adjusted dock use area is converging lot lines. Because the current dock installation at the applicant's site was not consistent with the 1991 Variance Order, the applicant has submitted a new variance application for Board consideration to amend it. In reviewing the proposed vadance application, the Board should focus its attention primarily on the proposed adjusted Nagel/Boedecker extended side site line extension and the dock and boats stored at both sites. The applicant should clarify the number and locations of boats that it would store at the proposed dock. At the Boedecker site, it appears that the number and location of watercraft to be stored might need to be limited to one because boat storage needs to be contained within the authorized dock use area. It appears that any additional boat storage at the Boedecker site would need to be done on the south side rather than the north because it appears that it would not be contained within the authorized dock use area established by the 1991 Variance Order. The Board might want to consider deflecting the Nagel/Boedecker a few degrees to the south so that it intersects the nearest corner of the Boedecker dock, granting a side setback vadance from the adjusted dock use area for Boedecker, and requiring Nagel to adjust the placement of the proposed dock so that it complies with the 20' minimum side setback requirement for canopies from the proposed adjusted side site line extensions. In compliance with MN DNR General Permit 97-6098, the City of Greenwood and the MN DNR were provided a copy of the proposed vadance application on 7/11/02, with comments due in the Distdct office by 7/22/02. The City of Greenwood stated that they had no objections on the proposed application and staff was awaiting feedback from the MN DNR. He had three comments on the proposed application. First, the application of Code causes a physical hardship to the Boedeker site and there is a need to adjust the Nagel/Boedecker extended side site line for dockage and boat storage. However, staff questions whether the extended side site line needs to be adjusted 23 degrees to the north because boat storage on the north side of the Boedecker dock would not be contained within the adjusted dock use area for the site. The Boedecker site currently has a canopy at the dock that is not consistent with the 1991 Variance Order. Second, when an authorized dock use area is adjusted, the Board can reduce the impact on the abutting property owner by either granting a side setback or dock length variance. Rather than adjusting the extended side site line and requiring that the nearest structures at the two sites maintain a 10' side setback from it, he recommended that the Board adjust the side site line extension slightly to the south and grant Boedecker a zero foot side setback variance and require Nagel to meet the 20' minimum side setback from both of its adjusted extended side site line extensions. Otherwise, the Board might want to consider less of a side setback requirement for , -4328- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting July 24, 2002 Page4 the proposed Nagel canopy, such as 15'. Third, any approval by the Board should take into consideration whether limitations should, be placed on the size, location, and number of watercraft to be stored in the Nagel and Boedecker dock use areas. He entertained comments or questions from the Board. Babcock stated that he would like to see a survey that documents the north side site line of the second property owned by the applicant Foster concurred with Babcock that it would be beneficial to: have .the. north side site line of the second property owned by the applicant to evaluate the. impact of adjusting the dock use area to the north between the two properties owned by N.agel, Nagel made the following comments: · He stated that he could document the north side site line of the second property that he owned on the proposed, site plan · He. worked with the District a number of years ago to defend the adjustment of the north side site line between the Nagel/Pards sites granted through the 1991 Vadance Order, He believed that a number of thi.ngs could have been done at that time with the south side site line'extension between' the Nage/Sauc er sites, · One of the reasons why a vadance was required in 199t. was that an illegal permanent dock was constructed at the Saucier site:and the Distdctdecided to grant a variance and.push the hardship to the north~ In 1988 When 'this dockwas constructed atthe saucier site, a sketch on the' layout was provided and the actuatdock:jnstaltation greatly varied.from it, resulting in it:crossing Over the common extended side site line, He: believed'that the Saucierdock COuld have been constructed Within th'e eXtended side lines, with a'.zero.foot side setback variances: and WoUld. not have required adjustment Of: the two side site lines to-the north, Instead of meq uesting the Saucier!s to make appliCation for and secure a variance for this dock~st~ucturei:an umbrella variance: was, grarited~for both sites.' · Access to :his'dOck'has recently improved'With the: removal of the Old ¢ochrane!s dO(~k arid the Nedegard twinhome development,. When he installed hi~ new seasona dock:this past spring, he Stated that he made his best effort, to maintain the20' side setback requiremerit from the extended side site line and not infdnge on' the Boedecker site tine;' Babcock stated that there was,language in the 1991 Varian~ Order that prohibited canoPies at both sites and there are currently canopies installed at. both,dOckS in 2002i~ Nagel stated that. canop eswere allowed at both sites if there was'mutUal consent, Of both. parties, Which was secured in the.past, Babcock,: s~ated in ,the. ,approved 1991 Vadance ,Orders.the.first condition was that the par~ of the. aPplication request ng a variance fromside setback requirements of the Code apPliCable to canopies was denied. What might have:.been diScussedperta ning to mUtual.consen[ :at w.ate¢: structures Committee and previous Board meeting in 1991 was:not in the Findings,of Fact and order. '~The danger of granting a vadance and allowing canopies through mutual consent is what~,happens when mutual consent goes away, which he believed was the case in this. example -4329- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting JUly 24, 2002 Page 5 Nagel stated that he had 80' of lakeshore frontage and he found it difficult to infringe on the properly t~ the north and impact its ValUe to just Put up a c~inoPy. He' add~l that he WoUld not care if the Board allowed a canopy at the BoedeCker site. Th:ere being no further comments, FOster closed the public hearing at 7:38 p.m. Foster stated that he believed that the proposed vadance application should go to a working group to address pending issues, which would include staff and interested Board members. Babcock stated that he believed the proposed variance application was relative y close to something the Board to could act on', The intent of'the vadance granted in 199i' Was to' maintain 10' Side setbacks fro~::ithe ~Justed dock use areas and it appears that it might not have been' achieved because of the hand drawn drawings. He believed that maintaining side Setback is important and that he would be Willing to SerVe on the working group recommended by Foster. Foster stated that he would not be opposed to the Board granting side setback variances for both sites because the houses on the two sites overlook the lake and their site lines are not greatly impacted by canopies. Babcock stated that he would have trouble supporting a variance from Code for side setback variances on a lot that has approximately 50' of lakeshore frontage because of the precedent it would set on a lakewide basis. The consensus of the Board was to direct staff to facilitate a working group that would consist of Bab~Ck, Nagel, Boedecker, and staff to resolve the pending issue and to. bdng it back for revieW at a future Regular Board Meeting. WATER STRUCTURES A. John and.'KathY Aquilina, consideration of Findings of Fact and Order for approval of a dock length variance application. Foster entertained comments or a motion for the draft Findings of Fact and Order. MOTION: Babcock moved, McMillan seconded to approve the Findings of Fact and Order as sbbmitted for approval of the John and Katy Aquilina dock length vadaDce application. VOTE: Motion carded unanimously. City of Deephaven, staff review of expenses incurred by the DiStrict in the processing and administrati'on of approved new multiple dock license, special density license, and temporary vadance applications. Foster stated that the C ty,'Of Dee~)haven had. recently sabmitted applications that were apP~Ved by the Board to'ptbvide tempdt~ary dOOkiri{~ for one~'~easolq ,fdt;the :residents south of the bddg~ While it'~WaS under construction' Deepliaveti ha~mquested the Boardit° C0i')Sid~r ~eiUnding' either'all oi a:P°~i~n~6f the fees submitted and he recommended that the Board consider approving this request, possibly $1,000. He asked for feedback from Other Board members bn this agenda item. McMillan stated that she would support fees submitted for the special densitY and variance aPPlications, $850. This would include $500 for the vadance application and $350 for the Special density.liC'en~e application. -4330- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting July 24, 2002 Page 6 MOTION: McMillan moved, Skramstad seconded to refund $850 to the City of Deephaven, $500 for the variance application approved and $350 for the special density license approved. Babcock stated that he would support refunding $878.00. This would include the $250 deposit.for the vadance application, the entire $350 fee for the special density license application, and one half of the new multiple dock license application, $278. McMillan and Skramstad withdrew their motiOn. MOTION: Babcock moved, Skramstad seconded to refund $878.00 for the City of Deephaven variance, spec al dens ty license, and new multiple dock license applications for temporary storage for the 2002 season for residents south of the bridge on.Carsons Bay during its reconstruction due to its temporary nature. VOTE: Motion carried unan mously. D. Additional Business. There was no additional business. FINANCIAL A. Au d it of vouchers (7/1/02- 7/15/02) and (7/16~02 - 7/31/02). Skramstad reviewed the audit of vouchers as submitted. MOTION; Skramstad moved, Suerth seconded to approve the audit of vouchers for the periods of 7/1/02- 7/15/02 and 7/16/02-7/31/02 as submitted. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously C. Additional Business. There was no additional business. LAKE USE & RECREATION A. Discuss on of. Tom Casey.tetter, dated 7/15102, Fost~:'Stated that when the ordinance Was recently adopted that allowed watercraft in Six Mile Creek upstream pa~t ~he: Upd.!~nd Farms de~/e opment~ he believed that the Board concluded.that they. be eved they h~d 'ur'sd ct on in this ~area. ,Because,of this, he= be ieved that a multip e dock license wou d be required by the D strict for the ,Upland Farms project when five or more watercraft are, stored at this, site Babcock stated that he wanted to cladfy that jurisdicti0n of the District was resolved when it was created by state enabling legislation in 1967, not when the Distdct extended the electdc motor ordinance upstream to Highway 7. Even if the Board did not adopt the recently adopted electric motorordinance, he believed that th~ b~Sidct woUid have had judsdiction.in {his area. -4331 - Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meetin~l July 24, 2002 Page7 The Board discussed potential boat storage activity at the Upland Farms development and what would trigger the need for a new multiple dock license application or any other permit under the jurisdiction of the District. B. Review and discussion of recent Lake Minnetonka lake level readings. Foster asked for background on this agenda item. Nybeck made the following comments: · A "High ~Water Declaration" was made on .Tuesday, 7/16/02~ consistent with Code Section 3.021. The Code requires the Executive Director to make this declaration when the Lake' elevation is at or above 930,0' NGVD for a period of eight consecutive dayS, or has reached 930.25' NGVD. The lake level on Lake Minnetonka had been at or above 930.0' NGVD since Sunday, 7/6/02. · The "High Water Declaration" was terminated on Tuesday, '7/23/02, Consistent with Code Section 3.021. The Code requires the Executive Director to terminate the declaration when the Lake elevation has fallen and remained below' 930.9' NGVD for a pedod of three consecutive days. The lake level on Lake Minnetonka had remained below 930.0' NGVD sinCe Wednesday1 7/17/02. · He reViewed the process used bY staff to inform the pUblic when the "High Water Declaration" was declared and terminated, noting that it involved signage at the public accesses and the preparation of a press release to the local television and radio stations, as well as ~ordinating With the Other governmental agencies. Skramstad stated that.he wOuld like the Board to review Code Section 3.021 at a future BOard meeting, adding that he betieved there might be better ways to deal with during high'Water situations. Babcock and Foster stated that they did not want to discuss Code Section 3.021 at a future Board meeting. Skramstad provided the Board an uPdate on hOW lake level readings are taken on Lake Minnet°nka by MCWD staff. He made the following comments: · In the pedod from around 7/3/02 to 7/11/02, there were three heavy days'of rain that accumulated about 5.5". The official lake level readings taken by the MCWD during this same period only rose .02', or 1/4 of an inch. Because of this, he had recently further investigated hoW I~'k~ level' readings are taken by the MCWD. · He reviewed an overhead that provided a schematic of the Grays Bay' :Da~ and the ~piiiWay. At this site, there is an official, suNey' at:asp~ifiC:'ele~:atisn. Near.~is site, th~e~'is an.officiai measuring marker that is in the lake approximately 10' from shore, which has vadable measurements on it. The two measurements added together is the offi'~ial:iake'~ievel reading,taken by the'M~W0 §taft, noting that it is more accurate in ca ~ conditions versus windy cond tons. · There is an:autd~ated wa~ f°rthe MCwD tb takeiakeievei' readings Oh Lake Minneton'ka that is cudefitlYnot~WOtl(iSg Pro%dy, becau~:'the MCWD' o~ce'c~innot receve th§ 'nfoi:~ation~'. ~he MCWD has stated that they WoUl~ i~an~fer ah ab.t~mated':~e"aSuring deviCe frO~:'ano~h:er:iake in the watershed district to Lake Minnetonka to allow automated readings on Lake Minnetonka.in the future. · He provided an overview of the 200' long spiiJwaY tha['i§ nbrth of the dam site, noting that water is supposed to run over it when the lake level reaches an elevation of 930.00' NGVD. · He stated that he would keep the :Board informed ~on the prdgi:eSs of thiS. C. Additional Business. -4332- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting July 24, 2002 Page 8 There was no additional business, ADMINISTRATION A. Discussion on status of Administrative Secretary poSition. Foster asked Nybeck for an update on this agenda item. Nybeck stated about four months ago, Gona Olson was hired as the full-time Administrative Secretary for the District. She resigned from this position, effective 7/12102, and there was a need to hire a replacement. After consulting with LeFevere on legal requirements for the re, hiring of this position, staff contacted the second candidate because of the short time span since the hidng of Olson. This candidate, Karen S. Anderson, has agreed to assume the position on a pad-time basis and herflrst day with the District was 7/17/02. She has. agreed to accept the position at an hourly rate of $13.25~ with the District participating in a P,E.R,A. pension plan. Because this position is part-time, she does not qualify for other benefits that other fuji-time District employees receive. He asked the Board to ratify the hidng of Karen Anderson as part-time Administrative Secretary for the District, effective 7/17/02, at a rate of $13.25 per hour and P.E.R.A. benefits, with no other benefits consistent with the District personnel policy for part-time employees. Skramstad informed the Board that Ms. Anderson was his daughter and that he was totally out of the hiring process. MOTION: Babcock moved, Knudsen seconded to ratify the hidng of Karen S. Anderson as part-time Administrative Secretary for the District, effective 7/17/02, at an hourly .rate of $13,25.and P.E.R.A. pension plan benefits, with no other benefits consistent with the Distdct personnel policy for pad- time employees. VOTE: Ayes (8), Abstained (t, Skramstad);.motion carried. B. Addit onal Business. There was no additJona business. EWM/EXOTICS TASK FORCE A. up.~a{e O~"Ee~s K~ep Zebra Mussels Out.of Lake Minnetonka project. Foster .asked for an update on this agenda item, NYbeck stated that inspection 0f watemraft entedng Lake Minnetonka..at Maxwell Bay, North Arm, and Spring Park Public.accesses have recent y begun, A schedule for this 2.002 pilot project was included in the hand~Ui folders and a report will be finalized after the 2002 pilot.project, ' B, Staff update, on 20'02 EWM Harvesting Program. Foster stated that Staff has included a 2002 EWM Mid-Season Summary Report in the handout folders for informational purposes on key statistiCs. C. Additional Business. -4333- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting july 24, 2002 Page9 There was no additional business. 6, SAVE THE LAKE There was no discussion. 7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR NybeCk stated that them were copies of the quarterly Executive Director Newsletter and other District related new articles included in the packet and handout folders for informational purposes. There also was a copy of a letter from Mound Board Member Orv Burma and LeFevere that pertain to the electric motor ordinance for wetland areas on Lake Minnetonka that was recently adopted. 8. OLD BUSINESS LMCD Ordinance 178 Knudsen asked Foster if he was comfortable with whether the Robert's Rules of Order parliamentary procedures were followed when the Board recently adopted this ordinance. Foster stated that he was comfortable. Knudsen stated that he considered raising this question the evening that the VOte took place; however, he believed that there still would have been the same outcome if a revote had occurred. He referred to the Mary Tietjen memo, dated 7~23~02, noting that she was a co-worker of LeFevere at Kennedy and Graven, He asked LeFevere if he agreed With her opinion. LeFevere stated that he agreed with her °pinion. Knudsen stated that he recentlY attended a Minnetrista ~CitY Council meeting to give them an update on this ordinance. The Minnetrista City COUnCil expressed concern that:the three Or four property owners that have doCUmented historical use were not grandfathered. HoWeVer, the Uinnetdsta City Council did nOt have a desire foi' eitlier gas or electric motors for other prope~ies on SiX Mile Creek. Legal cOunsel for the City of Minnetrista has bi,eh direCted to check into What~ Minnetri~ta can dO to addressthe situation of the three or four prOpe~ owners. Ambrose stated that he had received some interesting information since the Board adopted the ordinance and that he was interested in hearing' further info~ation. Knudsen asked Ambrose if he was comfortable with the voting procedures when the ordinance waS adopted. Ambrose Stated that he believed that the vote Was confusing; however, he could not recall whether a vote had been announced that it failed: Foster:stated that he recalled that a tallied vote was taken and being discussed, noting that he believed BOard members were entitled to change their votes. The DiStriCt has adOpted RObert's RUleS Of Order, adding that he believed it allows for an informal process. Based on his review of the of the Mary Tietzen memo, he believed that -4334- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting July 24, 2002 Page l0 parliamentary procedures were not violated the evening the vote was taken. He asked for corn ments from the Board or the public. McMillan expressed concern about the parliamentary procedures followed by the Board the evening that the ordinance was adopted. She stated that she had listened to the tape of that meeting and she believed that the Chair announced that the motion to adopt the ordinance failed. Based on her review of Robert's Rule of Order, she believed that a vote cannot be changed except with a motion to reconsider after the Chair announces the motion failed. She stated that she would like an inquiry into the procedure followed' that evening and that she would like a transcript of the minutes for the discussion at the next Board meeting. She suggested that the Board might not want to publish adopted ordinance amendments in the future until the minutes for that meeting are approved by the Board. Van Hercke stated that would like to further explore this. She asked if there was any reconsideration time frame that the Board was not aware of for reconsideration purposes. Babcock stated that Board members can make a motion to change an ordinance at any time. In addition to a motion to reconsider, other motions could include an amendment or repeal. He questioned why Board members were so concerned about a motion to reconsider. McMillan outlined what she believed would be correct procedures that need to be complied with in order for Board member Gilman to change his vote. She believed that Gilman would have needed to make a motion to reconsider the vote with a proper second, and then the revote could have occurred. Foster asked LeFevere to review the Mary Tietjen memo. LeFevere stated that Robert's Rule of Order are intended to provide orderly procedure for determining the w l of the majority. The District has adopted Robert's Rules of Order; however, they aresubject to interpretation and are somewhat flexible. There is nothing referenced in Robert's Rules of Order pertaining to fdendly amendments and there is not supposed to be discussion by the Board unless there is a motion on the floo~,:~ There are violations of strict application of Roberts Rule of Order generally at each meeting and there has been a process set up by Robert's Rule of Order. that al Ows. membem to police these violations. If a Board member believes that a violation has occurred, and they havea concern, they can raise this as a point of order and~allow the Chair to make a ruling, He believed that the ordinance that was adopted was effective because there was a mo..t on and a second, there were eight votes in the affirmative, 'there was no.objection raised when Gilman changedhis vote, and the adopted ordinance wasadopted. If a Board member had technical questions pertaining to.~bed~s Rules of Order when Gilman changed his vote from nay to aye, the objection should have been raised .at.that time. McMillan stated that she believed the question pertaining to this ordnance was whether proper procedures were followed rather than whether it is a valid ordinance. She believed that there is a need for a framework for procedures for the Board in .its decision making process. Babcock stated that when he was Chair~ he attempted to ensure that the motions being considered by the Board of Directors was clear, that the votes being counted were correct, and to allow sufficient input from both the Board and the public. Although some of the activities may have been confusing to some Board members and the public, he believed that the end result was a clear direction with enough votes in the affirmative to adopt the ordinance. It would be nice if Board members disciplined themselves to comply with Robert's Rules of Order; -4335- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting July 24, 2002 Page 11 however, he believed that the outcome of the votes made by the Board on this ordinance were clear and were published in accordance with state law. McMillan expressed concern about the changing of the vote when she believed that the vote had failed. LeFevere stated that Robert's Rules of Order has a certain amount of flexibility built into it~ Because Board members have the ability to object or appeal, the Chair on many occasions might try a short cut. If a Board member has an objection and believes that point of order needs to be raised regarding parliamentary procedures, there is an obligation for that Board member to raise the point of order when the breach occurs. If that does not occur, Robert!s Rules of Order does not allow it to be invalidated after the fact. If Board members do not speak on parliamentary procedures at a meeting, it is interpreted based on Robert's Rules of Order as a consent to it, Babcock stated that it appeared that the right to object or appeal parliamentary procedures is the responsibility each Board member. Knudsen asked if it was too late for a Board member to raise a concern relating parliamentary procedures at the next Board meeting. LeFevere stated that he believed it would be too late because a final decision was made, other business was conducted at the Board meeting in question, and the .ordinance was published in the official newspaper for the District, · Suerth stated that although he was not in attendance at the Board meeting in question, he has had experience with Robert's Rules of Order over his business career, He believed that Robert's Rule of Order are guidelines used to help maintain order and are not absolute. Although the change in vote may not have been appropriate, any objection by a Board member should have raised at that meeting and the issue is over and done. 'He recognized the concern raised by McMillan; however~ he did not have a problem with'the outcome because of the flexibility allowed..in Robert's Rules of Order. · Knudsen stated that although there might have been some procedural issues when Gilman changed his vote, he believed that itwas quite'poss b e thatthesame,eutcome would have occurred at'the.meeting, Based on the information provided by LeFevere~ he stated that he respected his opinion on R0bert's Rules of Order, Babcock stated that when Foster allowed G Iman tochange his vote and no Board member objected to it, Robert's Ru es. of Order~were followed based on the:interpretation,Of LeFevere :,: LeFevere stated that Robert's Rules of Order are not intended to be inflexible so that laws, ordinances, or contracts are undone, He,reviewed thetape of the:Board meeting in question and a roll Call v0t~ was,:taken, the Chair stated that the motion failed and a Board member questioned that, the roll call vote was being reviewed, and the change in vote occurred while it was under review before the Chair made a final determination. Even if the Chair:made a fina determination byannounc ng?the vote on the'motion, a BOard member has the dght to change their vote by permission of the assembly and not requiring a motion to reconsider the vote. Foster asked for comments from Greg Smith on this, noting that discussion should be limited and that further extensive discussion of it should be scheduled for the 8114102 Regular Board Meeting. -4336- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting July 24, 2002 Page 12 Mr. Chris Dietzen, legal counsel from Larkin, Hoffman, Daly, and Lindgren, stated that he represented four property owners on Six Mile Creek. They include Greg and Katherine Smith, Ralph and Beana Hatch~ Jerry and Michelle LeMire, and Jim and Lynda Kay Kutcher. He expressed concem about the procedure by which the ordinance was adopted by the Board because he believed that the Chair declared that the motion failed with seven affirmative votes and five nay votes. There was a request to review the votes, the Executive Director read the votes back, and then Board member Gilman changed his vote without a motion to reconsider or any discussion. The Chair then declaredthat the motion paSsed and he objected to this because it was contrary to Robert's Rules of Order. He believed that there wasa need for Gilman to explain why he changed his vote. He has discussed with LeFevere the idea of a motion to reconsider this vote at this meeting, citing a recent Minnesota State Supreme Court case that allowed a motion to reconsider at the next meeting, noting that it was deemed proper. He believed that the question raised by Van Hercke on whether there is a time frame for the Board to reconsider a motion was skillfully not addressed. He stated that he believed the Board has stated that they adhere to Robert's Rules of Order on an informal basis; however, there is strict adherence to when an objection or point of order can be raised. Babcock stated that he did not believe the Board had reached any of the conclusions raised by Dietzen. Any Board member could make a motion to reconsider or any other motion at this meeting. LeFevere stated that he did mean to avoid the time frame question raised by Van Hemke and he addressed it. Earlier when the issue was raised whether the failure to' act prejudices this body, he clarified that an ordinance could, be adopted at any time with no deadlines. A. motion to reconsider is only appropriate inthe sesSion' in which the motion is made, noting that he believed a session for this organization is a meeting. He stated that he and Dietzen had a disagreement on the definition of a session. In Robert's Rules of Order, it states that a motion to reconsider needs to. be taken in the same session or the next calendar day. He believed that another motion wouldbe more appropriate and would not have to be' made by a Board member on the prevailing side. Dietzen stated that his interpretation of Robert's Rules of Order was that a motion to reconsider only on the same day the original .vote was. taken or the next succeeding day within the session that a business meeting is scheduled. He believed that the motion to reconsider the vote needed to either take place at the last Board meeting or this Board meeting. Nelson stated that ~he had not.had an opportunity to review the material received from Dietzen because he. had received it only .a day in advance of this meeting. Additionally, the composition' of this Board at this meetihg was greatly different than the Board meeting being discussed. He recommended that this matter be taken up at the 8/14/02' Regular BOard'.Meeting to allow members to be instructed~as to whatwas 'going on so'thatlt,'coald be dealt with in order. The need for a'motion to recOnSider the voteat this or;other meetings has' been overstated because any Board member could make a motion at a future meeting to repeal this ordinance. "MOTION: Babcock moved, Nelson.seconded toclose discussion on Parliamentary procedures and Robert's Rules. of Order. Dietzen stated that he wanted the record to reflect thathe was unable to complete 'his presentation. VOTE: Ayes (5), Nayes (4; Ambrose, Knudsen, McUillan, and Van Hercke); motion carried. Foster stated that he would not be opposed to further comments from members of the public and allowing them opportunity for further comments at the 8/14/02 Regular Board Meeting, -4337- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District P, egular Board Meeting July 24, 2002 Page'13 BabcOCk Stated that he would not be opposed to further comments as long as there was not extensive comments on the information provided by Dietzen that he had not had oppOrtunity to properly revieW, noting that this discussion would be more appropriate for the 8/14/02 Regular Board Meeting. Foster stated that he wanted Dietzen to have the opportunity to wrap up his comments and to allow more extensive at the next Board meeting. MOTION: Ambrose moved, Van Hercke seconded to reconsider the vote relating to adoption of the wetland ordinance amendment adopted at the previous Board Meeting and to table further discussion of it to the 8/14/02 Regular Board Meeting. Babcock raised a point of order because the motion to reconsider the vote was out of order based on the legal advice of LeFevere. Foster asked LeFevere for assistance on the point of order. LeFevere stated that he believed the motion to reconsider was not the proper motion. Foster declared the motion to reconsider out of order. He asked if there were any Board members that objected to this. Van Hercke stated that she objected to the ruling of Foster. Ambrose explained that the purpose of his motion was to preserve the undefined dght to reconsider the passage of the wetland ordinance at the previous meeting. Foster asked what the will of the Board was regarding his ruling that the motion made to reconsider the vote relating to adoption of the wetland ordinance amendment was out of order because it should have been made at the 'previous meeting. Five Board members agreed with the ruling of Foster. They included Babcock, Foster, Nelson, Skramstad, and Suerth. Four Board members disagreed with the ruling of Foster. They included Ambrose, Knudsen, McMillan, and Van Hercke. Foster announced that the motion to reconsider the vote was out of order. Dietzen highlighted the key points of the 7/23/02 letter he forwarded to Board members. The position of his clients was that the ordinance adopted by the Board was null and void because of improper procedures. His clients have hired him to sue the District and he wanted to make an attempt to resolve it and make it clear on the record. His clients have laid out six reasons in this letter why they believed that the ordinance is improper. He questioned the scientific data used by the Board and noted that his clients are currently riparian owners that area currently using Lake Minnetonka. He questioned how phosphorous loading into Lake Uinnetonka from Six Mile Creek would increase if his clients are already conducting the activity. He expressed concern about how the Board exempted, specific property owners on Painter's Creek and had not exempted his clients, noting that he believed that Painter's Creek loads significantly more phosphorous into Lake Minnetonka than Six Mile Creek. He requested that his clients be exempted from the ordinance, similar to the residents of Painter's Creek, and this is the conversation he would like to have with the Board. Other Old Business Items -4338- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting July 24, 2002 Page 14 Skramstad updated the Board on three other "Old Business" items. They included: 1) he and McMillan recently presented the resolution to Shorewood Mayor commending his public service on the phosphorous free fertilizer legislation adopted this past session, 2) if anyone was following up with the City of Victoda on their vacant District Board position, and 3) the status of second version of the Distdct newsletter coordinated by Van Hercke this past spdng. Van Hercke stated that she had Board approval for only one District newsletter; however, she envisioned a second one. possibly this fall 9. NEW BUSINESS There was no discussion. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjoumed at 9:41 p.m, Albert O. Foster, Chairman Lili McMillan, Secretary -4339- DRAFT LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS 7:00 PM, Wednesday, August 14, 2002 Tonka Bay City Ha'Il CALL TO ORDER Nybeck called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m., noting that both Chair Foster and Vice Chair Nelson were not in attendance. He asked Skramstad to review the process in determining which Board member would preside during this meeting. Skramstad reviewed the process outlined in the Distdct by-laws in determining who presides at a Board meeting when both the Chair and Vice Chair are absent. He entertained comments or a nomination from the floor on a Board member to preside at this Board meeting. MOTION: Knudsen moved, Burma seconded to nominate Board member Skramstad to preside at this Board meeting in the absence of Chair Foster and Vice Chair Nelson. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. ROLL CALL Members present: Tom Skramstad, Shorewood; Lili UcMillan, Orono; Bob Ambrose, Wayzata; Orv Burma, Mound; Tom Gilman, Excelsior (arrived at 7:15 p.m.); Paul Knudsen, Minnetrista; Tom Seuntjens, Uinnetonka Beach; Herb Suerth, Woodland; Katy Van Hercke, Minnetonka. Also present: Charles LeFevere, LMCD Counsel; Greg Nybeck, Executive Director; Judd Harper, Administrative Technician. Members absent: Doug Babcock, Tonka Bay; Bert Foster, Deephaven, Craig Nelson, Spdng Park; Sheldon Wert, Greenwood. Victoria has no appointed Boardmember CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTs, Treasurer SkramStad There were no Chair announcements. READING OF MINUTES. 6/26/02 LMCD Regular Board Meeting 7124102 LMCD Regular Board Meeting MOTION: Seuntjens moved, Suerth seconded to approve the minutes from the 6/26/02 Regular Board Meeting as submitted. VOTE: MOtion carried unanimously. Skramstad asked What action the BOard would like to take with the 7~24~02 Board Meeting minutes. They were not included in the Board packet received by mail; however, they were forwarded by e-mail a few days in advance of the meeting. MOTION: Ambrose moved, McMillan seconded to table review of the minutes from the 7124102 RegUlar Board Meeting to the 8/28/02 Regular Board Meeting,- -4340- Lake MinnetOnka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting August 14, 2002 VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. Page 2 PUBLIC COMMENTS- Persons in attendance, subjects not on the agenda. There were no comments from the public on subjects not on the agenda. CONSENT AGENDA- Consent agenda items with a (*) will be appreved in one motion unless a Board member requests discussion of any item, in which case the item will be removed from the consent agenda. Seuntjens moved, AmbroSe seconded to approve the consent agenda as submitted. Items so approved include: lB, Hennepin County Sheriff's Office Water Patrol Significant Activity Report, and 2A, Minutes from the 7'/12J02 EWM/Exotics Task Force Meeting. 1. LAKE USE & RECREATION A. Discussion of LMCD Ordinance 178. Skramstad stated that LMCD Ordinance 178 was recently adopted by the Board of Directors. Discussion at the previous meeting included what was adopted in the ordinance, protocol and RObert's Rules of Order, and whether there is any consensus of the Board to move the point of demarcation in these three tributaries or to grandfather affected property owners with historical use. He asked for any further comments on this agenda item from LeFevere. LeFevere stated that the Board recently adOpted an ordinance and some citizens requested at the last Board meeting to be heard on it. There was a consensus of the Board at that meeting that they would be willing to receive further comments on the adopted ordinance at this meeting. Skramstad asked if there were comments from the public on this agenda item. Mr. Chds Dietzen, legal counsel for four property owners on Six Mile Creek, encouraged the Board to consider amending LMCD Ordinance 178 to exclude his clients from the ordinance, recommending that the point of demarcation should be moved to the fish traps upstream from his clients. He stated that he believed that this was the location on Six Mile Creek where judicial ditch laws would apply. Skramstad stated that he was unclear on what fish traps are and the location of them. Dietzen continued his comments: · Ame~ing !heordinance as he proposed would preserve his client's dpadan dghts. He circulated an aei'ialPhbt5 0f SiX Mile CreelS, and:ide'ntifiedthe/o~ati0n of his client,S properties, the tax'forfeiied property owned by the City of Uinnetrista, and the fish traps he referenced. · He compared Six Mile and Painters Creeks, noting that they counted 45 docks and 72 watercraft being stored in Painter's Creek. In Six Mile Creek, his clients have four dock with a total of fou'r Watercraft stored at them. He believed that there would be no docks or storage of Watercraft at the property owned by the Ci~bf~Minrieidsta. ': ' · Ha'reviewed Lake Minnetonka Water Quality Reports prepared by the Three Rivers Park District, The phosphorous loading in Lake Minnetonka, pdmadly Halsteds and Jennings Bays, are significantly impacted by intemal loading. According to these Reports, the. impact of the creeks flowing nto these ba~/~ is minimal. '~ited' ~mm%tsjn ih~ 'i99'~:.Ae~.rt made by john Barten, noting th~tit states "Efforts made to improve Halsteds Bay, and other Shallow bays, wi:i~i'need to focus on'internal loading to -4341 - Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting August 14, 2002 Page 3 be successful,. He added that the same Report states "Reducing existing loading rates to the shallow bays will have little, if any, effect on water quality". In the 2001 Repod, the results are essentially the same~ In this Report, it states that "Jennings Bay had poorer water quality than Halsteds Bay. in 2001". Later in this Report, it states that ".Reducing existing loading rates will have minimal effect on water quality". He stated that he included this information because part of Painter's Creek east of County Road 110 is excluded from the adopted ordinance and because he believed that that the scientific studies document that restricting access in these creeks will have little to no effect on water quality in Halsteds or Jennings Bay. · He was recently made aware of other jurisdictional concerns, including the federal clean water act with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency asserting jurisdiction. The City of Minnetrista has concluded that they have the authority to supersede the jurisdiction of the District and they have directed their attorney to prepare an ordinance accordingly. · The District has no scientific evidence that the use of gas motors versus electric motors would contribute more greatly to phosphorus loading in Halsteds Bay. The Reports he just revieWed would be contrary to the position taken by the District. He believed that the intent of the ordinance was to limit new phosphorus sources into Lake Minnetonka, noting that his clients are existing property owners similar to those on Painter's Creek. · There is no rational to treat his clients any differently than those property owners on Painters Creek that are excluded form the ordinance. He re-stated that he believed the point of demarcation for the ordinance in Six Mile Greek should commence at the point where the judicial ditch begins; the fish traps. · He commented on the LeFevere memo's, dated 7~23~02 and 818102. He believed that it Was improper to exclude the motion at the previous meeting to reconsider the motion that adopted the ordinance, citing a City of Chanhassen case from 1984. In the 8/8/02 memo, there were some statements that caused him concern~ He expressed concem with the statement that the District does not need to have a sufficient basis in the record to justify the ordinance; that these justifications do not haVe to be Part of any record of proceedings, and the effort to pin down Board members on the reasons for their decision is understandable yet there is no obligation to participate in this Process. He believed that the Board should be accountable and express their justification(s) for the OrdinanCe at this time rather than after the fact if it goes to court. · · He concluded by reCOmmending that the Board amend LMCD Ordinanoe 178 moving the point of demarcation on Six Mile Creek so that it commences at the fish traps with the line proposed in the aerial photo and the legal description detailed in the materials Su'bmittedl He entertained comments or questions from the Board. Skramstad asked what the difference was between mOving the point of demarcation up Six Mile Creek or grandfathering these property owners from the ordinance. Dietzen stated that there areno significant differences legally; howeveri ~he did not want his clients being issued tickets for non-compliance with the ordinance if they are grandfathered. Burma asked Dietzen how much land the City of Minnetdsta oWned from HalSteds Bay up to his client's properties. Dietzen stated that he understood the City of Minnetdsta owned the vacant landon both Sides of Six Mile Creek. Mayor Cheryl Fisher, City of Minnetrista, stated that she was in attendance to share the city position, noting that she encouraged the two governmental agencies to work together on this issue. The Git?of Minnetdsta has environmental concerns about future development on Six Mile Creek and the number Of boats USing it. -4342- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting August 14, 2002 Page 4 However, the city would like to proteCt the rights of the prepedy owners that already exist. ,?,he recommended that the Board should consider either mOving the point of demarcation upstream from these 'residents or to grandfather them from the ordinance. The Minnetrista City. CounCil has directed its attorney to look fudher into the city's jurisdiction on this issue, noting that it would be rbviewed at the 9/3/02 Uinnetrista City Council Meeting. Skramstad asked Fisher if she was aware of their attorney's opinion on this issue, such as moving the point of demarcation upstream on Six Mile Creek. Fisher stated that she was unaware of their attorney's opiniOn at this time; however, it might include non- motorized watercraft upstream from the undetermined point of demarcation. Ambrose stated that he. was encouraged by the input from Mayor Fisher because he was unclear about the position of the city, He asked for fudher input on the Upland Farms regarding boat storage when the original application was reviewed and approved by the city council. Fisher stated that the Upland Farms development was originally sold as an equestrian community. If residents are allowed watercraft in this development, it is likely they will want to use gas motors sometime in the future. McMillan expressed three concerns about boat storage in Six Mile Creek. These included the narrowing and depth concerns further up the creek, the fluctuation in water depths, and extensive vegetation clearing will be required. State Senator Gert Olson stated that she did. not attend the meeting to speak; however, she had a few comments, She became involved in local government politics when Saunders Lake in a neighboring community was proposed as a settling~pond for sewage. She acknowledged hermspect for the establishment of the District, noting that it was created with the idea that it was better for a local body to govern the activities of Lake Minnetonka rather than the State of Minnesota, She stated that she had a respect for the dPadan dghts of the residents on Six Mile Creek and the precedent it could set for the District. She encouraged the District to take the issue seriously and. hoped that it wou d not become an issue for the state legislature. Knudsen stated asked Dietzen if his clients: had d scussed limiting the number of boats as well as the number of docks. Dietzen stated that had not been discussed to the best:of his knowledge. Suedh stated that some of the remarks made by Dietzen were a little confusing on internal loading, citing that Baden in the past. had considered,intema loading as re,suspension of phosphorus that already existed on the lake bottom. Skramstad asked John.Baden if he would like to clarify comments made on the Lake Minnetonka Water Quality Reports. Baden stated there has been a lot of discussion in past Repeals on the internal loading component, of Halsteds Bay and the impedance of that. However, these Repeals have also pointed out that the discussion on internal loading does notsuggest that the phosphorus loading from the watershed is nOt impodant. In the long term, preventing i.ncmases'in phosphorus loading from. new developments is absolutely cdfical to maintaining the quality of~the lake~: He cited the new state phosphorous law as an example of efforts to limit phosphorous loading from the watershed. -4343- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting AuguSt 14, 2002 Page 5 Mr. Ralph Hatch, 4000 Kings Point Road, asked Baden how much of the external loading in Halsteds Bay comes from Six Mile Creek. Baden estimated that 90 to 95 percent of the extemal loading comes from Six Mile Creek. Knudsen asked the Board to recess the meeting for a few minutes so that he could confer with Mayor Fisher. The meeting was recessed at 7:55 p.m. and reconvened at 8:02 p.m. skramstad asked if there were further thoughts Or comments from the Board. McMillan stated that she would be interested in amending the ordinance and she was interested in the prOcedure to db this. Skramstad stated that he had consulted with LeFevere and an amendment could be prepared for review at a subseqUent meting if there was a motion, with a proper second, and a sufficient number of those Board menibe~ Present Voted i'n favor of the motion. McMillan questioned if an amendment could be made this evening withoUt review at a subsequent meeting, LeFevere stated that'the Board could adopt an amendment to the Code this evening as long as the text of the ordinance is clear to the Board and there are eight votes in the affirmative. McMiilan stated that she would like to amend the amendment to this ordinance to move the point of demarcation on Six Mile and Long Lake Creeks. OnSix Mile Creek, she stated that she Would like to move the point of demamation upstream of the Ralph Hatbh' Property at the fish traps his attomey referenced.' On Long Lake Creek, she stated that she would like to move the point of demamatiori point.uPStream to Brown Road. She proposed the use of non-motorized watemraft upstream from these two points of demarcation, as well as the point ofdemarcation alreaciy Proposed. On Pairiter's Creek. She Stated that She did not support the use of electric motors because she believed that it was not effective. Knudsen stated that'he supported what. waS p~bsed by MCMillan, adding that he believed lahguage should added that WoUld limiiboat sto¢agb to:the What i~:'at {he current dOCk Bu~a Stated' that he saW'the validity of the'arguments made by Dietzen, Mayor Fishei:, and Senator Gen Olson. However, he believed that their concerns could be addressed through grandfathering rather than moving the p.o, int of d:em~i-catJSh~'u~~: S.ix :M'ile Creek. He expressed' cOficem abb~i .~b[entiai long,tern1 re.development in Six Mi'b Ci'%k and the' number of Watercraff'.~at ~ald be. stbmd':bn:i{. H'e i'ecommend:ed that grandfatheHng these property owners would be more appropriate because it would protect the four property owners that have claimed hiStOdCal usei' however, it would pmte~t theSe creek~ in'the futUi:e When redevelOPment occurs. skramstad stated that the one i~sue that hb:'beiieVed would need to be addressed relating to grandfathedng wb"uld §e: efifo'r~rnent bY the ShedffS Watef~'~{toll'' Dietzen expressed some concern about other potential issues that. may be associated with grandfathedng rather than moving the point of demarcation:' NybeCk Stated he and BOard membel' BalScock recently met With three of the property owners on Six Mile Creek to discuss LMCD Ordinance 178. There was some discussion on the potential limitation of boats at these -4344- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting August 14, 2002 propedies, possibly through easements. commun cate histhoughts on this. Page 6 He stated that Babcock would be at the next Board meeting to LeFevere stated that if there was a concern by the Board about grandfathering and the potential impacts it would have on future subdivisions,' he believed that it could be addressed in the Code amendment. He addressed moving the point of demarcation upstream on Six Mile and Long Lake Creeks, noting that it would also be available to the general public as well as the property owners that have ripadan dghts. McMillan stated that she had hoped these areas of the creeks would be limited to the homeowners, adding that it could become an enforcement issue. She supported the use of "No-Wake" buoys, or signs in these areas because they are shallow. Knudsen stated that he lived near Six Mile Creek and he observed that a limited amount of traffic uses Six Mile Creek. Gilman addressed the comment made by Dietzen on the 8/8/02 memo prepared by LeFevere.. In his comments, Dietzen stated that LeFevere pointed out that there was not a need for the Distdct to have su~cient justification in the adoption of the ordinance. Gillman pointed out that LeFevere also stated in this memo that he did not imply than ordinance is not required to~_have some.justifications. LeFe.vere stated that ordinances must be rational and reasonably related to public health safety and welfare. He stated that he originally supported no motorized watercraft in these areas and that he might be open to some compromise. Skramstad summarized the disCussions of the Board, noting that it appeared that there was consensus to consider .amending the ordinance, This.could be done either by moving the points.of demarcatiQn.or through grandfathering, adding that it might be appropriate for LeFevere to prepare a couple of' versions for consideration by ~e B°aid at a future 'meeting. Another consideration for the Board to conSider would be a motion to repeal the:adopted ordinance. McMillan questiOned whether the ordinance would need:to be repealed-if .the Board adopted another amendment .... .~..~ MOTION: McMi! an moved, Knudsen se~nded .t~ dill'ct theaffomey to .prepa[e an ordina~nce amendment to LMCD Ordinance 1~8:' .tha~ wo~l~! !).pi~)~h.i~it.~to?iZed.water~.:ii~c -~pstrea. m from thefish traps on Six Mile Creek, Br°wr~s R ;ad °n i~r~g~"Eake creek, and:West of County Road Painter,s. Creek;and..2) to repeal the language..that prewio, Usl.y [eferenced electric m~Drs. Se~ntjens stated: that.he did:. n!°t'Deii'eve i[WoUld ~ Prudent to su. ppoA~ the ,pr°PoSed mqt on ..because the agenda for ihis meeting WaS'posted aS:di~bssiOr~''and not e~P]iCiti~.decU~ept~a' as an acti°n item on' the agehda. McMillan stated that the motion, was t~)dcaff i:angUage f~r.tbe ame~rn;nt.and not tO vote °i~ tat this meeting. S~untjens stated that he believed the. motion, was @m~.~strong because there.had been some discussion relating to ad°P{iOn o{i't. He added' ti~at th'e'r:n~iiO~'~id'a ~0 c°n~ider adding a grandf~th~ring ~i~tiOn to it if that is the desire of the Board. McMii'lan stated that she was not interested in grandfathering and'that the Board could'make a secQnd motion. Burma recommen~ded a friendly amendment to the motion, to have the attorney prepare an amendment that would, include a grandfathering option, -4345~ Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Roard Meeting August 14, 2002 Page7 McMillan stated that she might be interested in a grandfathering option; however, she would be interested in more details. Burma stated that he believed some of these details would be included in the ordinance amendment prepared by LeFevere. LeFevere stated that it did not appear that McMillan and Knudsen were agreeable to include the friendly amendment proposed by Burma in the original motion. Options for Burma to consider could include a formal amendment to the original motion or a second motion. McMillan expressed concern about grandfathering because there might be some residents on Long Lake Creek who would put a dock on the creek for grandfathering purposes. Nybeck questioned whether that could occur on Long Lake Creek because the City of Orono would require permits for these docks and there would probably be a need for variance from Code from the District. Burma withdrew his friendly amendment. Gilma stated that he would not support the proposed motion because thero were some Board members absent and that he would like their input before LeFevere prepares an ordinance amendment. Burma stated that he would support the motion, although he would like to have the Board be able to consider more options. Seuntjens expressed concern that a full report, with possible options, was not received from the Task Force. He believed that the proposed motion was too narrowly focused and that further work should be done by the Task Force on this issue. McMillan stated that she was encouraged to see interest in this issue from the City of Minnetrista. She added that the discussion on this issue has been extensive and generally has been at a sub-committee of the Board, noting that there have been only a couple of formal Task Force meetings. Seuntjens stated that he would like to investigate all potential options for the Board to consider when reviewing this issue. He stated that he believed there might a need for further Task Force meeting(s) to bring back all the options, with recommendations and pro's and con's. He added that it would be beneficial to have the opinion of the Minnetrista city attorney when considering the issue. McMillan stated that she believed there was dissatisfaction on the Board with the current ordinance and that it should be addressed as soon as possible. Seuntjens stated that a draft ordinance for grandfathering might also be appropriate. Dietzen stated that based on the discussion at the previous Board meeting, he hoped that action by the Board would be taken at this meeting on his client's properties. Although his clients proposed moving the point of demarcation upstream, his believed that they would be willing to consider grandfathering. He encouraged the Board to deal with this issue separately from the entire issue, expressing concern that his clients are violating the current ordinance. -4346- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting August 14, 2002 Page 8 Van Hercke questioned whether a moratorium or another process that would allow these four property owners to use gas motors on Six Mile Creek would be appropriate. She believed that there was consensus of the Board to allow these four property owners to use gas motors rather than electric. VOTE: Ayes (7), Nayes (2; Gilman and Seuntjens); motion carded. Skramstad stated that he believed that there are still pending issues relating to enforcement of the current ordinance and whether an ordinance should be prepared that would provide grandfathedng as an option for the four property owners on Six Mile Creek. The Board discussed a variety of issues pertaining to enforcement of the current ordinance. There was no consensus by the Board on these issues. MOTION: Suerth moved, Van Hercke seconded to repeal LMCD Ordinance 178. Fisher stated that she believed it might be appropriate for the District attorney to consult their city attorney on language for the options to be considered by the Board in the near future. VOTE: Ayes (4; McMillan, Skramstad, Suerth, and Van Hercke), Nayes (5); motion denied. Ambrose stated that he would like to make a motion to'suspend enforcement of LMCD Ordinance 178 for the four property owners on Six Mile Creek. LeFevere stated that he believed the Board has given staff direction on the enforcement of the adopted ordinance. He did not believe the motion would be appropriate because it could give these property owners a false sense of secudty and it is the discretion of the Water Patrol to determine what rules they enforce. Ambrose withdrew his motion. Van Hercke stated that she was unaware of the Board being provided draft ordinance amendments With the various.options. She supported the idea of LeFevere working with Dietzen and the Minnetrista city attorney on possible language for these ordinance amendments. Nybeck provided an overview of how the Lake Minnetonka Wetlands Task Force was established and what was accomplished,by it, There,were only a few official Task Force meetings and there were no recommer~dations made :by it to the 'Board,. ~;, McMillan stated that she would not support sending this issue back to the Task Force, noting that she believed it should remain at the Board.level, Mr. Dan Kelly, legal counsel for the Upland Farms development, recommended that the Board should direct the District attorney to prepare a minor amendment that would address~-the four property ownersonSix Mile Creek, whether it be through grandfathering or moving the point of demarcation. The Board has spent a significant amount of time debating this issue and has reacheda compromise relating to gasmotors venus electdc motors. He.expressed concer~ that a number of Board members who Participated inthis deb'atewere 'notat this meeting, noting that this compromise would go away with the new ordinance amendrhent that:the Board has directed the District attomey to prepare, He:recommended that:the Board should consider another option by drafting an ordinance amendment that would address the four property owners and not the issueof whether electric motors should be used in these areas. -4347- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting August 14, 2002 Burma made a motion for the Board to direct LeFevere to prepare an altemative ordinance amendment for review by the Board at the next Board meeting that would involve grandfathering for the four property oWners on Six Mile Creek rather than moving the point of demarcation. The motion failed due to the lack of a second. McMillan expressed concern about grandfathering because of the precedent it could set. Nybeck stated that at the second Board meeting in May, a hierarchy of the most restrictive to.the least restrictive options was presented and discussed by the Board, with each option considered through a straw poll.. ~ He recalled that the ordinance that was adopted by the Board in June was the only option at the May meeting that had enough votes from the straw poll in the affirmative for adoption. He believed that staff could forward this hierarchy of options a second time as an informational item for the Board at the next meeting. McMillan left at 9:39 p.m. The meeting was recessed at 9:39 p.m. and reconvened at 9:41 p.m. C. Additional Business. There was no additional business. EWM/EXOTICS TASK FORCE B. Additional Business. Mr. Dick Osgood, Executive Director for the Lake Minnetonka Association (LMA), updated the Board on two issues pertaining to zebra mussel related programs on Lake Minnetonka. First, a promise has been made for $5,000 to the LMA for the "Let's Keep Zebra Mussels Out of Lake Minnetonka" project for 2003. Second, results from the zebra mussel Veliger sampling program have recently been received, noting that zebra mussels have not been found in Lake Minnetonka. 3. FINANCIAL A. Audit of vouchers (8/1/02- 8/15/02). Skramstad reviewed the audit of vouchers as submitted. MOTION: Skramstad moved, Gilman seconded to approve the audit of vouchers for the period of 8/1/02 - 8/15/02 as submitted. VOTE: Motion carded unanimously. C. Additional Business. Nybeck stated that a CD had recently matured and was reinvested, noting that a memo was included in the packet that summarized District investments. 4. WATER STRUCTURES There was no discussion -4348- Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting August ~14, 2002 5. ADMINISTRATION Page 10 There was no discussion, 6. SAVE THE LAKE There was no discussion. 7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Nybeck reported the following: · The lake level on 8/t2/02 was 929.86', with a discharge of 200 c.f.s. · A monthly report summarizing recent Distdct staff activities was included in the packet for informational purposes. · The most current schedule for public access inspections staffed with MN DNR employees for the 2002 zebra mussel pilot project was included in the packet for informational purposes. · A copy of the article from the 8/6/02 edition of the Lakeshore Weekly News was included in the packet for informational purposes. 8. OLD BUSINESS Skramstad updated the Board on improvements made by the MCWD for taking lake level measurements on Lake Minnetonka and a tree trimming project planned, possibly this fall, by Hennepin County along the Narrows Channel. 9. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. 10, ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Tom Skramstad, Treasurer Lili McMillan, Secretary -4349- CITY OF MOUND BUDGET EXPENDITURES REPORT July 2002 58.33% July 2002 YTD PERCENT BUDGET EXPENSE EXPENSE VARIANCE EXPENDED GENERAL FUND Council 79,280 13,320 46,080 33,200 58.12% City Manager/Clerk 235,100 16,233 132,502 102,598 56.36% Elections 11,030 0 890 10,140 8.07% Finance 201,260 20,641 114,265 86,995 56.77% Assessing 79,700 77,148 77,278 2,422 96.96% Legal 122,000 14,588 58,675 63,325 48.09% City Property 89,110 6,400 46,127 42,983 51.76% Computer 28,250 808 19,132 9,118 67.72% Police 1,164,600 108,833 599,337 565,263 51.46% Emergency Prepardeness 6,780 198 4,491 2,289 66.24% Planning/Inspections 266,030 27,484 152,319 113,711 57.26% Streets 576,610 40,834 292,714 283,896 50.76% Parks 322,240 27,445 183,817 138,423 57.04% Transfers 207,840 17,320 121,240 86,600 58.33% Cable TV 48,000 20 175 47,825 0.36% Contingencies 60,860 _0 (89) 60,949 -0.15% GENERAL FUND TOTAL 3,498,690 371,272 1,848,953 1,649,737 52.85% Area Fire Service Fund 699,470 Cemetery Fund 9,920 Dock Fund 132,700 TIF 1-2 0 Water Fund 577,660 Sewer Fund 1,007,420 Liquor Fund 460,660 Recycling Fund 155,510 Storm Water Utility 58,200 36,722 338,526 360,944 48.40% 0 1,258 8,662 12.68% 3,328 35,022 97,678 26.39% 22,066 425,892 (425,892) 52,954 439,098 138,562. 76.01% 65,293 603,081 404,339 59.86% 36,123 240,238 220,422 52.15% 9,938 65,490 90,020 42.11% 22,571 55,892 2,308 96.03% Exp-01 08~28~2002 Gino -4350- CITY OF MOUND BUDGET REVENUE REPORT July 2002 58.33% GENERAL FUND Taxes Business Licenses Non-Business Licenses and Permits Intergovernmental Charges for Services Court Fines Other Revenue Transfers from Other Funds Charges to Other Departments July 2002 YTD PERCENT BUDGET REVENUE REVENUE VARIANCE RECEIVED 2,253,520 417,765 1,037,965 (1,215,555) 46.06% 6,300 150 7,025 725 111.51% 188,450 18,081 150,494 (37,956) 79.86% 461,130 191,847 232,247 (228,883) 50.36% 137,550 9,665 68,106 (69,444) 49.51% 110,000 7,936 48,564 (61,436) 44.15% 145,400 759 91,784 (53,616) 63.13% 128,000 0 0 (128,000) 0.00% 13,000 387 8.920 (4,080) 68.62% TOTAL REVENUE 3.443.350 646,590 1,645,105 (1.798.245) 47.78% FIRE FUND CEMETERY FUND DOCK FUND WATER FUND SEWER FUND LIQUOR FUND RECYCLING FUND STORM WATER UTILITY 429,470 81,186 332,317 (97,153) 77.38% 6,050 0 2,685 (3,365) 44.38% 129,360 596 113,656 (15,704) 87.86% 535,500 45,901 310,314 (225,186) 57.95% 1,048,810 117,224 628,330 (420,480) 59.91% 2,050,000 188,991 1,069,114 (980,886) 52.15% 127,880 4,015 54,437 (73,443) 42.57% 112,000 6,846 61,705 (50,295) 55.09% 08~28~2002 rev01 Gino -4351 - General Fund $1,283,381 CDBG 1,114 Area Fire Protection Services 277,194 Grant Revolving 0 Cemetery (1,163) Dock 206,224 PW Facility 107,202 G.O. Improvement Bonds (19,520) Commerce Place TIF (20,559) TIF 1-2 Notes 25,578 G.O. Bonds 2001 - A 10,247 G.O. Bonds 2001 - C 19,147 HRA Lease Rev Bonds 719,228 Capital Improvement 7,452,815 MSA 20,520 Sealcoat 3,325 CDB 2,038 Downtown TIF 1-2 (1,721,999) Water 1,284,553 Sewer 1,075,806 Liquor Store 1,407,851 Recycling 71,053 Storm Water 839,066 Fire Relief (48,818) HRA 24,319 Note: The above schedule shows the combined cash and investment balances by fund for the months indicated as recorded in the General Ledger. The balances do not reflect receivable, payables, authorized transfers, encumbered funds, or dedicated/reserved resources, etc. Only some accrued transactions are reflected. Investment income will be distributed to the funds at the end of the year and is not included. A long and complete process is followed to record all transactions, before we close the books, at the end of the year. In addition, the audit from the independent auditor is performed and an official Comprehensive Report will be presented to the City Council and made available to interested parties. In no way this schedule is intended to represent balances of funds available for spending. 08/28/2002 CashReportCouncil Gino -4352- LEN HARRELL Chief of Police TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MOUND POLICE 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Telephone 472-0621 Dispatch 525-6210 Fax 472-0656 EMERGENCY 911 Kandis Hanson Acting Chief John McKinley Monthly Report for August, 2002 STATiSTiCS The police of August. for all There abuse, law violations, 5 DUI, 3 and 11 other offenses. service during the month Larcenies accounted include 1 child 2 narcotics, 5 liquor 14 domestics (6 with assaults), The juvenile citations. Warnings were There we~; ~d:}i~ le ~ and!!l 8 adults and 8 j 2 f~ony and 4 mi: The (2 with injuries). There Mound assisted requested assistance on 8 -4353- MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT - August, 2002 II. INVESTIGATIONS Investigations on 1 motor vehicle theft, 3 burglaries, 1 robbery, 1 narcotics complaint and 1 unlicensed contractor accounted for 46.75 hours of investigative time. Other cases investigated included thefts, adult protection, domestic assault, child protection, damage to property, tampering with a motor vehicle, theft by fraud, theft by swindle, tampering with a witness, forgery, violation of a restraining order and identity theft. Formal complaints were issued for Interfering with a 911 Call, Speed, Felony Tampering with a Witness, Gross Misdemeanor DUI, Over. 10bac, Minor Consumption of Alcohol, Exterior Storage, Improper Storage of Motor Vehicle, Improper Storage of Refuse, Noise Violation, Check Forgery and Domestic Assault. III. PERSONNEL/STAFFING Michael Sussman began working as a patrol officer in August. He has replaced Sam Nelson who left the city in June. Jen Williams, who worked as a Community Service Officer this summer, left at the end of August. The Community Service Officer position will be filled by Zach Petz who comes to us from Grand Rapids Minnesota. Officers used approximately 109.5 hours of overtime during the month of August. Officers used nearly 30 hours of comp-time, 46.5 hours of sick time, and 28 hours of vacation. Officers earned 35.75 hours of comp time. There was no training attended by officers in August. V. COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER As stated earlier, Jen Williams left for school at the end of August. She did a good job for the city filling in as a Community Service Officer during the summer. Jen responded to 12 animal complaints, 51 ordinance violations and 254 miscellaneous calls for service in August. RESERVES The reserves donated 150.5 hours to the community in August. The unit currently has eight active who contribute on a regular basis. -4354- MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT AUGUST 2002 OFFENSES CLEARED EXCEPT- CLEARED BY ARRESTED RE P(kR_-T~ UNFOUNDED CLEARED A~REST ADULT JUV Homicide Criminal Sexual Conduct Robbery Aggravated Assault Burglary Larceny Vehicle Theft Arson 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 0 0 0 30 2 i 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Child Abuse/Neglect Forgery/NSF Checks Criminal Damage to Property Weapons Narcotic Laws Liquor Laws DWI Simple Assault Domestic Assault Domestic (No Assault) Harassment Juvenile Status Offenses Public Peace Trespassing Ail Other Offenses 30 2 i 4 3 I 1 i 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 I 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 5 0 0 5 4 1 5 0 0 5 4 1 3 0 2 0 0 0 6 0 0 6 6 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 4 2 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 52 2 5 26 16 8 PART II & PART IV Property Damage Accidents Personal Injury Accidents Fatal Accidents Medicals Animal Complaints Mutual Aid Other General Investigations TOTAL 5 2 0 26 25 15 471 544 HCCP Inspections 2 51 TOTAL 679 30 21 9 -4355- MOUND POLICE DEPA/~T~ CRIME ACTIVITY REPORT AUGUST 2002 GENERAL ACTIVITY SUMMARY Hazardous Citations Non-Hazardous Citations Hazardous Warnings Non-Hazardous Warnings Verbal Warnings Parking Citations DWI Over .10 Property Damage Accidents Personal Injury Accidents Fatal Accidents Adult Felony Arrests Adult Misdemeanor Arrests Juvenile Felony Arrests Juvenile Misdemeanor Arrests Part I Offenses Part II Offenses Medicals Animal Complaints Ordinance Violations Other Public Contacts THIS YEAR TO LAST YEAR MONTH DATE TO DATE 69 464 433 47 257 330 0 16 106 7 131 345 69 598 565 9 173 366 5 36 46 4 27 44 5 86 71 2 28 13 0 0 0 5 26 18 22 194 249 1 10 16 8 87 139 30 204 301 52 462 554 26 210 227 25 242 425 51 190 277 471 3,338 4,555 TOTAL Assists Follow-Ups HCCP Mutual Aid Given Mutal Aid Requested 908 6,779 9,080 29 291 332 10 106 426 2 20 23 15 110 103 8 42 48 -4356- MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT AUGUST 2002 DWI More Than .10% BAC Careless/Reckless Driving Driving After Susp. or Rev. Open Bottle Speeding No DL or Expired DL Restriction on DL Improper, Expired or No Plates Stop Arm Violations Stop Sign Violations Failure to Yield Equipment Violations H&R Leaving the Scene No Insurance Illegal or Unsafe Turn Over the Centerline Parking Violations Crosswalk Dog Ordinances Code Enforcement Seat Belt Overweight Vehicles Miscellaneous Tags TOTAL 5 4 1 2 0 55 2 0 15 0 3 0 1 1 3 0 1 9 0 2 11 2 0 120 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 -4357- MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT AUGUST 2002 Insurance Traffic Equipment Crosswalk Animals Trash/Derelict Autos Seat Belt Trespassing Window Tint Miscellaneous TOTAL W/LRPJLNT ARRESTS Felony Misdemeanor 3 2 1 0 0 22 0 0 0 4 32 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 -4358- Property Value Report Property Class Class Extension Mound Police Incident. DateReported Between 07/26/02 08/25/02 CaseProperty. RecordType Equal STOLEN B - Bicycles Thursday, August 29, 2002 Record Type Items Dollar Value Unknown Bicycle TOTAL: B - Bicycles Stolen 1 300.00 Stolen 1 1,400.00 2 1,700.00 E - Consumer Items CHEESE STICKS MiLK & BEER TOTAL: E - Consumer Items Stolen 1 1.00 Stolen 1 4.00 2 5.00 0 - Office Equipment Cellular Phone TOTAL: 0 - Office Equipment Stolen 1 250.00 1 250.00 P - Personal Accessories WALLET TOTAL: P - Personal Accessories Stolen 1 20.00 1 20.00 R - Radio/TWSound Entertainment Car STEREO TOTAL: R - Radio/TWSound Entertainment Stolen 1 620.00 1 620.00 S - Sports Equipment Golf Clubs, BAG AND SHOES LOWER MOTOR UNIT OF CRUISER TROLLING MOTOR TOTAL: S - Sports Equipment T - Currency, Negotiable bonds Unknown TOTAL: T - Currency, Negotiable bonds W - Auto Parts & Equip DoOR HANDLES AND WINDOW CRANKS TOTAL: W - Auto Parts & Equip Stolen 1 480.00 Stolen I 1,500.00 Stolen I 795.00 Stolen Stolen 3 2,775.00 3 2,025.00 3 2,025.00 1 100.00 1 100.00 Licensed to Mound Police Department Page: 1 -4359- Property Value Report Class Class Extension X - Equipment/tools DollY WaCKER, LASER LEVEL TOTAL: X - Equipment/tools Y - All Other DoCK BUMPERS FLAG FLAG AND SOLAR LIGHT FLAG POLES AND FLAGS KEY CHAIN W/5 KEYS TraSH CAN TOTAL: Y - All Other Mound Police Incident. DateReported Between 0'7/26/02 08/25/02 CaseProperty,RecordType Equal STOLEN Thursday, August 29, 2002 Record ~ Dollar Value Stolen 1 550.00 Stolen 1 3,200.00 2 3,750.00 Stolen 1 100.00 Stolen 1 10.00 Stolen 1 30.00 Stolen 1 125.00 Stolen 1 5.00 Stolen 1 10.00 6 280.00 OVERALL TOTAL... 22 11,525.00 Licensed to Mound Police Department Page: 2 -4360- Property Value Report Property Class Class Extension Mound Police Inciden~DateReported Between 07/26/02 08/25/02 CaseProperty. RecordType Equal RECOVERED Thursday, August 29, 2002 R~ord Type Item~ Dollar Value E - Consumer Items CHEESE STICKS TOTAL: E - Consumer Items Recovered 1 1.00 1 1.00 X - Equipment/tools Unknown TOTAL: X - Equipment/tools Recovered 1 550.00 1 550.00 OVERALL TOTAL... 2 551.00 Licensed to Mound Police Department Page: I -4361 - Crime Summary Report MOC Mound Police Incident. DateReported Between 07/26/02 08/25/02 Total Thursday, August 29, 2002 MOC Literal Translation 9000 9002 9014 9018 9020 9021 9038 9039 9200 9210 9220 9301 9312 9313 9314 9400 9420 9430 9450 9451 9452 9561 9566 9567 9710 9720 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 4 3 '2 5 9 1 1 3 2 2 3 1 3 2 3 2 1 SPEEDING NO D/L, EXPIRED D/L STOP SIGN EQUIPMENT VIOLATION CARELESS/RECKLESS J-CARELESS/RECKLESS MISC CITATIONS/TRAFFIC $-MISC CITATIONS/'I1LAFFIC DAS/DAR/DAC PLATES/NO-IMPROPER-EXPIRED NO INSUKANCF_JPROOF OF LOST/MISSING PERSONS FOUND ANIMALS/IMPOUNDS FOUND PROPERTY FOUND VEHICLES/IMPOUNDED ALL OTHER MTR VEH ACCIDENTS DERELICT AUTO PERSONAL INJURY ACCIDENTS PROPERTY DAMAGE ACCIDENTS H/R PROPERTY DAMAGE ACC. H & R ACCIDENTS W/TICKET DOG BITE ANIMAL ENFORCEMENT TICKETS DANGEROUS DOG MEDICAL/ASU MEDICAL/DOA Licensed to Mound Police Department Page: 1 -4362- Crime Summary Report MOC Mound Police Incident. DateReported Between 07/26/02 08/25/02 Total Thursday, August 29, 2002 MOC Literal Translation 9730 9731 9732 9741 9750 9800 9801 9802 9803 9804 9835 9900 9901 9904 9910 9911 9912 9921 9930 9932 9933 9950 9980 9991 9992 9993 9994 19 2 2 5 3 5 2 1 1 I 2 2 12 1 1 1 11 7 1 1 1 6 3 4 5 6 MEDICALS MEDICALS/DX MEDICALS/CI 911 HANG UPS FIRES ALL OTHER/UNCLASSIFIED DOMESTIC/NO ASSAULT PUBLIC ASSIST WATER/SEWER NOISE COMPLAINT TRAFFIC COMPLAINTS ALL HCCP CASES ADULT PROTECTION OPEN DOOR/ALARMS MISC. SERVICES BY OFFICERS OFP SHORT FORM SERVED K-9 USED/REQUESTED INSPECTIONS CITATION HANDGUN PURCHASE GRANTED OFP VIO. CRIME CONTROL & LAW ENF RESTRAINING ORDER ON FILE INFO/INT WARRANTS J-MISC. VIOLATIONS MUTU~ AID/8100 MUTUAL AID/6500 MUTUAL AID/ALL OTHER Licensed to Mound Police Department Page: 2 -4363- Crime ~ummary Report MOC Mound Police lncident. DateReported Between 07/26/02 08/25/02 Total Thursday, August 29, 2002 MOC Literal Translation A5353 A5355 A5506 AL351 AL352 AL354 AL411 AL551 C3111 C3311 DA540 DC500 J2301 JF501 JFF01 JG501 JGF01 M3005 M4140 M53 ! 3 M5350 M8199 N3030 N3190 N3390 P2110 P3110 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 5 ASLT 5-MS-INFL OR ATTMPT HRM-HANDS-ADL STR ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-CHLD-ACQ ASLT 5-MS-TI-IREATEN HARM-NO WPN-CHLD STR DOM ASLT-MS-INFLT BODILY HARM-HANDS-~-F~ ASLT-DOMESTIC-MS-INFLT BODLY HKM-HNDS-ADLT-AC DOM ASLT-MS-INFLT BODILY HARM-HANDS-CH-FAM DOM ASLT-MS-FEAR BODILY HARM-POS FARM-AD-FAM DOM ASLT-MS-FEAR BODILY HARM-HANDS-AD-FAM FORGERY-MS-MAKE ALTER DESTROY-CHECK-PERSON FORGERY-MS-USES-CHECK-PERSON DRUGS-SM AMT IN MOT VEH-POSS-MARIJ-UNK DRUGS-DRUG PARAPH-POS SESS-UNK-UNK TRAF-ACC-GM-FAIL STOP-RPT ACC-UNK-MV TRAF-AC-GM-3RD DEG DWI-UI ALCOHOL-MV TRAF-AC-GM-3RD DEG DWI-10 OR MORE WIN 2 I-IRS-MV TRAF-ACC-M-4TH DEG DWI-UI ALCOHOL-MV TRAF-ACC-M-4TH DEG DWI- 10 OR MORE WIN 2 HRS-MV JUVENILE USE OF TOBACCO LIQUOR-UNDERAGE CONSUMPTION 18-21 JUVENILE-CURFEW JUVENII.~-RUNAWAY CRUELTY TO ANIMALS-OTI-IER DISTURB PEACE-MS-DISORDERLY CONDUCT DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSING COMMUNICATIONS DISTURB PEAC-MS-VIOL DOM ABUSE NO CONTACT ORD PROP DAMAGE-GM-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT Licensed to Mound Police Department -4364- Page: 3 Crime Summary Report MOC Mound Police Inciden1.DateReported Between 07/26/02 08/25/02 Thursday, August 29, 2002 MOC Literal Trans!$tion GRAND TOTAL: P3630 TB059 TC021 TC159 TC169 TQ059 TR021 TR029 TR059 TR099 TR151 TR159 U0730 U1062 U1493 U249C U3280 U328D VNlll W3110 W3180 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 8 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 247 LITTER-UNLAWFUL DEPOSIT OF GARBAGE-COM-BUSINES THEFT-MORE 2500-FE-YARDS-OTH PROP THEFT- 501-2500-FE-BUILDING-MONEY TI-~FT-501-2500-FE-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP THEFT-501-2500-FE-WATERCRAFT-OTH PROP THEFT-251-500-GM-YARDS-OTH PROP THEFT-UNDR 250 - MS - BUILDING MONEY THEFT-250 OR LESS-MS-BUILDING-OTHER PROP THEFT-LESS 250-MS-YARDS-OTHR PROP THEFT-LESS 250-MS-SELF SRV GAS-OTH PROP THEFT-LESS 250-MS-MOTOR VEH-MONEY THEFT-LESS 250-MS-MOTOR VEH-OTHER THEFT-UNK LVL-IDENTITY THEFT-UNK LOSS THEFT-FE-THI~ BY SWINDLE TRICK-2501-19999 THEFT-FE-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-501-2500 TI-IEFT-GM-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-251-500 THEFT~MS- SHOPL~ING-UNK LOSS THEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-250 OR LESS VEH-250 LESSMS-PARTS-MOTOR VEH-AUTO WEAPONS-MS-DISCH-MACH GUN-S BARREL-NO CHAR WEAPONS-MS-DISCHARGE-FIREWORKS-NO CHAR Licensed to Mound Police Department Page: 4 -4365- Citation Summary Report MOC Mound Police Citntlon.DateCRed Between 0'~126/02 0g/26/02 Literal Translation Thursday, August 29, 2002 9000 54 SPEEDING 9001 2 J-SPEEDING 9014 2 STOP SIGN 9026 OVER THE CENTER LINE 9038 MISC CITATIONS/TRAFFIC 9040 2 NO SEATBELT 9100 8 PARKING/ALL OTHER 9150 NO TRAILER PARKING 9210 11 PLATES/NO-IMPROPER-EXPIRED TOTAL... 82 Licensed to Mound Police Department Page: 1 -4366- Mound Police Incident. DateReported Between 07/26/02 08/25/02 Offense. OffenseCode Greater Than or Equal A0000 Case Status Report Un- Except- Cle. nred Pending/ Total MOC Total Founded Cleared Arrest Inactive Cleared Thursday, August 29, 2002 Ref. To GOA Assisted Oth. Agen /UTL /Advised Other A5353 ASLT 5-MS-INFL OR ATTMPT HRM-HANDS-,~DL STR 1 0 1 0 0 1 percent 00.00 100.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 A5355 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-CHLD-ACQ 1 0 1 0 0 1 percent 00.00 100.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 A5506 ASLT 5-MS-THREATEN HARM-NO WPN-CI-ILD STR 1 0 0 0 1 0 percent 00.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 AL351 DOM ASLT-MS-INFLT BODILY HARM-HANDS-AD-FAM 2 0 0 2 0 2 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 100.00 AL352 ASLT-DOMESTIC-MS-INFLT BODLY HRM-HNDS-ADLT-AC 1 0 0 1 0 1 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 I00.00 AL354 DOM ASLT-MS-INFLT BODILY HARM-HANDS-CH-FAM 1 1 0 0 0 0 percent 100.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 AL411 DOM ASLT-MS-FEAR BODILY HARM-POS FARM-AD-FAM 1 0 0 1 0 1 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 100.00 AL551 DOM ASLT-MS-FEAR BODILY HARM-HANDS-AD-FAM 2 0 0 2 0 2 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 100.00 C3111 FORGERY-MS-MAKE ALTER DESTROY-CHECK-PERSON 1 0 0 0 1 0 percent 00.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 C3311 FORGERY-MS-USES-CHECK-PERSON 1 0 0 0 I 0 percent 00.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 DA540 DRUGS-SM AMT IN MOT VEH-POSS-MARIJ-UNK 1 0 0 1 0 1 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 100.00 DC500 DRUGS-DRUG PARAPH-POSSESS-UNK-UNK 1 0 0 1 0 1 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 100.00 J2301 TRAF-ACC-GM-FAIL STOP-RPT ACC-UNK-MV 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 Licensed to Mound Police Department Page: 1 -4367- Case Status Report Total Mound Police Incident. DateReported Between 07/26/02 05/2S/02 Offense. OffenseCode Greater Than or Equal A0000 Un- Except- Cleared Pending/ Total Founded Cleared Arrest Inactive Cleared Thursday, August 29, 2002 Ref. To GOA Assisted Oth. A~en /UTL /Advised Other 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 JF$01 TRAF-AC-GM-3RD DEG DWI-UI ALCOHOL-MV 2 0 0 2 0 2 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 100.00 JFF01 TRAF-AC-GM-3RD DEG DWI- 10 OR MORE WIN 2 HRS-MV 2 0 0 2 0 2 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 100.00 $G501 TRAF-ACC-M-4TH DEG DWI-U[ ALCOHOL-MV 3 0 0 3 0 3 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 I00.00 JGF01 TRAF-ACCoM-4TH DEG DWI-10 OR MORE WIN 2 HRS-MV 2 0 0 2 0 2 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 100.00 M3005 JUVENILE USE OF TOBACCO 1 0 0 1 0 1 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 100.00 M4140 LIQUOR-UNDERAGE CONSUMPTION 18-21 1 0 0 1 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 0 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 1 0 0 0 0 00.00 100.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 M5313 JUVENILE-CURFEW 1 0 0 1 0 1 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 100.00 M5350 JUVENILE-RUNAWAY 2 0 0 2 0 2 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 100.00 M8199 CRUELTY TO ANIMALS-OTHER 1 0 0 1 0 1 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 100.00 N3030 DISTURB PEACE-MS-DISORDERLY CONDUCT 1 0 0 1 0 1 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 100.00 N3190 DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSING COMMUNICATIONS 1 0 0 0 1 0 percent 00.00 00o00 00.00 100.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 N3390 DISTURB PEAC-MS-VIOL DOM ABUSE NO CONTACT ORD 1 1 0 0 0 0 percent 100.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 Licensed to Mound Police Department Page: 2 -4368- Mound Police Incident. DateReported Between 07/26/02 08/25/02 Offense. OffenseCode Greater Than or Equal A0000 Case Status Report Un- Except- Cie, ared Pending/ Total Ref. To MOC Total Founded Cleared Arrest Inactive Cleared Oth. Agen P2110 PROP DAMAGE-GM-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT 3 0 1 0 2 1 percent 00.00 33.33 00.00 66.67 33.33 P3110 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT 5 0 0 0 5 0 percent 00.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 P3630 LITTER-UNLAWFUL DEPOSIT OF GARBAGE-COM-BUSINES 1 0 I 0 0 1 percent 00.00 100.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 TB059 THEFT-MORE 2500-FE-YARDS-OTH PROP 1 0 0 0 1 '0 percent 00.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 TC021 THEFT-501-2500-FE-BUILDING-MONEY 1 0 0 0 1 0 percent 00.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 TC159 THEFT-501-2500-FE-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP 2 0 0 0 2 0 percent 00.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 TC169 THEFT-501-2500-FE-WATERCRAFT-OTH PROP 1 0 0 0 1 0 percent 00.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 TQ059 THEFT-251-500-GM-YARDS-OTH PROP 1 0 0 0 1 0 percent 00.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 TR021 THEFT-UNDR 250 - MS - BUILDING MONEY 1 0 0 0 1 0 percent 00.00 00.00 00.00 I00.00 00.00 TR029 THEFT-250 OR LESS-MS-BUILDING-OTHER PROP 2 0 0 1 1 1 percent 00.00 00.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 TR059 THEFT-LESS 250-MS-YARDS-OTHR PROP 8 2 0 0 6 0 percent 25.00 00.00 00.00 75.00 00.00 TR099 THEFT-LESS 250-MS-SELF SRV GAS-OTH PROP 1 0 0 0 1 0 percent 00.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 TR151 THEFT-LESS 250-MS-MOTOR VEH-MONEY 1 0 0 0 1 0 percent 00.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 Thursday, August 29, 2002 GOA Assisted /UTL /Advised Other 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 Licensed to Mound Police Department Page: 3 -4369- Mound Police Incident. DateReported Between 07/26/02 08/25/02 Offense. OffenseCode Greater Than or Equal A0000 Case Status Report Un- Except- Cleared Pending/ Total MOC Total Founded Cleared Arrest Inactive Cleared Thursday, August 29, 2002 Ref. To GOA Assisted Oth. Agen /UTL /Advised Other TR159 THEFT-LESS 250-MS-MOTOR VEH-OTHER 2 0 0 0 2 0 percent 00.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 U0730 THEFT-UNK LVL-IDENTITY THEFT-UNK LOSS 1 0 0 0 1 0 percent 00.00 00.00 00.00 I00.00 00.00 U1062 THEFT-FE-THFT BY SWINDLE TRICK-2501-19999 1 0 0 1 0 1 percem 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 100.00 U1493 THEFT-FE-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-501-2500 1 0 0 0 1 0 percent 00.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 U249C THEFT-GM-BICYCLE-NO MOTOR-251-500 2 0 0 0 2 0 percent 00.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 U3280 THEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-UNK LOSS 1 0 1 0 0 1 percent 00.00 100.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 U328D THEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTrNG-250 OR LESS 2 0 0 2 0 2 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 100.00 VN111 VEH-250 LESSMS-PARTS-MOTOR VEH-AUTO 1 0 0 0 1 0 percem 00.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 W3110 WEAPONS-MS-DISCH-MACH GUN-S BARREL-NO CHAR 1 0 0 1 0 1 percent 00.00 00.00 100.00 00.00 100.00 W3180 WEAPONS-MS-DISCHARGE-FIREWORKS-NO CHAR 1 0 1 0 0 1 percent 00.00 100.00 00.00 00.00 100.00 0 0 0 0 00.o0 oo.oo oo.oo oo.oo 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0 0 0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 TOTAL 74 4 6 30 34 36 0 0 0 percent 05.41 08.11 40.54 45.95 48.65 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 00.00 Licensed to Mound Police Department Page: 4 -4370- -4371 - -4372- 00000 000000 oooEE EE 00000000 00000000 ~0000000 ~0000000 0~000000 00000000 ~0~000~ m C~ 0 0 r- o < -4373- ~ ~0 ~ ~~o. ~.~ o o 0000 0 o z < ~mm < 00~00 0 0 -4374- The Village by the I houses and 40 and a P!aza~.Prices for the :units range from $194,900 to.' Tour. ?h WSdifferen ays: of bUiidingcommuniti By. Jim,Buchta Star ~ribune'~taff Writer The Builders Association: of:the .Twin ~'Cities'. Fall Showcase Offers an op-' i po~:itY ~ :see,th~ ~d',e?~ietY Of wa~s/ tha~' developers A clubh'0~e has, sPace for meetings and picnics. 'It also has a. fimess center with showers, and' loCkers and an out- door pool. Home prices range from the low $150,000s to more than $200;000.' ~ SUmmit Hil!.(en~ 8:10 from Delta Homes) is near Inter- are planning new ~iia~-.~ __..~,.~__ ,_~, sta~e H~, 35~ in commUnities~ T0 .~~~~,,~-, Eag~,~It has 30 ~de: ~make it.eas~. ~e :~:..,~:. ~-.,~: .... :.~:~ ~ ~he~o~hoUs:es~ l~ssOC.~b~.._ h.~s ~~~~ ..... ~:~,,:Shyed:~i~ ...... focus nmghbor-' ..... m m ~e.~d~e ~d l ho0'fls" ~at show- cas~':different approaches' to b~d~g, a pond ~d wefl~d ~ea. Each houseig communities. - ~ Ymaga by the Bay (entry No. 301, ! Flannery Construction)is a redevelop. spaces connected to free-standing; but a homeowners asso~ ciation provides exterior maintenance and landscaping services. The housES ment project near the shores Of. Lake have,..o~e ortWo front porches and mini~etonka in downtown MOun~:: The set 'clo§e to the Street. Them are fo~ it dev:~lopers replaced an aging high two:story home styles with 2,200 ~ sch0ol at a busy intersection and bUilt a 2,500 square feet; prices range from' mi~/~d-use communl~' ~ith ihouses, ~ $300~000 to $400,000. , ~h0ps andi,~Co~/~ty~i~,'!t is made' ' · ~'~er Parade de~tails:' !up /~f 99' ~ome~i i~i~i~g~'59 town- .. ,: The tour runs from Sept..7-29; hours ihouSes aiid.40 eond~~ .that a~ arenoon to 6 p2m. ]thursdays through-. ' adj.aCent, tO a s!~i~enn~ket'/c.i:tY Park; "Sundays. ' · ~ walldng ~aths and p~'~/~overlooking, a ' .., The tour is freo; however, there is a. wateffan[ TOwnhoUses r~g~ f~m.jh.s_.t t~]dei $5: dOnation'to .the Builders Ot~treaci~? ~FOundation-to visit the Dream Home, $200 000 't°. $249;§(J~)'; fiofa~b~initirh'~~ $i.2 million house with' almOst 6,0iio are priced fr0m$!S~,¢00 to;$269~900. . .square feet in Cr'~dit rdver. To~h/p I~ ¢luhwest:(entries.624-627 built' Scott.County. by ROtflund Homes and 628 and,620 :by -' House prices range from $118,:8~i CenieX Hom.e~),, ~s. a r~esp~;~Wle:.~ge!'-r.for.a/6~ouse ~ ~amb~Oge,. to. :opment n0~..the. NatiO~_al':~pO~,C~: ' .milli0/i for a~quse"in~~t,;a~!':.; ' ter and th~ TOu~nmeg. t players. Club.. :..amap. of.~the, tom ho~:il, ln thai; · golf cour~.,in Sim,; a~*~read°n i&. Fail ShdWCaSi~'i.g~ho,~k]'::'ia¢~iiab[~ '/heine here, rhere~e::~ij0' h0m%, gOoii..at all cludlng 6q~: an~,:~d;!evel't0~Ou~ha.: :S.t~ies, or.at ~:anyp~ade 5~uS'es On Sept.. (built to meet th0:n~eds of.y, our/g fami??7'.. Yoii also can: Xqsit htiP}//www' l lies, single ~st-time bugei~S'~demp~ ,paradeofhomes.org.. · · ' · inesters, POndS :ncc.Up¢. ¢2, acreh· . .: :." · · l'thro~ighout the heighborhood, Which ' ]lm Buch~at ' . ~ .. !also'includes five rnii~s ofw~ngpaths jbuchm@sm~bune, con~ : ~ ' ~.: 'and trails, benche, S. wb~'d~!¢: tennla ". : .o-.r ;' !'co andch d n-spl.ay t e :. :,-'.. · - ....... ............... . '!, DEVELOPMENT from D1 HOt trend: Turning suburbS tto more urban-like places the conclusion ofpresen- from Heart of the City mole Y/tiens on Burnsville's "Heart than justifies the investment of of the City" and Brooklyn about $17 million in public Park!s "The Village," represen- spending to buy and clear land tatives of those commurdties on NicolletAvenue between received warm applause and a request from Alena Hunter of Ramsey for advice on.how her town can develop support for a downtown Ramsay. "How do you convince the pubr~c that growth and devel- opment can be a positive thingg" asked Hunter, a mem- ber of a citizen task force look- ing at the possibility of build- lng a town center in Ramsey, a northern· suburb of Minneapo- lis. "How doyou get those nay- sayers turned around?" Grog Konat, Burnsville's city manager, delivered a pragmat- ic response: "You first have to realize you're not going to con- vince eye.one. And you're go- lng to be criticized all the way through it until the ground- breaking, and then people will go, 'This is a great idea.'" It was apparent at the over- flow meeting of the land use coalition, a nonprofit organiza- tion for development profes- sionals in government and the private sector, that the move- ment toward remaking sub- u[.bs into more-urban places is /l~ffi.t, popular trend in public- 1e partnerships. , I~[nat and his Burnsville cmueagues seemed to have convinced their'fellow development professionals that th~ return to* taxpayers Burnsville Pkwy. and Hwy. 13. Since the Aug. 1 ground- breaking for Burnsvflle's new downtown, old buildings have been tom down on Nicollet for the first phase of the project, which includes a $20 million European-style village of rental apartments, office'space, a res2 taurant and a culinary school adiacent to a town-square · park. .. The city predicts that by the time the two other phases -- which will yield affordable housing, expensive condos and a hotel-performing arts center -- are completed, an area now appraised at $12.3 million will be valued at more than $200 million, and that property-tax .revenue of under $200,000 will increase to more ~than $$ mil- lion. "When you ask, 'Why should a community look at this -- ~t s an increase tn 13 to 16 times the current value, it's an investment ratio Of 9 per- cent public to 'private," Konat said. The public investment is cpming from,the city of Burns- villa and a coalition of govern- ment a{~encies that provide fi- nencim support for projects that include affordable h0us: lng. Because the Heart of the City will contain several types "How do you con- vince the public ihat growth and devel- opment can be a positive thing*. How to you get those naysayers turned around?" -- Alena Hunter, F~arase¥ resident of housing that meet afford- able-housing guidelines, the project is receiving subsidies from the Metropolitan Coun- cil, the Minnesota Housing Fi- nance Agency, Dakota County CommUnit~ Development Agency an(l the U.S. Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Development Village The. Brooklyn Park repre- sentatives explained that such funding wasn't available for The Village because that city already has an abundance of affordable housing. And the public-pr/yarc ratios in Brook- .yn Park aren t as nnpress~ve as the numbers presented by Bumsville. But the redevelop- ment at Zane Ay. and Brooklyn Blvd. still makes economic sense, said Scott Clark, deputy director of community deval- opment for Brooklyn Park, and Stacie Kvilvang, a consultant on that city's project of turning a near-vacant shopping center into a village of shops, housing and walking paths.. The Vtliage North shopping center, which was 75 percent vacant, was a prime candidate for redevelopment because it had become obsolete as a shopping desthaation and be- cause it was adjacent to Shin- glo Creek The master plan for the 134-acre redevelopment calls for new rowhouses, sin~ .glo-family homes, senior hous- ing and parkland along the' creek. Refurbishing the creek will cost $7 million alone, Kvit- wang said. But the new Shingle Creek will be a centerpiece in- stead of an eyesore. Another m/tjor subsidy came in the form of a $2.9 mil- lion loan to the developer to turn an aging 70s-era apart- ment into attractive senior housing. She said the cigr had the cash on hand and c/~nsid- ers the loan, at zero interest for three years, an investment with a better return than keeping that money in the bank. Clark cautioned the devel- opment Professionals that they shouldn't limit their viaious of suburban redevelopment by the amount of money they have available. He said the city should work with citizens to decide what the community needs. ~Financing will work nut ' he said. "It ai~ays does." -2" Kvilvang said it's crucial to keep the project alive by keep- ing it before the public. "Get youtsalf in from of the media," she said. "Promotion, promotion, promotion.' -- I, mTy Werner i~ at lwerner~startribuna eom. -4376- -- ,,-G$$5 - Gover.n. men Ap. provai or Acknowledgment For Use of Gambhng Fun{Is Organization Information (pleaSe print) ' (11/01 Ex~nditure Description (a~ch addit~nal sh~ts E n~sa~) 2. Check the appr~rtate e~enditure caego~: ' Contd~tion ~ a unE of government - Un~ Sat~, stye of Minnesota, or any of its subdMsions, agenc~s, or instmmentalEies. NOTE: A contribution may not ~ made directly to a I~ enforc~ent or pros~uto~l agency, such ~ a police d~a~ent, coun~ sheriff, or ~un~ ~0rney. . A ~ldli~ manageme~ pmj~ ~ ~nefl~ ~e public ~ lar~ w~h ~proval of the state agency th~ h~ author~y over the pr~t. Describe the proposed expenditure, including vendors. ..... Grooming and maintaining snowmobile or ail-terrain vehicle trails with approval by DNR. All trails must be open to public use. Describe the proposed expenditure, including vendors. Oath I affirm that the contribution or expenditure, in accordance with Minnesota Rule 7861.0120, subpart 5D(10), does not result in any net monetary gain or other pecuniary benefit to our organization. I affirm that when lawful gambling funds are used for grooming and maintaining snowmobile or all-terrain vehicle trails or for any wildlife management project for which reimbursement is received from a unit of government, the reimburse- ment funds must be deposited in our lawful gambling account and recorded on the LG1010 - Schedule CID report. / Chief executive officer's signature Phone number Date - Government Approval/Acknowledgment By signature below, the representative of the unit of government · approves the project as described abOVe, and/or · acknowledges the contribution, which will not be used for a pension or retirement fund. Keep this completed form attaohed to the LG1010 - Schedule CID in your organization's records. IT his form will be made available in alternative format (i.e. large print, Braille) upon request. If you use a TrY, you can call us by using the Minnesota Relay Service at 1-800-627- 3529 and ask to place a call to 65t-639-4000. The information requested on this form will become public information, when requested by the Board, and will be used to determine your compliance with Minnesota statutes and roles governing lawful gambling activities. For additional information, check our web site at ww. gcb.state, mn. us -4379- Minnesota Lawful Gambling LG555 - Government AdPsPrOval or Acknowledgment For Use of Gambling Fun (11/01 O"gan;za*lon Int'°rmation (p '"se print)' Expenditure Description (attach additional sheets if necessary) 2. Check the appropriate expenditure category: Contribution to a unit of government - United States, state of Minnesota, or any of its subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities. NOTE: A contribution may not be made directly to a law enforcement or prosecutorial agency, such as a police department, county sheriff, or county attorney. Awildlife management project that benefits the public at large with approval of the state agency that has authority over the project. Describe the proposed expenditure, including, vendors. Grooming and maintaining snowmobile or ail.terrain vehicle trails with approval by DNR. All trails must be open to public use. Describe the proposed expenditure, including vendors. Oath · I affirm that the contribution or expenditure, in accordance with Minnesota Rule 7861.0120, subpart 5D(10), does not result in any net monetary gain or other pecuniary benefit to our organization. · I affirm that when lawful gambling funds are used for grooming and maintaining snowmobile or al-terrain vehicle trails or for any wildlife management project for which reimbursement is received from a unit of government, the reimburse- ment funds must be deposited in our lawful gambling account and recorded on the LG1010 - Schedule CID report. /, Chief executive ofi~..er's signature Phone number Date acknowledges the contribution, which will not be used for a pension or retirement fund. This fo,,,-~ will be made available in alternative format (i.e. lage print, Braille) upon request. If you use a TI'Y, you can call us by using the Minnesota Relay Service at 1-800-627- 3529 and ask to place a call to 65:1-639-4000. Phone number Keep this completed form attached to the LG1010 - Schedule CID in your organization's records. The information requested on this form w]l become public information, when requested by the Board, and will be used to determine your compliance with Minnesota statutes and rules governing lawful gambling activities. For additional information, check our web site at ww.gcb.state.mn.us -4380- Page 1 of 1 Sarah Smith From: To: '"Sarah Smith'" <SarahSmith@cityofmound.com> Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 11:18 AM Subject: RE: Stormwater Permit - P.S. Building Great - good work ..... Original Message ..... From: Sarah Smith [mailto:SarahSmith@cityofmound.com] Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 8:25 AM "Todd Christopherson" <tchristoph@amconconstruction.com> To: John Cameron; mbritz@sehinc.com; Todd Christopherson Wanted to let you know that the stormwater and erosion control permits from the MCWD for the new '~ Public Safety building were approved at the 8~22 meeting. Additionally, the City's surface water ~. management plan was also approved. Therefore, the City of Mound is now responsible for permitting~..~ Best regards. Sarah Smith Sarah Smith Community Development Director City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 952-472-3190 - work 952-472-0620 - fax -4381 - 8/26/2002 heS PR 1 N G S T E DLetter letter to our friends about "Building Their Communities" , By Nicholas R. Dragisich Senior Vice President and Client Representative has been like a roller coaster ride for most cities, counties and school districts. Nearly every state has faced reduced revenues, coupled with increased costs for both operations and capital expenditures. The result is either a reduction in or the elhuination of shared revenues for other units of goverm:nent. As many of our clients move through the budgeting process, the uncertainty of these revenue sources continues to cause concern, The challenges faced in developing a budget are further complicated by the rising costs of medical insurance and energy, as well as the public's resistance to increased taxes. Additionally, for those entities with significant cash reserves, lower investment interest returns have minhuized this revenue source. The key to navigating in this sea of uncertainty lies in effective long-range planning. Many organizations already develop multi-year budgets as a planning tool. However, our experience is that the multi-year budget, usually two years, is not adequate. To gain an understanding of where the organization is heading and the problems that are likely to be encountered, you must take a systems approach to long-range planning. A systems approach is all inclusive, taking into consideration everything that is likely to impact your organization, both internally and externally. It includes those things you can control directly, for example: -4382- ~_-~ CAPITAL EXPENDITURES ~-~ NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES O LOCAL TAX RATE ~ NUMBER AND AMOUNT OF USER FEES It also enables you to see the likely impacts of those things you cannot control, including: ~.¥~ COST OF MEDICAL INSURANCE, ENERGY AND OTHER SUPPLIES ~-~ UNCERTAINTY OF STATE-SHARED REVENUES ~_-~ CHANGES IN YOUR TAX BASE Using a systems approach in planning should result in developing a tool that enables you to perform sensitivity analyses to view the hr~pact when assumptions change relative to the above factors. How LONG SHOULD A PLANNING PERIOD BE? There is no single answer. Factors include the variability of your annual revenue streams and expenditures, the amount and type of debt outstanding, the rate of growth or lack thereof, your tolerance for risk, and other factors. Effective long-range plmming should be for a period of five years at a minh~aum, and in many instances, 20 years is appropriate. Longer planning periods would be appropriate for an organization experiencing rapid growth, while shorter periods would be more appropriate for fully- developed organizations. Effective long-range planning needs to include all the stakeholders in a collaborative process. It also needs to be congruent with all the other planning documents and activities, including the strategic plan, the comprehensive plan, the capital huprovement plan and the debt management plan. Effective long-range plaiming enables your organization to anticipate the future through a proactive approach, rather than reacting to things as they happen, and to make decisions with an understandh~g of their likely long-term impacts. Several residents ofthe.south-centml The '~'gap!'¢onsist~d ~£.~h~..difference inglace a_standbys~o_ur....ce.o£~apital Wisconsin city of Monroe who between the actual cost of the to protect the City's ability to pay are active in agriculture and food processing industries identified the gmat potential value of an ethanol production facility. Ethanol, made from com, is sold as a gasoline additive to improve enviro~m~ental air quality. The proposed ethanol facility would provide a strong market for the locally-grown crop. The developers approached the City of Monroe, asking for development incentives and assistance. The City held a parcel of land that City leaders believed would serve as an excellent site for the production facility. The development would'be a significant addition to the tax base, would provide new jobs, and would diversify the local economy. The City felt it would be in the pubhc's interest both to create a Tax Increment Financing District and to provide "gap" financing to the developers. The City Council moved very quickly to create the Tax Increment District, and issued bonds to fund the public improvements required. The bonds were structured to be repaid with the incremental property value that will emerge from the project's development. It created an urgency to move forward with the gap financing that was required to complete the financing package. development, and the sum of the owner's equity plus the mnount the primary bank was willing to lend. The developers wanted the City to fill the gap - then estimated at $8 to $10 million - with a second mortgage loan. The City asked Springsted, as its financial advisor, to evaluate the degree of risk its position as a subordinate lender was likely to entail. The studies addressed the questions: ~..._-'3 WHAT IS THE INTERMEDIATE AND LONG-TERM MARKET FOR ETHANOL? ~,,.._-'~ WHAT ARE THE APPROPRIATE SAFETY MARGINS GIVEN MARKET PRICE VOLATILITY? ~;,.~-~ HOW CAN THE CREDIT EXPOSURE BE DEALT WITH FROM A BUDGETING AND CREDIT RATING PERSPECTIVE? Following the study, the City agreed to guarantee a $5 million low- interest energy loan to be given to the new ethanol plant by its power supplier. The loan requires no expenditure of City funds, but does expose the City to furore payments if the business venture fails. City officials carefully reviewed this risk, and put and its credit rating. With all of the City's commitments in place, the project broke ground in the fall of 2001. The plant is expected to begin production in September, and will be capable of producing 40 million gallons of ethanol annually. -4383- By David N. MacGilliw'ay Ch, airman One major reason for the current prolonged economic problem is the crisis in confidence in business institutions. The system's supposed "checks-and- balances" have experienced failures on a large scale. First, major publicly- held corporations presented fraudulent financial results. Next, these failures In certain cases, the role of the oversight firms was compromised because of their competing internal business interests: one sector of a firm courting business activity, compromising the ability of another sector to fulfill its responsibilities. The depth of this most recent lack of independence caused a breach of trust that not only cost individual companies vast sums, but has shaken the financial markets. Independent, objective advice is the cornerstone of Springsted. Our those firms whose first priority is investment banking, with advisory services as a conduit to underwriting. It also separates us from those economic development advisory tn-ms that work for a developer on one project, and then negotiate against that same developer in representing a city or county on the next project. We often hear from our clients about the value they place on our telling them what they must hear, rather than what they want to hear. Recent events demonstrate this were compounded by other finns independence is based on serving ..... approach to providing independent charged,with ensuing that finanmal onlyone chent ~ the pubhc .and nora results were presented accurately profit sector. This separates us from and truthfully, by building a parmership of trust. -- simply, spend the most on local entity Minnesota has just experienced ~~!~ By William doynes Assistant Dean Graduate School of Public Administration lYamline UniversiO; Saint Paul, Minnesota Former CiO; Manager Golden Valle3; Minnesota For the last 32 years, I have had the privilege of serving local government in Minnesota, a place that has been selected for the sixth year in a row as the most livable state in the country. As I transition to another career, I'm often asked to reflect on those years of public service and offer some conclusions. Perhaps the most appropriate are based on remarks made by Mr. Wy Spano, [publisher, co-founder and co-editor of The Newsletter, Politics in Minnesota]. His words are not mine, but his senthuents are something I have felt for quite some time. seminar at Hamline Spano cormuented that a majority of the indices for Minnesota's selection as most livable State dealt with public policy issues and their implementation. He said we continue to win this distinction because we, quite goods and services and we deliver them as well as or better than anyone. Once again, we axe faced with a state and local budget crisis brought about by events both in and out of our control. For some of us old folks, this will be the fourth or fifth such occurrence. The hand-wringing has started and the press and numerous elected officials have wamed us of the hard times ahead. Yes, they will be tough. Yes, we will make adjustments. And yes, we will continue on pretty much as we have in the past. It is always interesting to me to see new candidates for office emerge with the mantra of change. What I have learned over the last three decades is that the public expects us to be the providers and protectors of the status quo. When people come home from a day of dealing with the worldwide market place, they want stability. They want the water to come out of the tap, the police to come when called, a place for the kids to play and the snow removed from the street in a thuely fashion. They do not want to have to think about these things, and in Minnesota, they expect them to be done and done well. -4384- PAGE years of, adinittedly, unique gubernatorial leadership. It was to be a time of great change. We may have shocked the world, but I'm hard pressed to identify any major changes. I use this as an example for all of us in the business of local government to emphasize the difference between tinkering with the tax system and levy linfits, as compared to actually eliminating services or reducing service levels. In 32 years, I have never seen a successful attempt by a public body to elhuinate or drastically reduce any core service. Spano also said Minnesota wins the most livable state designation because citizens here expect and believe that their voices will be heard. In my experience, they almost always have been. Those voices come together when the public debate starts to threaten the status quo and the services we have come to expect. In a sector where performance measurements are difficult, I take comfort in the fact that cutting services is equally difficult and in the knowledge that we are doing good work and giving good value. I hope a public service career is as rewarding for you as it has been for me. Recently, we began offering Human Resources services in the Midwest, but our office in Virginia (formerly MAI) has been providing these services for decades. One of their hallmarks is that more than 70% of their new work is from long-term clients. Here are two examples, drawing from the experience of a long-term client and a new client. THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE BEACH, FLORIDA selected our hmuan resources team to conduct a comprehensive classification and compensation study for the City in 1994. The study recommendations were adopted, and in 1999, we were invited back to By Roger M. Scott Senior f/ice President and Client Reprexe~lali~,e in January of this year, the City once again requested our assistance in the form of two additional salary surveys. The first survey was conducted for non-union positions and was followed are consistent with each department's mission, business responsibilities and core requirements. We have assisted in developing a database containing each depm~anent's information and will assist in reviewing and updating job descriptions to accurately reflect the work perfonned and ensure agreement with the departmental mission. The ultimate goal of these efforts is to fonu a basis to ensure that all departments' missions and goals support and enhance the County's overall mission, to establish and maintain equitable and competitive compensation for provide a detailed study update which several months later by a survey for all classes of employees, to provide .......... for successful recruitment of ualified meluded-re.v.~smg- eu~ent~classfficat~on ~ ..umon~pos~mns,~-T-he~r-esul~t. s4ndicate ............... ~ .......... -,~ ...... ~ .................... ~q ................................ documents and preparing new that on average the City is seven employees, anct to aetermme documents as needed. As part of the second study process, a union representative accompanied team members and supported and endorsed our process at employee briefings. Budgetary restraints have forced the City to forgo cost-of-living adjustments since the implementation of the 1999 update. As a result, percent (7%) behind the market. The City will be able to use the survey information during contract negotiations and compensation plan updates. In ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN, we are assisting in establishing a system and process to ensure that operations in their various departments consistent and continuing training needs. These services followed from our assisting the County in a long- tenu planning process. Both the City of Jacksonville Beach and St. Croix County are benefiting from our ongoing knowledge of their individual situations, enabling us to craft solutions tailored to their specific needs. By John Ne~tead Senior [qce President and Client Representative Minnesota School District participation in the 2002 Minnesota Tax and Aid Anticipation Borrowing (MNTAAB) program reached both record dollar volume and school participants in the July 2002 Pool. There are 83 School Districts participating with a total dollar volume of $159,000,000. The increased demand for school district borrowing in Minnesota is attributable to a combination of factors. The State Aid metered pay- ment schedule for schools has been restructured for the 2002-2003 school year. Instead of individual districts receiving 90% of their aid allocation during the fiscal year beginning in 2002-2003, the allocation has been changed to 83% during that fiscal year. This alone has caused some districts to fred themselves in temporary deficit spending. We reported in a previous publication that the State had taken on more of the funding of the basic general education fommla. The increased need and dependence on operating levies, a drop in em'ollment, collective bargaining agreements, increased health plan costs -4385- and, in general, increased operating expenses, all play a role in increasing cash flow needs in school districts. Some districts are also using proceeds to assist in funding various capital projects. While most local tax levies have decreased, the heavier reliance on state aid payments has caused a number of districts (who have not traditionally borrowed for cash flow purposes), to find a need to borrow in anticipation of aid payment. Will this trend continue? Part of the answer will be the public response to operating levies in November. The second part will be the availability of State funds beginning in the 2003-2004 fiscal year. Stay tuned, we will keep you infonued. By Ter~q Heaton Senior Vice President and Client Representative Local governments are now in the midst of balancing budgets and dealing with a few new twists added this year, including: O DECLINING REVENUES FROM ECONOMICALLY SENSITIVE FEES ~._-'~ PROBABLE REDUCTIONS TO STATE AIDS AND GRANTS ~._--~ TIGHT LEVY LIMITS The combination of these three factors alone provides challenges more acute than those seen in many years. Will local governments balance the budget using one-time, short-term "fixes" or will long-term, ongoing, sustainable structural changes be implemented? Challenges can evolve into opportunities. Without such drivers, opportunities for change are often put off. It is easier to tap a reserve or cut capital expenditures in order to delay the pain than it is to restructure services to meet changing demographics or undemtilization. This painless approach only works if the recovery is swift, assured and strong enough to make up for the short-term fix in addition to normal increases in the following year's budget. If the economic situation continues or worsens, the delay will compound the problem very quickly. Terri Heaton recently joined Springsted, and is serving clients in the Midwest. She previously served as the chief financial of/ricer.for the City of Bloomington and its Port Authority. Local government's bond ratings may be impacted by how 2003 budgets are established. Based on recent credit reports issued by nationally recognized rating agencies, structural changes rather than temporary fixes are desired. The following should be considered. FUND BALANCES: Are reserves sufficient to cover cash flow needs throughout the year, without short-term operating loans or internal borrowing? CONTINGENCIES: Operating contingencies are more critical when individual budget line items are trimmed to minimal need levels. ONE-TIME TRANSFERS: Such transfers lower the current levy, but leave a larger gap the following year. DELAYED CAPITAL SPENDING: Decisions to use equipment for an extra year .or two may result in savings, depending on the increased cost of maintenance associated with aging equipment. Delaying infrastructure and facility maintenance may shorten the life of these assets and cost more in the long mn. Debt service is outside of levy limits and the markets are providing the lowest municipal bond interest rates in 40 years. ACROSS THE BOARD CUTS: This quick solution to budget problems often has the result of wounding the entire municipal operation. It affects morale in every area and often has a direct negative impact on service delivery to the citizens, the exact opposite of what most elected bodies want to see happen. Across the board hiring freezes may inhibit governments from hiring the very person needed to address budget problems. TARGETED SERVICE CUTS OF SELECTED ACTIVITIES: These cuts are often more painful on the front end of a budget process and require the elected officials to make tough decisions. In the long mn, it keeps the core service activities in place and allows those areas cut or reduced to work on finding alternative funding from primary consumers, or to redirect efforts towards higher demand activities. Performance measures, by activity, may assist elected officials in identifying areas for targeted changes. OETIONALBU [~GEI REDUCTION STRATEGIES: Presented to elected bodies, this process will allow focus on the impact of each level of decision making. A 5/10/15% reduction alternative, targeted or non- targeted, from the current budget allows understanding of the various impacts and aids in prioritizing difficult decisions. Differentiation between mandated and non-mandated services should be provided to the elected body so they can make effective policy decisions regarding the appropriate level of subsidy the community should fund from taxes, versus what should be generated from self-supporting fees. SHARED SERVICES WITH OTHER COMMUNITIES: Collaboration with neighbors may reduce costs through economies of scale and could result in service enhancements to the citizens. Preliminary budgets and levies, due September 15, are to be finalized in late December. Long-term vision, priorltization of services, and fmancial stewardship are called for during this budget season. Financial Management Policies and Capital and Operating Models are planning tools that can assist you in managing your local government's finances for the next five, ten, twenty years or more. -4386-5 By Paul T. Steinman Vice President and Client Representative For many communities, the local business park is a valuable generator of quality jobs and a diversified tax base. In Mequon, Wisconsin, for example, an existing 129-acre business The City sought Springsted's expertise in the area of Tax Incremental Financing (TIF), as it is commonly called in WisconSh~. This tool allows cities to "capture" taxes associated with the increase in value, over and above the existing value. The city then is able to use the captured taxes to pay the cost of sanitary and storm sewer improve- ments, street construction, site grading, land acquisition and other site costs incurred in preparing the land within a Tax Incremental District (TID). Since development in Mequon's business park is anticipated to be completed in phases over a six-year time span, park is home to 1.1 million square feet Springsted tested the development ......... 6 f Ii'g~ff/h~h-ff~~-iig~S7 ~ a~ ......assumptions~riorlozreatingaxe, liab/e_~L~ numerous high quality jobs, and has bond financing scenario. We produced a an approximate value of $543,000 per acre. When it was time to expand the existing park, the City needed an economic development tool that would assist them in meeting this challenge. conServative bOnd financing scenario, minimizing the City's risk while meeting the timing concerns of the development. Wisconsin TIF differs from TIF in many other states by requiring an endorsement by a Joint Review Board (JRB). A JRB is comprised of representatives from each of the primary overlying taxing entities and one public member. Because a new TID must be approved by a majority of the JRB, Wisconsin cities must work with the overlying taxing entities to ensure their veto power is not exercised. Local citizen group input also will ensure that the type and style of construction in the expanded park will be of high quality. Specialty berming and landscaping will provide a buffer for the surrounding residential homes, and trails will link the business Eark with th~e~great, e~ ..................... Mequon community. The new 100-acre business park is expected to increase market values by approximately $26 million, which is an average value of $260,000 per acre. 60L~' 'ON NJA[ '~IflVd (llYd ~IOV£SOd 'S'fl "IIVBI 8SVqD .LS~:I 4387- p~jronbog oo.~,,tao£ ~oappV The Gillespie Gazette VOL X NO 9 September. 2002 PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE Augus~ 19, 2002 Dear Members and Friends, I can't believe that the summer months are history. But, then, I see all the parents and children shopping for clothes and school supplies. I see the school buses on their practice runs, I even see a few trees starting to turn colors. This was a different summer. But, then, they all seem to be different. It seems to me that most times we had rain, it poured. The flowers at our Center certainly are beautiful. We aelabrated~ur-o~a~-a~iwer~a~y-o~uly_~8? witUn_an~_cream_~ci~,l~l~,_q[ilt~gt~, so we really enjoyed being cool inside and enjoying ~good company.~-Thanks-to~all~.who~helpedand~ch~nks~co-l~i~ne Rosencrantz, from Coldwell Banker/Burnet Realty, for providing the lemonade punch and help for the afternoon and to Culvers for their great discount on the ice cream sundae supplies. Most of our Iongtime members are familiar with our Senior Dining Program. Some of our newer members may not know about this program. A delicious and nutritious lunch is serVed Monday through Friday at noon in our Center. The suggested donation for this meal is a very inexpensive $2.75. Mary Hatch, our Senior Dining Manager, runs the cleanest kitchen anywhere. The menu usually includes meat, potatoes, a vegetable, bread, dessert, milk and coffee. You won't find a bargain such as this anywhere, unless it were at another senior center. Bring a friend and come join us, or make new friends here. One of the wonderful programs offered by Senior Community SerVices is the "Dial-a-Ride" program. The buses will pick up passengers in our local area and take them to their local destination. The cost per ride is a donation of 50 cents for seniors and $1.50 for non-seniors. Dial-a-Ride office hou~ are 8:00 am to 4:00 pm. Their phone number is 952-474-7441. Please try to call 24 hours ahead. Van hours are 8:00 am to 3:30 pm on Monday, 8:00 am to 5:30 pm on Tuesday through Friday and 8:00 am to ~.00 pm on Saturday. Star~ing on September 14~, there will be no Me~ro bus coming to Mound, so that means local rides only on Saturday. Our friendly drivers are: Pam HorCon, Joy Bennett, Kitty Hilk and Dean Dvries. Sub drivers are Bill Davis and Mick McLean. We thank all these drivers and also the drivers who take seniors to doctor appointments in their own vehicles: Ferol Andersen, Gert FreverC, Dana McCarVille, Mick McLean, Jim Regan, Marry and Gene Garvais, Jerry Henke, Dick Hall, Mary Opheim, and Dave Swanson. Sue Gallus is the Senior Community Services staff in charge of this program and we thank Sue for the great job she does us. Jack Weist Chairperson Gillespie Center Advisory Council -4388- -4389- 0 0 -4390- -4391 -