The URL can be used to link to this page

82-10-05MOUND CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting Tuesday, October 5, 1982 7:30 P.M. - City Hall CITY OF MOUND AGENDA Mound, Minnesota 1. Minutes of September 28, 1982, Regular Meeting '2. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Continuation of C.B.D. Maintenance Assessment Role for 1983 B. Revenue Sharing Budget for 1983 3. Resolutions Levying Deferred and Supplemental Assessments Upon Waiver of Formalities; Directing Preparation of Abstract; and Directing Certification to the County Auditor A. Supp. #2879 - Three Points Water - 1 year - $ 228.90 B. Supp. #3180 - Sanitary Sewer - 2 years - $ 292..00 C. Supp. #7928 - 1979 Streets - 13 years - $1,769.45 D. Supp. #7514 - 1978 Streets - 12 years.- $ 292.73 E. Supp. #8297 - 1980 Streets - 14 years - $1,828.15 4. No Parking on the East Side of Finch Lane between Three Points Blvd. & Woodland Road 5. Comments & Suggestions from Citizens Present (please limit to 3 minutes) 6. Resolution to Direct the County Auditor to Levy Certain Taxes 7. Information/Miscellaneous A. Resignation of Gary M. Paulsen from Planning Commission B. Letter from Citizens Advisory Committee for Area 4 C. Action Alert - League of Minnesota Cities D. Letter from Mrs. LaVonne Blackwell E. Letter from Mr. Richard Bialon, 3495 East Shore Drive & Answer from City Attorney F. Letter from Dept. of Transportation on C.S.A.H. llO (Commerce Blvd.) Regarding Setting Speed Limits G. Article "Our Changing Society" H. Discussion by City Manager a Series of Development Challenges (Verbal Report) Pg. 2282-2288 Pg. 2289 Pg. 2290-2294 Pgo 2295-2296 Pg. 2297 Pg. 2298 Pg. 2299 Pg. 2300 Pg. 2301 Pg. 2302 Pg. 2303-2311 Pg. 2312 Pg. 2313 Pg. 2314-2315 Pg. 2316-2317 Pg. 2318-2321 Pg. 2322 Pg. 2323-2329 Page 2281 REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL 199 September 28, 1982 Pursuant to due cell and notice thereof, a regular meeting, of the City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepln County, Minnesota; was held at 5341 .Maywood Road in said City on September 28, 1982, at 7:30 P.M. ~hose present were: Mayor Rock.Lindlan,' Councilmembers Robert Polston and Gordon Swenson.' Coubcilmember Ulrick was absent and excused and Councilmember Charon arrived late. Also present were: City Manager Jon Elam, City Engineer John Cameron, Park Director Chris Bollis and City Clerk Fran Clark; and the foll bwing interested citizens: Patzy D'Avia, Willard~Hillier, Loretta Bickmann, Jerry Longpre, Bill Netka, Mr. & Mrs. Bob Hansen, Mr. & Mrs. John Wag~an, Ron Gehring, Bill Clark, Robert Burke, Mr. & Mrs. Bob Cheney, John Perkins, David Luse. The Mayor opened the meeting and'welcomed the people attending.. M I NUTES The Minute of September21, 1982, S~ecial Meeting were presented for consider- ation. The Mayor asked that the following be corrected in the Minutes of September 21, 1982: 1. On page ~92, 2nd paragraph, Patzy D'Avia's name was misspelled. 2. On page 194, under'Planning Commission Items, B, the first paragraph be cOrrected to read as follows: "The City Manager stated that the Planning Commission has. asked the Counci'l to reconsider this variance because the Hetchlers.can build.a detached garage with entrance on the side (after obtain'lng a variance) and the setback for this is only 8 feet off Island.View Drive." 3. On page 195, under Paint Exterior.of City Hall, "all references ~ paint be changed to stain. Swenson moved and Polston seconded a motion to approve the Minutes of the September 21, 1982, Special Meeting as corrected. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT FOR 1982 The City Manager explained that'Jerry Longpre and Bill Netka have spent a considerable amount of time updating the data on the businesses in order'to make the assessment role accurate. This is the highest dollar amount ever. 'assessed $17,723.46. The two largest dollar amounts in this assessment are Snow Plowing at$1!2,01.Z.Sband Leases with the Bur- lington Northern~.% The Mayor opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone would like to speak for or against the proposed assessment. Bill Clark, 5501 tynwood Blvd.- Stated that he feels he should not be included in this assessment because he does not benefit from any of this maintenance. He pays for his own snow removal, has a gravel parking lot therefore no sweeping and is not a retail store and does not have customers who park in the downtown parking lots. 200 September 28,. 1982 Patzy D'Avia - stated that he does not like the way the Super Valu parking lot was striped this year. There were not other comments. The City Manager presented the Council with a letter f~om Randy Bickmann objecting to this assessment as it relates to parking .space requirements and the fact that his property directly across ~he street from Bill Clark's should'also not be assessed because it is a vacant l'ot. The City Manager suggested only using the front footage of the building and not.the front footage for the complete piece of property. Also changing column #5 to 23 and column #7 to 29. There.were several errors in the market value of :pieces of property, on the role that he. is wa~ti'ng for the Assessor to correct.. He also.'suggeste~'droppi'og Bill Clark's property from the role. Polston moved and Swenson seconded a moti'on to continue, the' PUblilc. Hearing until October 5,'1982, at 7~30. P.M, cor~ectipg the above items and b~i'nging back the corrected figures to the Council. The vote was unanimously"i'~ 'favor. Motion carried. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT - UNPAID TREE'"REMOVAL'CHARGES. . ' The Mayor opened the Pub.l|c Hearing and asked if there was anyone present who wished to be heard about the unpaid-tree removal charges. There was no response sO the Mayor closed the Public Hearing. Polston moved and Swenson sec~'nded the following resolUtion. RESOLUTION #82-254 RESOLUTION LEVYING DEFERRED AND SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENTS UPON WAIVER OF FORMALITIES; · · 'DIRECTING PREPARATION OF ABSTRACT; AND DIRECTING CERTIFICATION TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR The vote Was unanimously in favor.' Motion carried. SPE'CIAL ASSESSMENT - UNPAID WEEDCUTTING CHARGES The Mayor opened the Public .Hearing and asked if there was·-anyone present who wished to be heard about.the unpaid weedcutting charges-. There was no response so the Maypr closed the Public Hearing. Swenson moved and Polston seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION .#8'2' 255 RESOLUTION'ADOPTING UNPAID WEEDCUTTING ASSESSMENT ROLE IN THE AMOUNT OF $100.O0 TO'BE CERTIFIED TO THE COUNTY AND SPREAD OVER I YEAR AT 8% INTEREST The vote was unanimously in favor. DELINQUENT WATER AND SEWER BI.LLS Motion carr. ied.--~- The Mayor opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone present would like to be heard in regard to any of the delinquent water and sewer bills proposed for shut-off. 201 September 28, 1982 Mr. Robert Burke, 3005 .Bluffs Drive stated that he is on the delinquent list for $209.93. Of .that amount, he feels he is only. responsible for $114.00 and the remaining $95.93'is the responsiblity of the previous owner.. The City Manager explained that delinquent utility bills stay .with the property and that it is the new owners responsibility to.settle the'. bills wlth the previous owner. Mr. Burke stated that he will pay.his $114.OO tonight, try to get the previous'owner- to pay their $95.93 and if they do not by Friday then he will pay that amount als°. Councilmemb~r Charon arrived at 8:30 P.M. -Polston moved and Swenson seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-256 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS ~ELETING:~ACCOUNT #22 321 3OO5.O1) IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,040.21 AND.AUTHORIZING THE STAFF TO SHUTOFF WATER SERVICE FOE THESE ACCOUNTS Ee The vote was unanimousl.¥ in favor. Motion carried. SPECIAL .ASSESSMENT - DELINQUENT WATER & SEWER BILLS The Mayor opened the Public 'Hearing and asked if there was anyone present who wished to be heard about the dellnquent water and sewer' bills. There was no response so the Mayor.~c)osed the Public Hearing. Swenson moved and Charon seconded thJ following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-257 RESOLUTION ADOPTING'THE DELINQUENT'UTILITY ASSESSMENT ROLE IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,215.65 TO BE CERTIFIED TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR AND SPREAD OVER 1 YEAR AT 8% The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion, carried. . COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM'CITIZENS PRESENT The Mayor asked if there were any comments or suggestions from the citizens · present'. There were none. FIRE CHIEF'S AWARD The Mayor asked the Council to add this special item to the Agenda. The City'Manager explained that Fire Chief Bob Cheney was awarded the "Box 15 Club" award, Great Lakes Division, at the International Chiefs Conference in Philadelphia last week. Fire Chief Cheney was present to show the City Council his award. The Council all expressed congratulations to the Fire Chief and stated that this recognition was greatly deserved. C'h~ef Cheney praised the entire Fire Department for the fine volunteer work they do that helped him to win this award. He also thanked the City Manager for the great letter he wrote to the Award Committee. 202 September 28, 1982 H.R.A. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS APPOINTMENT The City Manager explained that one of the Commissioners terms explored on August 29, 1982, and he feels we need to broaden out the types of skills we have on the'H.R.A. Board to reflect the future requirements the H.R.A. Board will face. He has several names to recommend for this' posi. tion but would like direction from the City Council on their feelings. Council- member Swenson would ~ike to see the City Manager appointed as Executive 'Director of the H.R.A. 'The Council questlone~ how t'he Director of the 2020 Project was selected. Mayor Lindlan asked that the Council delay any action on the appointment to the Boar~ until a meeting in October and find out how the Director of the 2020 Project is appointed; also asking the City Attorney if the Manager can-be appointed as Executive Director of the H.R.A. Charon moved and swenson seconded a motion to table action on this item until further information is presented. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. STOP SIGNS AT THE. INTERSECTION OF SHOREWOOD LANE AND QUAIL ROAD The City Manager explalned that a hazard exists at this intersection because a retaining wall was bui'lt after the road construction was completed and it blocks vision of all drivers attempting to enter' Shorewood .Lane from Quail Road. The Police Chief is recommending that this intersection have Stop Sings installed. Polston moved and Charon seconded.the fo]lowing resolution, RESOLUTION #82-258 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE INSTALLATION OF A STO~ SIGNS ON BOTH SIDES OF SHOREWOOD LANE AT THE INTERSECTION OF QUAIL ROAD The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. MOUND BAY PARK IMPROVEMENT BIDS The City Manager explained that when the Bids for the Mound Bay Park Improvement were opened on September 21, 1982, there was an irregularity in the low bid of Perkins Landscape because they only 'submitted a 5% Bid · Bond and the specifications called for a 10% Bid Bond. The other four bidders subbmitted the correct Bid Bond of IO%. The low bid was for' $38,648.00.' The next low bid was from Natural Green in the amount of $38,820.00. The City Attorney has rendered the following opinion on the Bid Bond question: "..the City can waive the mistake on the part of the bidder if a 10% bond is on file prior to the time the Council considers the bid" The City Engineer has advised that Perkins Landscape has submitted anew bid bond which covers 10~ of the, ir bid pr.opg~a.1 ........ Swenson moved and Polston seconded' the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-259 RESOLUTION TO AWARD THE BID FOR THE MOUND BAY PARK'IMPROVEMENTS TO THE LOW BIDDER PERKINS LANDSCAPE IN THE AMOUNT OF $37,648.00, ACKNOWLEDGING THE IRREGULARITY IN THE BID David Luse of Natural Green was prQsent and asked to be recognized. 203 September 28, 198Z He stated that he felt awarding the bid to Perkins Landscape would go against the integrity of the bid process when everyone else c°mg e6 with the specifications and provided a 10% Bid Bond. ~he vote on the resolution was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING - SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR TREE REMOVAL CHARGES ~haron moved 'and Swenson seconded.the following resolution. RESOLUTION.#$2~260 RESOLUTION SETTING OCTOBER 12, 1982, FOR THE UNPAID TREE REMOVAL CHARGES SPECIAL ASSESSMENT HEARING The-vote was unanimously .in favor. Motion carried. LEASE OF LOTS 1,2,3,. ~m 22~ BLOCK 5, .DREAMWOOD -.LEO WALLIS The City Manager explained that Mr. & Mrs. Leo Wallis has asked'if they can leas. e this.City land in order to.cleanth'em up and.i.mprove the appearance*of the area. They ma¥~ after cleaning up the lots, want to place a small garden on the land. The City Attorney has advised that he sees not problem with the leasing of the land as long as it is not used as a commercial garden spot. The City Manager [s r~cpmmending that the lease be for $1.O0.per year. Charon moved and Swenson seconded the follQwtng re~i01.ut~on, RESOLUT!'0N-#82-261 KESOLUT~QN. TQ.AP~RQVE.LEASING.LOT. S 1,2,3, & 22, BLOCK 5,. DKEAMW00D TO MR. & MRS,.LE0 ~ALLIS. The vote was unanimously*in.favor. Motl~on carried, BID FOR NEW SKYLIGHTS IN CIT¥'~A. LL' . The City'Manager asked that the Council authorize the advert~sment for b~ds for the.installation of ne~ skylights iln the C?t¥ Hall,. ' .Charon 'moved. and Polston.sec°nded-the following res.°lut)on, RESOLUTION #82--262 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ADVERTISMENT FOR BIDS" " FOR THE INSTALLATION.OF SKYLIGHTS'AT MOUND CITy. HALL, TO.BE OPENED AT 1:00 P',M, ON OCTOBER 12, 1982. The vote'was unanimously in favor,, Motion carried. ANDERSON BUILDING. The City Manager submitted a'letter ~rom Mr. Michael F, Smith ISm)th Heating and Air Condi'tioni. ng, inc.) proposi, n9 the purchase of the Anderson Bui. lding. The letter proposed ter~s but no total amount. The Manager stated that Mr. Smith called him. and had inadvertently left out the total amount of $30,000. The Council discussed the'fact that they' would like to see a plan of some kind from Mr. Smith showing what the bui'lding would look like when completed before making a decision. The Council referred thi. s ~tem back to the City Manager for further i. nformation. 204 September 28~ 1982 PAYMENT OF BILLS · Swenson moved and Charon 'seconded a motion to approve the payment o~ bills submitted on the pre-list in the amount of $48,541.-97, when funds are available. Roll ~all vote was unanimously in favor. 'Motion carried. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS A~ticle on Purple Loosestrife: Flowery Threat to the Wetlands L'etter from the City of Orono to the. L.M.C.D'. - supporting the L.M.C.D.'s policies and procedures of enforcing its ordinances. L.M.C.D. - Agenda from September 22, 1982 Minutes from August 25, 1982 Letter from McCombs Knutson to Hardrives - Regarding work to be completed from the 198'1 Street Project. . Letter from Suburban PUblic Health Nursing Service - progress toward impending.merger of. S.P.H.N.S. and the Visiting Nurse Service. Brief on Continental Telephone - Jim Larson Letter from Chris Bollis on Stairway at AVocet & Bluebird Westonka Chamber Waves - September 1982 Hennepin County Trans~o.E.t~tion Pro.g.ra~ .- Six month highlights of the examination of the transportation system for the.elderly and elderly handicapped residents of Hennepin County~. ~ J. Fact Sheet on Constitutional Amendment for.Highway Bonds`- to remove restrictions on t.he interest rates for and the amount of truck highway bonds. K. Metropolitan Council Review - from Septemb6r 17, 1982. L. Citizen ~..~.~gue"Memo - Subject Was issues, propOsals and participants in state-local finance. M'[ Action Alert - Subject was vital"new information concerning 1983 local government aid (LGA) Charon moved.and ~olston seconded a motion to adjourn at 9:50 P.M. was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. c~n Elam, City Manager The vote Fran Clark, City Clerk BILLS ..... SEPTEMBER 28, 1982 Acro Minnesota Albinson Ear) F. Andersen Aero Asphalt Gayle Burns Holly 'Bostrom Janet Bertrand 'Baldwin Supply Chapin Publishing Joan Conkey C~mmissioner of Revenue Cr~wley Fence Dept of Motor Vehicles Flexible Pipe Tool Nick Gronberg Dennis Gronberg Krome~ Co. [athrop Paint Supply' Doris Lepsch Mtka Painting & Decor. Mound Super Valu Northrup King: Office Products of MN Pitney Bowes Credit MN Coroners & Med MN Academy Prosec Mound Postmaster MWCC Conference De)oris Schw~l be Swenson Nursery Thurk Bros. Chev Western Tree Service Water Products Mtka Portable Dredging Xerox .Corp .Chemlawn Exam IAssn & Law Enf 30.!6 22.50 283.80 9,526.21 19.87 138.O0 30.20 346.14 30.78 6OO.OO 3,230.46 875.00 17.25 495.OO 2,667.46 1,.125.00 8.65 806.72 15.oo 1,865.oo 9.84 310.98 405.00 26.00 6O. OO 35.00 105.00 15.00 56.00 67.75 20,859.00 990.00 222.48 1,5OO. OO 82.72 1,664.OO TOTAL BILLS 48,541.97 -- -, -:' ':.-::' MOUND ' CBD .MAINTEN ,NCE. ASSESSMENT. '--~ueller. (Tom Thumb) 1.0 18 6 - ,6 l~ 2.40 50 7.0~ R8 nn~ 2.G9 310.~ ' ~n ~'77.7g .... 13-117-2~ 33 0005 -- House of Noy I.O 30 22 $ 47 6,00 9~ 3.90 '202.~0~ 6.1~ ~q.~7 117.7~ I?q ~ [I __13-117~2q 33 0006 · Curtis,Johnson 1.O 8 7,5 ~ 6.5 .8~ ~0 2.05 55.'OOO 1.68 112.00 ~q.?~ &~ ~R 13-11P-2~ .33 0007 ~ard Orn 1.0 '" ' S0 2.05 17.'t0~ .5~ ..... S~;28 IS,33 7~,6 -~ar] Bros. Co. (Post Off,lc,) I.O 1,6 .... lq lO 7~ ~,}q lO0 ~.ll '111.~O0~t.q2 ~O_~8 ltg g~ aR ~a ,,- %auer I.O ~ 8 17 2.17 85.1 3,~9 55,000~ 1,68 2n~.81 IOn. q2~g ~8 '~ ~13-117-2h 33 O016 'tonqpre's I,O 7.5 fl ~R ~ 9 ~1 62 2.~R 7~.~OO, ? ?~ ~R~ 7b 73.7~ 6~.77 ~23.25 13-117-2q 33 0oi7 · , Lbngpre's 1.0 7.5 3 Io.e 1.38 78 ~,oq ~.9OO ,I,60 180.8t) qT. ql&n &A 30~.22 .. 13-~7-28 33 002'~ ~. Bickma~ l.'O 29 23 23 29 3.70 IkO 5,7S 82,~0C 2.~2 899.30 166,27 72.87 '~111 Johnson (Coast-Coast) I.O )7. 9.~ ~6.5 ~, ql 66.66 ~.7~ 72~ I002..2) 8OOJ) 79,2~ 6t.91 ~ql,17 _ 13-117-2q 33 OOq2 arolch, Agency (Super Valu) 1.O ~0' .f&.~ ~&.~ 7,~, 66,66 Z,Tq ~210.1o0 6.~3 972.96 ,7~.2318s.93 1278.12 13~ll7-2~ 33'00~5 .,13-117-2q 33 0086 ~11 Johnson (Baker?) 1,0 1~''" )0.~ ~5.5 3.25 2~:5 .~2 55.0OO 1.68 ~38.57 ?6.60 ~8,~8 ~1t.7~ tansln~ 1.0' I~ ~,5 ~ 17.~ ?.2~ 60 2.~6 57;200 1.75 300.9~ 71.1~ 50,60 ~22.67 -13-~7-28 33 0053 _lJ-~r211 33 O058 13-117-2h 33-OO5~ .... Hound Hedical Prop. I.O , ~,~t -38 I,qOO .O~ _Jo.gq 1.16 -I],llT-~q ]3 0060 -tJ-ItT~2~ 33 0063 Con~ ~.0 ~2 ' ~0 '~2 ; 5.36 I00' ~.lh ~3~000 l.Ot ~723.31 1~8.8~ 29.2q 1~1~-2~ 33 0066 Snyde~ Oru9 I.O - I~ I0 I'~ I~ 2.q} ~O '2.O~ I0,0OO 3.37 322.92 5~.28 ~7.~5 ,Continental Telephone 1.0 hO ~7 -77 9.83 50 2.05 ~80,OO0 8.57 1326.52 59.'28 ~qT.J2 .... '~ . (I) (2) (3) (5) (6) .. (7) (8) (~) (1o) (~1) (12) (15) (16) (18) (20) (20 (24) ._ (26) {27) (28) (29) ..,'(31) 02) . (~) (3~) (35) 06) (37) 08) (~S) C0uncilmember RESOLUTION NO. 82- WHEREAS, "RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT ASSESSMENT ROLL AT $17,723.46 TO BE CERTIFIED TO THE COUNTY AND SPREAD OVER 1 YEAR AT 8 % -pursuant to..proper, notice duly given as required by. Law, the Council has met and heard and PaSsed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for the following improvement, to-wit: "CBD Parking Maintenance from'June 1, 1981 to May 31, 1982. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: i; Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment agai.nst the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein'included is hereby found to be'benefited by the proposed improv~men~ in the amount of the assessment levied against it. 2. Such assessment shall be payable in one annual installment, to be payable on the.first'Monday of January, 1983. To the installment shall be added .interest at the rate of 8 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of ~hls assessment resolution until December~ 31, 1983. 3.' 'The-owner of any~.property, so assessed may, at any time within 30.days~from the adoption Of this resolution, pay the wh01e of th~ as.sessment against any parcel, and no interest shall be charged;' and he may until. November 15, following the date of this resolution pay the whole of the assessment with interest accrued to December 31, of the year following the date of assessment. 4. The Clerk shall for. thWith..transmit a certified.duplicate of' this assessment to the County Auditor to.be eXtended on the proper tax lists of the County, and such assessments shall be cd-llected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. October 5, 1982 REED & POND ATTORNEYS AT LAW MOUND, MINNESOTA 5S364 PAUL L. I='ONO Mr. Jon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 RE: Dr. Robert Lauer PID Numbers 13-117-24 33 0014 and 13-117-24 33 0015 Dear Mr. Elam: Dr. Robert Lauer has contacted m~ about parking assessments against the captioned parcels. Parcel 0014 has been assessed $213.98. assessed $442.33. Parcel 0015 has been Dr. Lauer has been credited with $192.50 against the assessment for parcel 0014. This credit is for a lease between Dr. Lauer and the City of Mound for parking. The lease is dated September 10, 1970, and has long since expired. The original rental for this lease, which is the credit for parcel 0014, was $192.50. This rental has remained the same down to the present date even though the assessment for the same property has increased during the past 12 years. The lease and rental payments thereunder have long since terminated. Dr. Lauer feels he should be entitled to a present rental payment equal to the increase in the assessments over the same period of time. This would amount to approximately 3 times $192.50 or $577.50. Please advise. Very truly yours, REED & POND PLP: ph cc: Jerry Longpre Because of the recent sale of Lot 0014 by Dr..Lauer, the credit this year and in the future should be applied to Lot 0015. 148 May 4, 1982 Councilmember Ulrick moved the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-134 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 1982 REVENUE SHARING BUDGET WITH THE ADDITION OF ITEM #18 WHEREAS, WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on April 27, 1982 regarding the proposed use of Federal Revenue Sharing Funds, and on May'4, 1982 another hearing was held before the adoption of the Federal Revenue Sharing Budget. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: To adopt the following Federal Revenue Sharing Budget: 1. Tire. Balancing Machine (Used) 2. Pressure Washer (Car/Truck) (New) 3. Summer Interns for City Manager's Office a. Master Park Plan b. Use of City Land 4. Downtown Study for DAC 5. Refurbish Three Points Tennis Courts 6. Vac-All Truck 7. Police Car 8. Painting and Refurbishing City Hall 9. Fence Around New City Maintenance Building. i0. City Hall Remodeling 11. Spring & Fall City Clean-Up 12. Park Dept. Truck Repairs 13. Magnetic Locator for Water/Street Dept. 14. Post Drive 15. Election Counter 16. Down Payment Toward Public Works Building 17. Handicapped AcceSs 18. Develope Brookton Park Tennis Courts $ 900.00 1,600.00 4,000.00 6,750.00 10,000.00 .15,000.00 8,000.00 10,000.00 8,000.00 20,000.00 10,000.00 1~000.00 550.00 785.OO 6,000.00 15,0o0.00 IO,OOO.OO 10,000.00 A motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Swenson and upon vote being taken thereon; the following voted in favor thereof: Charon, Polston, Swenson, Ulrick and Lindlan; the following voted against the same: none; whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. Attest: City Clerk AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION 5571 AUDITOR'S ROAD MOUND, MN. 55364 Stote of Minnesota County of Hennepin I 'l~le Il tO ahnoIJe~l thld the Ci,y ~ OI Ihl . ( City ol Mou~cI will cx)hOuC:l · · Octob~ 5,19~2 al 1:30 P.M.', m~ Ire Moun4 Cily ~ Offices, 5341' Meyvmocl · uw Ira' the 1~2-83 CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUND STATEMENT OF. REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1981 (with comparative actual amounts for year ended December 31, 1980) ·Revenue Federal aid - Revenue Sharing Grant County grant - Nennepin County Interest Other To~al revenue Expenditures Personal services 'Supplies Other services and charges Capital outiay Total expenditures Net increase (decrease) in fuhd balance Fund balance January 1, b~fore adjustment Prior period adjustment (See Note 3) · Fund balance January 1', restated Fund balance·December 31 1981 Budget $ 51,OOO $ 51.,0OO ,$ 43,O00 '$ .43,OOO Actual $ 44,827 4,525 12,O61 287 $ 61,7OO $ 12,570 565 14,905 17,602 · $ 45~642 $ 8,'OOO $ 16,058 $ 87,923 86,735 1,188 87,923 95,9.23 $103,981 1980' Actua~ $ 44,972 6,923 224 .. 52~119 ~,O78 8,946 52~7~52 65,776 $(13,657) ...$100,757" 823 · $ 87 ~923 FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUND BEG INNING BALANCE REVENUE '. BEG INNING BALANCE Federal Aid " Interest Other TOTAL REVENUE EXPEND I TURES - Tire Balancing Machine Interns Downtown Study-for DAC . Refurbish Three Points Tennis'Cour~ Vac-.All (1/2 Cost) ~ Pol'ice Car Painting & Refurbishing City Hail/ City Maintenance Building Fence Around New Maint. Building. City Hall Remodeling (Skylights) Spring.& Fall Clean-Up Park Dept. Truck Repairs Magnetic Locator Post Drive Election Counter Down Payment - Public Works Building . Handicapped Access Revenue Sharing Audit Youth Employment/School Dist. Sandblaster Dump Truck (1/2 Cost) Receptionist (Part-Time) Publications C'ivil DefeNse Siren (2 at $2,00d @ = $4,O00) * Codification of 0rd'i'nances Radio (Police) TOTAL EXPENDITURES ENDING BALANCE Revised 10-1-82 1982 PROJECTED 103,981 38,779 11,OO0 225 153,985. 9OO 4,O00 6,750 9,950 15,oo0 8,OO0 10,000. -0- 20,000 14,2OO 1,825 484 640 6,275 --O- -O- 5OO 6oo 630 2,500 2o0 -0- io2,454 51,531 1983 PROPOSED 51,531 '45~762 10,O00 2OO 107,493 'O- 7,500 -O- 10,000 -0- '0- -0- -0- -0- 30,000 -0- -0-- 2,000 15,000 5OO 65,000 42,493 Counci lmember WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, RESOLUTION # 82- .RESOLUTION TO SET OCTOBER 26, 1982, AS.THE DATE FOR FINAL ADOPTION OF THE REVENUE SHARING BUDGET a public hearing is required on the proposed use of Federal Revenue Sharing money, and this public hearing was advertised in the Laker Newspaper on September 21, 1982, and held on October 5, 1982, and the following items were proposed: 1. Police Car 2.' Spring & Fall Clean-Up 3. Dump Truck (1/2 cost) 4. Civil Defense Siren 5. Codification of Ordinances 6. Radio (Police) Tota 1 and $ 7,500 10,000 3O,OOO 2,000 15,000 5OO $ 65,000 WHEREAS, another hearing is. required on the final adoption of the-Federal Revenue Sharing Budget. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY'THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: That October 26, 1982, be the date for the hearing on the final adoption of the Federal Revenue Sharing Budget for 1983. Councilmember RESOLUTION # 82- RESOLUTI'ON TO SET OCTOBER 26, 1982, AS THE DATE FOR FINAL ADOPTION OF THE REVENUE SHARING BUDGET WHEREAS, a public hearing is required on the proposed use of Federal Revenue Sharing money, and WHEREAS, this public hearing was advertised in the Laker Newspaper on September 21, 1982, and held on October 5, 1982, and WHEREAS, the following items were proposed: 1. Police Car 2.' Spring & Fall Clean-UP 3. Dump Truck (1/2 cost) 4. Civil Defense Siren 5. Codification of Ordinances 6. Radio (Police) Total and $ 7,5OO 10,000 30,000 2,000 15,000 5OO WHEREAS, another hearing is. required on the final adoption of the' Federal Revenue Sharing Budget. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: That October 26, 1982, be the date for the hearing on the final adoption of the Fede'ral Revenue Sharing Budget for 1983. GRS Account Status As of June 30, 1982 UD'UHD C~TY GENERAL REVEN~E SHARING ALLOCATIONS HAVE BEEN COHPUTED FOR PERIOD [4 (OCTOBER 1, '[9B2 - SEPTEMBER ~O, [gB~) USING DATA THAT UERE REV~EUED.B¥~ERCH GOVERNMENT. YOUR GOVERNMENT".S.ZNITIRL.PERIOD [4. ALLOCATION'E5 .... IN APRIL lgB2, YOU UERE NOTIFIED OF PRELIMINARY DATA FOR°-' EP, 14.UHICH INCLUDED. 19TT PER CAPITA INCOME..YDUR EP 14. ~NITIAL-ALLOCATION WAS CALCULATED.USZNG~CURRENT DATA UHICH INCLUDES [gTg.PER CAPITA INCOHE BRSED ON THE'[gBD CENSUS,~ISTED-BEEOU.'FOR.~OUR:~OHP~R[SON.:P, RE,~HE CURREN~ ..... AND PRELIM.INARY DATA: ~gBa POPULATION: PER CRPZTR INCOME: F~ [9g[ INTERGOVT TARNS: CURRENT 9,~BQ S6~1,14~ '* '$B~l, 56S SB~1, BBS FINAL AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN COHPpTED FOR EP [~ USING FINAL DATA. YOUR GOVERNMENT'S FINAL PERIOD $4~ LESS'T~AN.THE AMOUNT"EStIMATED FOR THE EP. THE'ADjUSTMENT FOR PERIOD 1~ HAS BEEN.SUBTRACTED FROM YOUR INITIAL PERIOD ~4 ~L~OCATION .TO COMPUTE YOUR INITIAL pER~OD 14 ENTITLeMENT.DF $45,782. YOUR COVERNHENT UiLL RECEIVE PAYMENTS FOR EP IA BASED ON THIS ENTITLEMENT AMOUNT BEGINNING JANUARY ~gg~, PROVIDED THEENCLOSED.STRTEHENT OF'ASSURflNCES'.CERTIFICRTION .FORH IS COMPLETEO RNDRETURNED TO. THIS OFF.ICE AND ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN MET. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR NEEDADDITIONAL INFORMATION, BE SURE TO REFERENCE YOUR ORS RECOUNT NUMBER, ~4 2 OaT 024, -AND YOUR STATUS CODE, '070. DIRECT YOUR ~NQU~R[ES TO ORS, INTERGOVERNHENTAL RELATIONS DIVXSION, 24D[ E STREET NU, WASHINGTON D.C. 2D225 OR CALL 2D2-6~4-S~DQ; 77 14. CITY of MOUND' 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 Date: September 29; 1982 To: Jon E1 am From: Sharon Legg~,~ ER: Poi icy on water and sewer connection fe~s In prior years when a new construction building permit was issued or a lot was divided, we searched old water and sewer assessment rolls for additional special assessments, which we. call deficiencies. The applicant had the option of paying for it on his building permit or having it assessed along with his taxes. He had to sign a form to wa ivethe special assessment hearing. (See copy of form attached,) On December 29, 1981, the council passed Reso]utlon 81-407, setting the Building, Planning and Zoning Fees for 1982. 'Included in this resolution were provisions for collecting a water connection fee of'$125 and a sewer connection fee of $125. I have 'instructed both Dee and Marge not to collect the additional special assessments on building permits and lot splits because I thought the $125 connection fee replaced the additional specials, Am I correct? Example: If someone were to divide a lot with front footage of 80'feet into two lots each with 40 front feet and build a. house on each, Dee or Marge would search old roils such as Levy 3397, Levy'31'80 or Levy 3388 for the original front feet and units charged. If the minimun was 60 front feeh an additional 40 feet would be charged'plus an additional unlt charge. Searching these old assessment records involves quite a bit of work, and' I have a hard time justifying charging both the 0125 and the additional assessments. Also, we do not have the assessment records on utility installations in some parts of Mound. Therefore, in these areas, no additional assessments are charges. Levy 3180, Treatment Plant & Tr'unk System Levy 3388, Sanitary Sewer Lateral Levy 3397, Water M&in~ Trunks Laterals Unit Charge''~= $292.00 ,.Unit Charge = $ 64.03 Unit Charge = $ !7.21 Per ft = $9.04 Per ft = $4.85 The loss of revenue in 1981:::if::Oe:'had collected, the $125 hook-up charge instead of.the additional special assessments could have been at the most $668. 1982's loss would amount t6 $438. We could also consider raising the $125 hook-up charge to cover these losses.for 1983. If you agree with me, I feel we should refund any additional assessments paid since we began charging the $125 hook-up fee and not adopt the supplemental assessments included in the October 5, 1982 council packet. I am only referring to the water & sewer supplemental assessments. · $uamaAo~dm3 ~ p~es ~o~$ $~$au~q pue ~!-q se %c~S u~ uo~nIO~H $o e%ep ~o~$ ~se~e~ux.%9 ~' $o ~uezssesse Ieuo3~ppe ue o~ ~ussuoo s~op pue ~$usmssssse ~o so~ou psI~e~ pue peqs~i~ud o~ ~q~ ~A~ea Xqs~eq ssop pue (s)q~.uu ao$ possosse sea pue q96I ~0~ XIUg uo I~ounoo og%'Xqp~dope sea p@pusme pue po~ed~d os ITo~ gusms~asse ~q~ ~V~H6t pue %u~em Mur~. ~ua~ss~ss~ p~sodoad e $o uo!~eaedead ~u~as@ao uo~nIog~a e ~dope 'q96I ~9Z k~tuo P~P punot~$o s~eII!A sq~ ~o I~ouno0 o~eiI!A oR% 'S~H~ (s~s :~uu.~& pue ~ueI& iezods.~i ~'-~S. X~e~ueg pur, o~) J,N~ic~S~S~V NO 7V2~dd¥ ~Oi~I'~H ~Oi'IiE~._H ~0 ~OIAO~I .40 eq~os euu .~,q ~punoN Councilmember moved the followlng resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 82- WHEREAS, WHEREAS, PlO RESOLUTION LEVYING DEFERRED AND SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENTS · UPON.WAIVER OF FORMALITIES; DIRECTING PREPARATION'OF ABSTRACT; AND DIRECTING CERTIFICATION TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR the City Council, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, (Laws 1953, Chapter 398, as amended) has the power to levy supplemental assessments and the power to levy. deferred assessments, and the following assessments were not initially levied in the projects as indicated, but waivers of formality for supplemental'and deferred assessments have been executed by the property owner and delivered to the City: 1. Pursuant to its authority under Chapter 429, Minnesota Statutes .the City Council does hereby determine thaC each.of the'parcels of land hereinafter described have benefited'in an amount equal to the amount set opposite each of the said parcels by virtue of the project as Indicated and that they 'be, and hereby are, assessed in the amount set opposite each suCh.described parcel, and each such supplemental and deferred assessment shall be payable-qn equal annual installments over such period of years as shown: Levy No. ImproVement Years Amount 13-117-24 14 0041 Supp. 2879 Three PoiPts Water 1. $228.90 "' 2. Such inst~llments shall be payable as foll~ws: 'The first of the instal'Iments to be payable on or before.the first Monday in Janu- ary 1982 a.nd sha]l bear interest at the Eate of 6.~ per annum from the date of the adoption of .this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added |~erest on the entire assess- meat from the date of this resolution until December 31, 1983. To each subsequent install'me't, when due, shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments.'. .' 3. ~he owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, p~y the whole of the assessment on such property, .to.the City Treasurer, except that no .interest 'shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within "thirty (30) days from the adoption of this resolu- tion; and he may.,_.at any time!p~i~'~ ~'N~e~b~ 15 of 'each yea~," pay to the County'T~e'~sure~'~e entire amount of the assessment .remaining unpaid, with interest gccrued to December 31 of the year in which such paymen~ is made. 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the. proper tax llsts of the County,. ~nd suc'h assessments shall be collected and paid over In the same manner as other municipal taxes. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember and upon vote being taken thereon; the follgwing voted in favor thereof: the following voted against the same: with the following being absent: whereupon said resolution was decl~red passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. Mayor Councilmember moved the following resolutlon. RESOLUTION NO, WHEREAS, RESOLUTION LEVYING DEFERRED AND SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENTS UPON WAIVER OF FORMALITIES; DIRECTING PREPARATION OF ABSTRACT; AND DIRECTING CERTIFICATION TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR the City Council, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, (Laws 1953, Chapter 398, as amended) has the power to levy supplemental assessments and the power to levy deferred assessments, and WHEREAS, the following assessments were not initially levied in the projects as indicated, but waivers of formality for supplemental and deferred assessments have been executed by the property owner and delivered to the City: 1. Pursuant to its authority under Chapter 429, Minnesota Statutes the City Council does hereby determine that each.of the*parcels of land hereinafter described have ben.~fited'in an amount equal to .the amount set opposite each of the said parcels by virtue of the project as indicated and that they 'be, and hereby are, assessed in the amount set opposite each su:h.descr'lbed parcel, and each such supplemental and deferred assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments over such period of years as shown:' Levy No. ImproVement Years Amount 'f& 7 supp. Sewer 3180 2 S292.00 Supp. Sewer 31 0 $292.00 PID 13-117-24 14 OO41 13-117-24'11 0130 o 4o Such installments shall be payable'as follows: 'The first of the instal'lments to be payable on or before the first Monday in Janu- ary 1982 and shall bear interest at the rate of 6_._~ per annbm from the date of the a~option of .this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added i~terest on the entire.assess- ment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 1983, To each subsequent installmefft, when due, shall be a'dded interest for one year on all unpaid installmen.ts~ The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior tO certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, .to.the City Treasurer, except that no .interest shall be charged if Che entire assessment is paid within "thirty (30) days from the adoption of this resolu- tion; and he may, at an~ tlmelp~f~-~ ~'N~mbe~ 15 of each'year,' pay to the Count~'~Sur~;'{~e entire amount of the assessment remalnl.n~ unpaid, with interest ~ccrued to December 31 of the year in which such paymen~ is made. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the. proper tax lists of the County,. ~nd such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. The motlon for the adoption o~ the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember and upon vote being taken thereon; the following voted ~n favor thereof: the following voted .against the same: with the following being absent: whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. Mayor Councilmember moved the followlng resolutlon. RESOLUTION N0. 82- WHEREAS, WHEREAS, RESOLUTION LEVYING DEFERRED AND SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENTS UPON WAIVER OF FORMALITIES; DIRECTING PREPARATION-OF ABSTRACT; AND 'DIRECTING CERTIFICATION TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR the City Council, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, (Laws 1953, Chapter 398, as amanda.d) has the power to levy supplemental assessments and the power to levy. deferred assessments, and the following assessments were not inltially levied in the projects as indicated, but waivers of formality for supplemental and deferred assessments have been executed by the property owner and delivered to the City: 1. Pursuant to its authority under Chapter 429, Minnesota Statutes .the City Council does hereby determine that each.of the'parcels of land hereinafter described have ben, fired'in an amount equal to the amount set opposite each of the said paccel.s by virtue of the project as indicated and that they be,.and hereby are, assessed in the amount set opposite each su~h.descr'ibed parcel, and each such supplemental and deferred assessment shall be payable-in equal annual PI0 13-117-24 14 O041 1'9-117-23 34 0035 installments over such period of years as shown: Levy No. ' ImproVement Year__.__~.s '8662 Supp. 79 Streets 7928 13. 8663 Sup~. 79 Streets 7'928 13 · Amount $1,768.45 $ ], 768.45 $3,536.90 2. Such installments shall be payable as follows: 'The first of the instal'Iments to be payable on or before the first Monday In Janu- ary 1982 and shall bear i~teres . t at the rate of 8 ~ per annbm from the date of the adoption of ~his assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assess- ment from the date of this resolution until Oecember 31, 1983. To each subsequent installment, when due, shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid |nstallments; .... 3. '-The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such ~roperty, .to .the City Treasurer, except that no .interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within ~thlrty (30) days from the adoption of this resolu- tlon; a.~n.cl..._h..e._may.,_at an~/ time!prior to November 15 of each year, · = pay to the County'Tr'~su're'~;~ ~;~e entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest a'ccrued to December 31 of the year in which such payme0~ is made. 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the' County Auditor to be extended on the. proper tax lists of the County,' ~nd suc~ assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution ~es duly seconded by Councilmember and upon vote being taken thereon; the follgwing voted in favor thereof: the following voted .against the same: with the following being absent: whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. Attest: Mayor Councilmember moved the following resolution. RESOLUTI0~ NO. 82' RESOLUTION LEVYING DEFERRED. AND SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENTS UPON WAIVER OF FORMALITIES; DIRECTING PREPARATION OF ABSTRACT; AND DIRECTING CERTIFICATION TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR WHEREAS, the City Council, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, (Laws 1953, Chapter 398, as amended) has the power to levy supplemental assessments and the power to levy deferred assessments, and WHEREAS, the following assessments were not initially levied in the projects as indicated, but waivers of formality for supplemental and deferred assessments have been executed by the property owner and delivered to the City: 1. Pursuant to its authority under Chapter 429, Minnesota Statutes the City Council does hereby determine that each.of the parcels of land hereinafter described have benefited'in an amount equal to the amount set opposite each of the said parcels by virtue of the project as indicated and that they be, and hereby are, assessed in the amount set opposite each su~h. descr'ibed parcel, and each such supplemental and deferred assessment shall be payable in equal installments over such period of years as shown: PID Levy No. Improqemen~ Years Amourtt- 19-117-23 24 004'2 .8662' Sump. 78 Streets 7514 12 $292.73. ).9-117J23 24 0043 866~ Supp. 78 Streets 7514 12' 292.72 annual $585.~5 Such installments shall be payable as foll~ws: 'The first of the instal'lments to be payable on or before the first Monday in Janu- ary 1982 and shall bear interest at the rate of 8 ~ per annum from the date of the aJoption of .this assessment re'--solution. To the first installment shall be added imterest on the entire.assess- ment from the date of this resolution until December 31, l~83. To each subsequent installment, when due, shall be ~dded interest for one year on all unpaid installments.. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, .to the City Treasurer, except that no .interest shal'l be charged if the entire assessment is paid withln'{hirty (30) days from the adoption of this resolu- tion; aD~_h.E_may.,_a~_a~k clme!prmor to NJ-v~mbeF 15 of each year, pay to the County'Treasur~r;-~e entire amount of the assessment remainin~ unpaid, with Interest ~ccrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the. proper tax lists of the County,-~nd such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. The motion for the adoption oF the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember and upon vote being taken the~reon; the following voted in favor thereof: the following voted against t.he same: with the following being absent: whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. Attest: Mayor CouncJlmember moved the followlng resolutlon. RESOLUTION NO. 82- RESOLUTION LEVYING DEFERRED AND SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENTS 'UPON WAIVER OF FORMALITIES; DIRECTING PREPARATION-OF ABSTRACT; AND DIRECTING CERTIFICATION TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR WHEREAS, the City Council, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, (Laws 1953, Chapter 398, as amended) has the power to levy supplemental assessments and the power to levy, deferred assessments, and WHEREAS, the following assessments were not initially levied in the projects as indicated, but waivers of formality for supplemental and deferred assessments have been executed by the property owner and delivered [o the City: 1. Pursuant to its authority under Chapter 429, Minnesota Statutes .the City Council does hereby determine that each.of the'parcels of land hereinafter described have ben.Aflted'in an amount equal to .the amount set opposite each of the said parcels by virtue of the project as indicated and that they be,.and hereby are, assessed in the amount set opposite each su{h.descr'ibed parcel, and each such supplemental and deferred assessment shall be payable-in equal annual installments over such ~eriod of years as shown: PI~D ~evy ~o. Improvement Years Amount 14-117-24 42 O121 '866) 14 Supp. 80 Streets 8297 $1,828.15' ' Such installments shall be payable as foll~ws: 'The first of the instal';meats to be payable on or before'the first Monday in Janu- ary 1982 and shall bear interest at the rate of 82% per annbm from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the'first installment shall be ad'ed interest on the entire assess- ment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 1983. To each subsequent installment, when due, shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments.- .' .The owner of any property so assessed may, at any tlme prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whQle of the assessment on such Property, ·to.the City Treasurer, except that no ·interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 'thirty {30) days from the adoption of this resolu- tion; and he may, at any time!p~f~r ~'No~beF 15 of each year, ~ E~ 6~--~nt~'~/e~s~'r~'E~e entire amount of the assessment remaining.unpaid, with interest ~ccrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the. proper tax lists of the County,. ~nd such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. The motlon for the adoption of the foregoing resolution Was duty seconded by Counc)lmember and upon vote being taken thereon; the following voted in favor thereof: the following voted ·against the same: with the following being absent: whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. Mayor CITY of MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 September 28, 1982 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Jou Elam Bob Shanley No Parking signs on Finch Lane I have received a request from two residents of Finch Lame amd the mail carrier to switch the No:',?arking This Side signs from the West side to the East side. This would only pertain to the section of Finch La~e between Three Points Blvd. amd Woodland Road. All of the mail boxes on this section of Finch Lane .are on the East side and they have problems delivering mail due to the cars parked there. This would have to undergo an ordinance change in Division 4, Chapter 46, page 3b ~46B. Respectfully, Street Supt. RS/.1cn cc: Bruce Wold T0: Jon E1 am FROM: Bruce Wold I 1. ooked over Finch~Lane, and feel that it is another case of local option being the controlling factor. Should there be a decision to change the no parking zone, I would recommend that the zone be changed for the entire length of Finch north of Three Points Blvd. This would cause less confusion for the police and the residents. I believe the best way to solve this problem is to move the mail boxes to the other s~de of the street. CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 September 28, 1982 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: 'Jori Elam Bob Shanley No Parking signs on Finch Lane I have received a request from two residents of Finch Lane and the mail carrier to switch the No Parking This Side signs from the West side to the East side. This would only pertain to the section of Finch Lane between Three Points Blvd. and Woodland Road. Ail of the mail boxes on this section of Finch Lane are on the East side and they have problems delivering mail due to the cars parked there. This would have to undergo an ordinance change in Division 4, Chapter 46, page 3b ~46B. Respectfully, Street Supt. s/:Icn cc: Bruce Wold CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 Date: September 30, 1982 To: Jon Elam From: Sharon Legg~u/ Attached please.find the final copy of the Local Government Aid Form 280 .for the 1982/1983 Tax Levy. ~ I have reduced the a~ount needed for bonded indebtedness (line E) by $1,565. This consists of: 1) Replacing the estimated $15,000 for. the G.O. Improvement Bonds of 1982 with $11,4OO, the actua] amount needed per the bond reso]ution. 2) Revising the City's share of special assessments from $56,692 to $58,727 to inc]ude the Central Business District Assessment and additonal County Road 110 assessments. Also, I have reduced the amount of the special levy for liability insurance by $8,644 for the 1970/1971 Levy as required. Instead, I am levying this amount for the Matching Funds Program, Logis. We should have counci] adopt the attached resolution and also adopt a budget.revision increasing the General Fund Tax Levy to $903,359 and Special assessment on city property to $58,727, RESOLUTION NO. 82- RESOLUTION TO DIRECT THE COUNTY AUDITOR TO LEVY CERTAIN TAXES BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HOUND, HOUND,'HN: That the County Auditor be directed to levy the following taxes for collection in 1983: S__pecial Levies Tort Judgements and Liability Insurance Bonded Indebtedness Certificates of Indebtedness Hatching Funds Program' Tax Abatements Unfunded Accrued Liability of Public Pension Funds Total Special Levies $. 14,117 111,992 24,865 8,644 2,663 16,41~1 178,692 Levy Subject to Limitation '819,208 GRAND TOTAL TO BE LEVIE~ $ 997,900 ,~/~/~ Er~Ot~ 9~ ~>" o~.~ 'u~ COMPLETE AND RETURN 'TO:' ~ '~'' ~ . ~' '~ ~ ~ Local Government Aids/Analysis. Division m 0 0 ~ ~ , Department of Revenue · . . ~DTiElrATI~i ~ ~ ~ ~ : ~ St. Paul, Minnesota 55145 1. Total L~vy Certified to County Audi'tot. (Do NOT' Inc)'ud~ ........................... ' ....... ~'~ "- ' A Tort Judgments and Liabilit~ Insurance .' ' .$ ' :'..~,1~7: D Social Services and Public Assis~anc'e'- - ........ :,- :--~.T ~:. "-D H Pa~ents~ for .Bonds of Another GoVernmental Unit "'.~' "C'~".:-: -L ..... Municip,al Board Orders- ~ ..... - ....... 0 ' Unfunded Accrued Liabilit7 of Public. Pension Funds ' 16~'~11' .~:~ ~.~. 0 ~ Employer..Comuter Van Program : [ : '': ::'~ TM .... "' P Q Southern Minnesota River Basin Area II · :':'-'". Q. R ~ Co~issioner of Revenue Ordered Reassessmnts -". "`~-" R Subd. 6 Shade Tree Disease Control '.- Subd. 6 Subd. 7 .County Subordinate Service Districts . Subd. 7 Rfferendgm Additional Levies ApproVed b7 Referendum Refer. Total Special Levies $ 178,692 I, the budget representative of the above mentioned county, city, or town, certify that the foregoing figures are accurate to the best of my knowledge. SIGNATURE OF BUDGET OFFICER: TITLE: DATE: SCHEDULE A: TORT J~S AND LIABILITY INSURANCE .(1) Judgments or Settle~nts in lort Actions Date a) b) Case Name Why T0rt Liability 1982 1'971 Amount Amount (Ia) Difference (2) Liability Insurance - ",, ._ 1982/1983 ..-1970/1971.-:_' . ..... T_~y.p~ of Liab~ Insurance .... Certified Levy ..... Certified Lev~_c ....... ._cE .... _._ :Dif~erJhJe · a)_ umbre11~ . ,.. $ 2884-c~r .b) Comprehensive' - 804~ ...... c) AutO . :.~ Date Agency T_~e 'of Activity ..... Certified Levy. Certi~.. Diffe-refic-e~ .... SOEDLLE C: (1) (2) (~) (4) (5) (6) (7) '. ~' ........................ Certified Lev_~ Certified Li~v.Y ..... Difference Community Health Services Community Corrections Agricultural Extension Soil and Water Conservation CETA -' '' Program Logis Grant Number N/A Agency______Log~ Local Required Amount $ 8644 8644 8644 Program Grant Number Agenc~ L~cal Required Amount $ Total Special Levy C (1 thru 8) $ 8644 -2- SOCIAL SERVICES AND ur~I~SED PUBLIC ASSISTANCE PA~ (i) (2) Public Assistance a). Minnesota Supplemental· Asslstance--L.~ . b) Aid.';~to...Eamilies wi_,th___D~p_e_n..d_ent Children Su, bject to I8% Maximum Increase ........... Social' Services and its Administration General · (8) 'Total Levy Exempt from 18% Maximum ' ' : m m m '- ~ ~:m~: & ~ ':Total.Special Levy D ( ~ .:-, . -. . ~ Ct,~ '.. ~, ,.: . .. _ '-- , v' · ~-: ~"' ' :~";:~".':-~v 1982/1983- Type of Bond : Purpose ' ''': :' :~'''' :' '' r ' : ' ~' :' certified Levi.. - ' (4) ........ llL 0 Total Special Levy E (1 thru 4) $.111,992 (4) G.O. Improvement BOnd{ of 82 CERTIFICATES OF INDEBIFJ)ESS Authorizing Statutes or Law (1) M.S. 412.301 (2) Purpose Fi re Equipment Total Special Levy F (1 + 2) 1982/1983 Certified Levy $ 24,865 $CHEDLLE G: PRINCIPAL.AND INTEREST ON ARMORY BONDS Amount for this schedule is entered only on page 1. IJ: PAYI~r__NTS ~ BONDS OF ANOTHER GOVERllI~TAL UNIT (1) (2) Political Subdivision Paid Purpose Total Special Levy H (1 + 2) SCt'EDULE I: DECREASED. MOBIIF HOVE TAX:~~ , (1).:~. 1;71Mobile. Homes Tax DistributioJ. i<-.~ ~:<~..~ .... (2)]]']__1982 Mobile'Home Tax ' ] ~ "' ~ L (2) ' ' - Total Special levy I ('1 minus 2) $ (1) $ (2) $ 1982/1983 (1) $ -.. SC~ J: AUDITOR'S ERROR OF O~ISSION Amount for this schedule-is entered only on page 1. Amount for this schedule is entered only on page 1. SC~ L: MUNICIPAL BOARD ORDERS _ -_ Amount for 'this schedule is entered only on page 1. (1) (2) INCgEASED INDUSTRIAL Ah~ C~CIAL DEVEL(~T Site Preparation - Site Description Increased Operating Expenses for Se~ices a) 1982/1983 Levy Limitation b) 1982/1983 Total Assessed Valuation of City or Town' c) Quotient (6-decimal places): (2a divided by 2b) d) l~ll~ A~uuuuutl ValunLlun ul I'~'uj~:£~ e) Assessed Valuation of Projects before Permits f) Difference: (2d minus 2e) g) Product: (2f multiplied by 2c) (1) (2a) (2b) (2c} (2d) (2e) (2f) (29) · .T. otal Special Levy M (1 +. 29) ...... $ $ $ -4- ~ N: PROFERTY TAX ABA~S -- 1980/1981 Certified LevY.::{-~:~'''I;: ' i/:. (~) s (2)-..2-- lgSO/lg81"Special Le~ies".i' '"'-c?' :'.-~'.-"m (2' - . · . · :' · ' · .'~' Cy'~ :' .~ "'..~2~.C' ~ _.'~:.- -. (3)' Difference.','(1-2) ~oq[].~..~'~-:~x~]~:i.~::,_<?:,.'.:~ .- ..... (3) - $ . (4) "'.: QUotient:. (3 -'+ 1) ~: ...,']~?'?.-:'~-~]~'~?~,~/~:.-~?~:?' :,. ~'"'~ .-.' ' ~' ' '(5)~ : :~b~~~'~' ~:2.?~-'~:~:~:~?::?,;-~:'~]~:.Ta~al~'Sp'eci al:Levy N' (5-x .:~:~ ....... .~,-~:-.:'~'-~-.~"- ~' ~ ~-~~ ~' "' ':-~:~.~,~,c----~- t:'L.T,.:.J:. ":. Relief Associattons..~'":':$~"~??'~':-'",::'~-:~-'."~:~.~?':'~''~:'::~'-- ''~''' .... *' .... ":.. ~~~11.=2:.,~ ........ .'.,- :~::..~.~-*.~.:,~.. ~::.:.~' =.. .]: ~, :~?~: :-.'.. ,. ':~ .*~ ,:~.~:, ~ .'~.,A~,~. ,.q 4. ,,.. *:-~:,~ .~..,-,~.~. ~. :. *.-: *,.....~-: :-*..*:.':*:* .,:;...-..~' '.; l ~};~e~-T~:*?~'-' ~ :';.q':.' .':A:~;'; :.~ . ' 4~ .-~: Volunteer F~ref~ghter. s ,~.~!:.?~;: ~?~?,:.: ?..:c,~... *..,-:.-:-~,_: ~...:~-...:-.-.,. '-. -( -~:'~.'Relief Asso6iations'.'(Min~mUm'.obl. iga~!°n' under La, S .19~,, .... ..,--:'i.~:~.~:~:'. ' '-- "'~'~,~ ~.v ~'~l"~med U~der':('3)-or:"(4) but' ~o~-unoer Do~n;'~t~/~' ..... :~.~:..,~-. ....... --: ....... ,~ ,~otal Special Levy ( )~ ~ ~~ ~ ~,.~... · / .-. '"~-, ~L.~..~ -= ~ - : - *,',: ~,~ ..~ :2:.~"- ~. ="': ' · '- ~ "::'-*' .... '~ .... * ' ' ' '- *: -'* 'Amount fo~ this schedule ~s entered only on p~ge 1.,. : ..... '.' ...... ~ R: PRQPERTY TAX' ABA~S RESULTING FRm C. ID~ISSIOhF_R OF ~UE ~ ~S Amount.for this schedule is entered only on page 1. Do not include amount claimed under Schedule N. SUBDIVISIO~ 6: SHALE TREE DISEASE 03qROL 1982/1983 Certified Levy 1980/19~i' Certified' LeVy:' .--!i-i.'i:~?~:':~"L..L::::'. ~"...'-.' :: ' ' .......... . (3) ...... i~8°iiSai'c~Ftifie~"LeVy x"iO~%''':. :::. ~:'":"~::'. '- ' ' .-"~'".: ':":.' .' : ' ' ' -'- .... ::.~-;'~.::c-,~'~-~'~'~:~.-:.~', "-.l.~? .," -"..' -"..".'].:].X}~]-~):].(: :,~:. ::J-.~:-~:':..-. L,..'-::'- /,' :¢: Tat~l~-.Special. LeVy. SUbdiVision 6'(1 minus ~DIVISI~ 7: :. C~ ~IgE~:~VI~ '~ ~:~': ? .-...?:: Name :o~. N umbeF ~:~:~; C:) ' .: '~."?~?~?(~ F~ :):-?? .:/~:-:" :.:' -'C.'?~: ?-. '~- Year D i str i C~73~5 · ~":":.:':5,~'.~,,of Distirct :';~:~:'~-, '.-?~ .---.': ~ g~rvices Provided`. ': :.':~:.:'"~.:~. Established~':; "l~'.~cy-.~<2F.j~j.L.~.:~....:~m.,,. ~, .... j~.:.z~ :~:.~-:~ :~..~.~.%~,' - - ~.~-j~.. .c .... ~- ~'?~F'~: - '~-'~ -, -'~ ~ , "'". - ~ '- "%~. ~,-~ ,~ - .'~ j, ~'.~':,:-~'~;~'~"~'~' ~ . .'.--?' ~':-<7~'7 ........ ::' ':~' ~'' :~??' ~-~-~:~..~=: :~:~Tota3:'Speci a3 Levy Subd (2) -- (3) -6- / Z 0 Z Z~ Z ~ ~ Z~O0 ~ ~ X~O -11- 0 CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55~4 (612) 472-1155 September 28, 1982 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Jori Elam Bob Shanley No Parking signs on Finch Lane I have received a request from two residents of Finch Lane amd the mail carrier to switch the No.Parkimg This Side signs from the West side to the East side. This would only pertain to the section of Finch Lane between Three Points Blvd. and Woodland Road. All of the mail boxes on this section of Finch Lane are on the East side and they have problems deliverimgmail due to the cars parked there. This would have to undergo an ordinance change in Division 4, Chapter 46, page 3b #46B. Respectfully, Street Supt. RS/ich cc: Bruce Wold TO: Jon E1 am //.~. ~ FROM: Bruce Wold I l. ooked over Finch Lane, and feel that it is another case of local option being the controlling factor. Should there be a decision to change the no parking zone, I would recommend that the zone be changed for the entire length of Finch north of Three Points Blvd. This would cause less confusion for the police and the residents. I believe th~ best way to solve this problem is to move the mail boxes to the other side of the street. Councilmember RESOLUTION NO. 82- RESOLUTION APPOINTING THE ELECTION JUDGES AS RECOMMENDED.FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION NOVEMBER 2, 1982 BE IT'RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND, MINNESOTA: That the Council does hereby approve the following list of election judges for the General. Election, November 2, 1982. Charles Anderson Vera Bee Holly Bostrom Adeline Brandenburg Emma Brandenburg Bob Burns Jennie Carlson Gerry Chase Vicki Childs Ina Coleman Leatrice Cooper Judi Cunnlngton Winnie Dalton Mary Ann Dehner Carol Doyle Gall DuPuis Jan Gierman Marion Gilbertson Willard Hillier Marjorie Hoag Judy. Hudson Phyllis Jessen Daisy Johnson Jeanette Johnson Sharry Johnson Alice Kramer Cora LaMere Donna tugauer Sharon Meier Charlene Miller Lee Mondloh Marsha Peickert Darlene Pool Don POteete Irma Psyck Jean Robinson Shirley Romness Florence Sather Ann Schwingler Ada Shepherd Harriet Shepherd Joan Shields Barbara Sidders Bud Skoglund Marsha Smith Lemuel Sprow Cynthia Stevens Mary'Sundby Fran Swanson Jean Swenson GordY Tullberg Pat Wallin Sandi Wilsey Juli~e Brown CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS SNOW R~OVAL FROM PARKING LOTS IN CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT Mound, Minnesota The City of Mound will receive bids at 5341Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota ~mtil 10:00 a.m. on Monday, October 25, 1982 for snow removal from the Central Business District parking lots and other areas as designated. Bid Bond is required. Performance Bond will be required of success- ful ~idder. The City reserves the right to reject any amd all bids and waive any informalities o Fran Clark City Clerk Publish in The Laker October 12, 1982 Fuel Recovery Company SPECIAUSTS IN UNDERGROUND FUEL AND CHEMICAL RECOVERY 760 Reaney' St. Paul, Minnesota 55106 DUANE 'L. KNOPIK 612-771-2272 September 29, 1982 City of Mound- 4845 Manchester Rd. Mound, MN 55364 Dear Sir, Our company installed an Interceptor Ventillating System (IVS) on your property. To date~your syStem is still in operation. In response to a Minnesota Pollution Control Agehcy.(MPCA) letter (see attached), Fuel Recovery Company will send a representative to inspect the explosive levels of the I¥S, which will be accomplished on a quarterly basis. There will be a charge of $50.00 per visit. 'After the MPCA has deter- mined that the IVS can be terminated, our quarterly visits will no longer be necessary. The MPCA has been instructed to enforce Minnesota Department of Health regulations regarding grouting procedures for open holes creating a direct path to the water table. The regulation states that these holes must be grouted after its use is no longer needed. The Minnesota De- partment of Health has determined that the holes used for the IVS must be properly.grouted upon system abandonment. We estimate that the grouting procedure should cost from $1,i00.00 to $2,000.00 per IVS. This price may'vary, dependent on the dabe of termi- nation, length of piping, location and trenchihg necessary. If there are any questions pertaining to these new regulations please call Gary Johnson at 771-2272 or write: Fuel Recovery Company 760 Reaney Avenue St. Paul, MN 55106 'Op erOSion s M~ager Fuel Recover~ Co. GRJ: pj Enclosure Mr. Jori R. Elam City Manager 5541M~ywood Road Mound., Mn. 5~564 Dear Mr. Elam: Due to personal reasons I am resigning frbm the City of Mound Planning Advisory Commission, effective immediately. Gary/~/. Paulsen t/ .planning. area 4 citizen advisory committee 2353 government center, minneapolis, mn. 55343 September 27, 1982 Mayor Leighton Lindlan City of Mound 5341.Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mayor Lindlan: As provided for in the Urban Hennepin County. Citizen Participation Plan, one of the charges given to Planning Area~Cltizen Advisory Committees is to review and comment on the progress participan% communities are making in the imple- mentation of their respective Community Development' Block Grant programs. The Planning Area 4 Citizen Advisory Committee at it's September 13, 1982, meeting reviewed the City of Mound's progress in implementing it's CDBG funded activities as represented on the accompanying August 31, 1982, Project Status Report. Following it's review, the Committee initially wishes to commend the City ~or its actions to close out program Years IV and V. The Committee views Mound's. initiation of the Commercial Reha§ilitation Loan~ program as an innovative activity in response to an overall community need and looks forward to its implementation. The West Tonka elderly housing projectis an exciting inter-community coopera- tive effort to provide needed housing alternatives for the area"s senior citizens. If I or other members of the committee may be of assistance to the City in your consideration of CDBG program concerns, please feel free to contact me at 474-4381. Sincerely, ', Charles J.~"Hodge, Chairman Planning Area 4 Citizen Advisory Committee ps Enclosure 'cc: PACAC 4 Members John Elam Larry Blackstad lea§ue of minnesota oities. September 28, 1982 TO: Concerned City Officials FROM: Don Slater, Executive Director Peggy Flicker, Legislative. CounSel CITIES VICTORIOUS: GOVERNOR ORDERS FINANCE DEPARTMENT TO CHANGE BUDGET GUIDELINES In response to vigorous lobbying by the League and city officials all over the state, the Governor has instructed the Finance Co~issioner to revise the budget guidelines for F.Y. 1984-1987. As Revenue Commissioner Clyde Allen stated in a letter addressed to Don Slater and dated September 24, "... the decision has already been made by the Governor that those guidelines will contain a recommendation that Local Government Aids ~e funded at the $270 million dollar level for all four years covered bythe budget ,uidelines." This means that there no longer is a conflict between what the Revenue Department told you to expect and what the Finance Department is planning to be able to pay. It does no~t mean that the fundsare "in t'he bag", however. Note also that no increase is being planned after 1983. CITIES MUST KEEP UP THE PRESSURE SO THAT THE NEW GOVERNOR AND LEGISLATURE ACTUALLY BUDGET FOR AT LEAST $270 MILLION A YEAR IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID ~ Although we won an important victory, most of the work lies ahead. The 1983 Legislature faces many difficult tax and spending decision's, and we must keep the integrity of city finances a high priority. A call or letter to Governor Quie, gubernatorial candidates and legislative candidates is still in order - expressing your satisfaction at the decision that was made and your hope that the state will continue to honor its commitment to pay LGA. You might also express your concern about the process itself - the fact that decisions were made without adequate consultation with cities - and ask for more communication and consideration of the local perspective in the future. DS:PF:kgj (OVER) I 83 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 551 01 (61 2) 227-5600 RECEIVED SEP 2 8 1982 September 27, 1982 Mound City Council 5341 Maywo0d Rd. Mound, MN 55364 To Whom It May Concern: On September 7, I attended your city coUncil meeting to pursue the vacation of a paper street 'called Sulgrove, on.which the corner of my house now stands.' ~ne matter was tabled at that time to all~ us to examine a suitable resolution to the satisfaction of all COncerned. -. Please take Uhder advisement the follc~ points regarding this matter: 1.' Sulgrove is a paper stree~ only, there is no potential use for.-the street now or in the future because of the proximity to the wetlands in and around it. 2. The City of Mound can incurr a certain amount of liability if they.continue to own that street, i.e. pave, curb, gutter, etc. '- 3. By approving. the vacation of the street the property value abutting the' Street' would: 'increase thus. increasing the tax base. 4. Of Pers°nal 'consideration, because of the title, cazplications involved, it would be extrenely difficult for us to Sell our property. ~ '5. A partial vacation of 1% to 2.feet could be. grante~ to remove our.hc~e, frcm sulgr°Ve thus resolvir~ the above issue. The above items are points ~to be considered, hc~eVer, there are t~o other major items that could ~ into play should it become 1. The City of Mound could be re~red to upgrade that road right of· way with all 'the expenses that that incurrs. 2. There is a matter of adverSe possession. We have had the ur~Lisputed .use of that· street as our driveway for sc~e 15 or more years. Our neighbors have had the same right with regard to the corner of our property. In s~,.L~tion, I ur~erstand that there is a state law ~at says, "A city can vacate a portion of road right of way if there is no public interest',, so, we would ]ike to'request a public hearing'regarding this matter to resolve it to everyones satisfaction as soon as possible. Sincerely, . 3495 East.Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 2..31 A. THOMAS WURST~ CURTIS ~. PEARSON, P.A. JOSEPH E. HAMILTON. P.A. THOMAS F. UNDERWOOD, P.A. JAMES D. I.ARSON. P.A. JOHN J. E~)WDEN LAW OFFICES WURST, PEARSON, HAMILTON, LARSON ~: UNDERWOOD A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS 1100 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 September 29, 1982 TELEPHONE (612) 338-4200 Mr. Jon Elam, City Manager City of Moun~ 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: Sulgrove Road Dear Jon: I received from the City this morning a copy of a letter from Richard and Barbara Bialon to the City concerning the proposed vacation of Sulgrove Road. As you will recall, at the September 7 Council meeting it became apparent that the issue was much more complicated than originally anticipated. After Jan and I met with the Bialons, we reported to the Council that we had recommended that the Bialons meet with oheir neighbors who own property in Lot 28, Whipple. We suggested that they lay out a plan and a proposal which would work to their benefit as well as to the properties located in the City of Mound. We also made several suggestions about working out a relocation of Sulgrove Road, the granting of easements over the Bialons' property, etc. I thought the Bialons understood all of the problems that were involved. The September 27 letter indicates again their belief that a vacation would solve everyone's problems. This is not true, and most particularly for the Bialons. I will respond to the points raised in their letter. 1. The statement is not true. Even though Sulgrove is only a paper street, it does provide public access, and if and when utilities are to serve that' area, it provides a means of installing said utilities. Sulgrove also provides to the Mound properties a -necessity to.remain a conforming use, namely that they front on a public street. Our ordinance does not indicate how the street has been improved or maintained, but the Mound properties are now in conformance with that section of the ordinance. 2. The liabilities of the City of Mound to improve those streets would fall back on the benefitting properties just as it has throughout the entire city, so I do not believe that is a valid point. Page 2 Mr. Jon Elam, City. Manager September 29, 1982 3. I am not in a position to state whether their statement is true or false. 4. The Bialons have severe property and title problems. The vacation of Sulgrove would,~not solve those problems. I have reviewed the N~ of Section 25, Township 117, Range 24, and I find Sulgrove Road is located entirely in the City of Mound and appears to have been platted as a portion of Whipple Addition. The Bailons' property is in a completely different addition, namely Douglas. Therefore, any vacation of Sulgrove would not go to the Bailons but.would rather be left in entire limbo and be a separate parcel which could be added'to the properties in Mound upon proper court action. This ~outd have to be done, and they would then have to get clear title. They would then have to come to the City and split off part of it for a proposed sale to the Bailons. The long and short of this matter is that a vacation does not give the Bailons the land on which their home is built, which encroaches on Sulgrove. Therefore, the statement in number 5 of the Bailons' letter is not correct. In his second paragraph, Zegarding the upgrading of the road, that is a problem that will have to be faced in the future if the' property owners in that area petition for road improvements and if it is necessary to provide them with sewer, ~ater, and other utilities. The impression that the'Bailons have some right to Sulgrove Road As a right of adverse possession is incorrect in that Minnesota Statutes 545.01 specifically .indicates that you cannot obtain public property through adverse possession. Jon and Jan, I am saddened by the Bailons' letter because it indicates that they have given.up on the effort to resolve the area's problems and are merely thinking of the encroachment of. their house On the public street. The problem~ is that their proposals to me do not solve their problems or the problems of the City of Mound. continue to suggest that the Bailons obtain competent professional help in the legal and engineering field to assist them in resolving their problem and the problems of their neighbors, who are located in a different subdivision, i.e., Whipple Addition. Very truly yours ~ Pearson, City Attorney CAP: Ih cc: Ms. Jan Bertrand Mr. and Mrs. Richard Bialon Minnesota Department of Transportation District Five. $801 Duluth Street Golden Valley, Minnesota 554.22 Sepkember 9) 1982 (612) 545-3761 Chief Bruce Wold Mound Police Department 5341Maywood Road 'Mound, MN 55364 Re: 315 ? CSAH-110 (Commerce Boulevard) Speed Zoning Hennepin County Dear Mr. Wold: Enclosed for your information are copies of the radar speed samples obtained for our recent speed zoning study on csAH, 110 (Commerce Boulevard). Study results including the speed samples, accident records, trial runs, and sight distance surveys, have led us to recommend authorization by the' State Traffic Engineer of the following speed limits for CSAH-110: 30 MPH - from CSAH-15 to Grandview Boulevard 35 MPH - from Grandview Boulevard to a point'approximately 350 feet north of Three Points Boulevard 45 MPH - from approximately 350 feet north of' Three Points Boulevard %o CSAH-151 Existing speed'limits on CSAH-110 have been incorrectly posted for some time. The north terminus of the existing 30 MPH zone is legally at a spot one-half mile north of CSAH-15 (approximately half way between Grand- view Boulevard and Three Points Boulevard). The new 35 MPH zone, therefore, will be 10 MPH lower than the existing limit in the'Three Points Boulevard area, and 5 MPH higher than the existing limit just to the north of Grand- view Boulevard. The proposed 35. M~H zone has a south terminus approximately 400 feet further north than originally proposed because of the pedestrian activity discussed with you previously. If you have questions concerning either the data or proposed speed limits, please contact Ed Brown at this office. Sincerely, J. S. Katz,~P.E. District Tra~_ Engineer Attachment: JSK:pn Att Equal Opportunity Employer OURCHANGING SO(][EIY and laow undations can laelp Fear of nuclear war, lowered economic expecrarions",xnd a search for a stronger moral base will be dominant influences hx the 1980s Fro, halation News, July/August 1982 5 Today I want to examine a qt, estion that is preoccupying everyone here involved in the field of philanthropy: Htw will the changes in our social, economic, and p0.1itical environment influence the role and function of foundations in the next few years? The mos~ noticeable change in the political environment is in the role of government. I imagine that the cut- backs in government spending must create brutal pressures on you to pick up the slack, especially in programs that affect.our hard-pressed dries. With the government seeking to do less, the rationale for one of the classic roles of foundations disappears: to provide the seed money or ~exdtement" money for new initiatives. This role makes sense only if government can be counted on to provide the routine op- erating resources. If the government abandons this role, the "seed money" concept of the foundations just doesn't make sense because the seed is not plan'ted in fertile soil. But the change in government's role is only one problem that faces us to- day. There are other changes that are also transforming the direction, role, and future function of philanthropy. ' The decade of the I g80s is shaping up as quite different in character from the i970s and 1960s. I find it illu- minating to identify'the key changes that are responsible for making this ~lecade a different one. I am going to confine myself to identifying four changes that are transfo~'ming American society. Not because they are the only important four--there are many others--but be- cause these four together form what I think will be the dynami6 core of our national political life for the bal- ance of the decade of the '80s. There- fore they provide a context for re- viewing the agenda of philanthro, py. 1. The Nuclear Arms Race. Above all other changes, I would place the public's growing fear of-nuclear war. There are many sources of this con- cern~from tile peace nlovement and the physicim~s' movement to ~hc con- $ Foundation News. julylAugu, st 1982 cern of elder statesmen like George Kennan and Thomas' Wirson. Be- hind these expressions of concern, is an objective reality: the achievement of nuclear parity by the Soviet Union. For many years our official national policy was characterized by the apt ac- ronym "MAD"--:Mutually Assured Destruction. It is rather curious the way these things work. For several reasons, the notion of mutually as- sured destruction gave Americans Americans want to go on working, and by and. large .~nericans view their work with a positive attitude. peace of mind for a long time. First. there was 'the all-or-nothing character of the threat as it. was. presented to Americans. The alternatives were seen as to/al annihilation or peace. And since tota} annihilation would be insanity, we felt we were reasonably secure as long as madmen were kept out of po- sitions of leadership. Then, in the past year, we began to hear talk in .high places ora "limited" nuclear war. This concept truly frightens people. The idea 'of a lbnited nuclear war has no credibility whatever. For the first time people see a break in the all-or-noth- ing threat. They are convinced that a nuclear war would not remain limited but would automatically trigger a total conflagration. Even more directly, up to.just a few months ago, the public assuri~ed that we in the United States en,joyed nu- clear superiority, which somehow got translated in peoples' minds into tile idea that with such superiority we our- selves could not be destroyed. Even though, logically speaking, the doc- trine of mutually assured destruction implies that both sides will be tle- stroycd, somehow the corel're'; of periority blurs the point. Througt~ some kind of emotional logic, mag.c logic, superiority gets translated invulnerability. (You know, people don't want to dwell on these.matters or look at them too carefully. So, it you don't want to 'think about them anyway, this is a way of not doing so.) What we have today, then, are two new facts to take into account: the fact that the Soviets have achieved nuclear parity, but also the fact of a changed consciousness. By this I mean that the possibility of nuclear annihilation the United States itself has, for the first time, entered the American con- sciousne~s. It has done so dramati- cally, and I do not think it is likely to go away. This new awareness directly affects the national security issue,' which is one of the topics being discussed at this conference. There is one aspect of this issue I would like to commenl on briefly. This is the possibility has entered the public mind only in 'the past few months, that increasing our defeiase budget may, through ac- celerating the nuclear arms race, ac- tually reduce our national security rather than increase it. Now; this is a counter-intuitive idea. The common sense idea is that you can throw money at a problem: it is generally assumed that the more we spend on the military budget,'the ffreater our national security will be. The cvianter-intuitive idea is that spending more money on defense might have the opposite effect, and actually diminish our national secu- rity. Such a counter-intuitive belief 'collides with a dramatic trend of the past decade. From 1973 to 1981,I Americans had assumed the opposite, premise: a higher defense budget means more security. Indeed, this pe- riod marks one of the most massive changes in public opinion in the past half-century. Between 1973 and 1981 the number of Americans favoring a significantly higher defense budget rose incredibly. It rose from a low of 11 percent at the end of the war in Vietnam u~ over 80 percent in lt.)SI: The hostage crisis in Iran and the Russian invasion of Afghanistan were, by the way: the principal stimulators of this trend. And now the country is having ag- onizing second thoughts--not about the desb'ability of enhancing .our na- tional security but about the means, and the costs, of doing so. Today our surveys find an astonishingly high 43 percent of the public expressing the fear that putting more money into the defense budget may actua!ly buy us less nation:fi security. I expect this issue to be the burning issue of the decade. Once raised, it is not likely to recede until it has been resolved in a way that makes sense to the average American. I am not speaking of a resolution that makes sense to the government, but to the average American~which is quite a different matter and may take a con- siderably longer period of time to achieve. · 2. The Japanese Challenge. A sec- ond tr;msforming change relates to our economic condition. The weak- ness in our competitive position is not confined to autom, obiles or to Detroit. It is much wider based, and it has been growing. Here are a few simple but chilling statistics that illustrate the erosion in our competitive vitality: since 1962, for a full generation, Japan has in- creased its productivity three and a half times faster than we have! In- deed, the rate may be even faster now, because tbr the past three to fOur years/ our productivity has stopped grow- ing. This grins fhct gets translated di- rectly into peoples' standard of living and income. F,'om 194.8 to the mid- 1970s, U.S. family income increased almost every year. In that period real income doubled~a'nd moved this na- tion from one in which the mass of people lived at the edge of poverty to one in which the ,najority of Ameri- cans began to live in reasonable com- fort. But in the decade of the 1970s that progress stopped. For white families, the rise came to a halt. in the mid- 1970s and remained basically flat for the rest of the decade. For black fam- ilies median income actually declined by five percent. In terms of per capi/a income, the United States now finds itself in 10th place in the world, where' throughout most of the post-war period we were in first place. Of course, the U.S. econ- omy is still powerful and dynamic, but The pOSsibility' of nuclear annihil.adon of the United 'States has for the first time, entered the .American conciousness.: as everyone in this city of Detroit knows, there has been a fateful change/ In an increasingly competitive world, theJapanese and others are out-com- peting us, with consequences that di~ rectly affect the standard of living and the psychologica! outlook of the av- erage American. This situation gives rise to an ines- capable political issue: how to revital- ize the U.S. economy, improve 'our competitive strength v/s-i-v/s the Jap- anese, and restore the economic growth that supported so much'social progress. It is significant that as recently as two years ago there was not a consen- sus in this country that we should strive for economic growth. But during the last two years, a consensus has formed. Nearly all groups in America have now come to realize that their own objec- tives depend on economic growth. So we arc--for the first time in a gen- eration~united on a goal. We are also united i.n our recognition of the se- riousness of the problem. There is now, for the first time, a' broad-based uti- derstanding in America of how truly serious this problem is, and that it must be tackled in a serious way. But there the consensus breaks down. TI'[ere exists widespread con- fuiion and differences of Views on the causes of our co m pctitive weakness and' on the best strategy to adopt to regain economic growth. In seeking solutions, many people look to Washington and to macro-eco- nomic policies to provide the solution. But increasingly, we find a growing realization that a mere shift in govern- merit policy is not enough. We are going.to have to do it the hard way. We are obliged to revitalize our econ- . omy at the micro-level--product by product, technglogy by technology, company by company, union by union, community by community. This is a much more difficult task than juggling macro-economic policies. It is also a task to which I believe this country will dedicate itself in this coming decade. There is, by the way, one research finding that I find fascinating and im.V portant because it, too, runs counter to the conventional wisdom {i.ni~ has an important bearing on our eco- ,mmic recovery. The finding is that the work ethic in America is n. ot sick and grbwing weaker, but is actually growing stronger! We are discovering that most Americans enjoy their work, that fewer want to retire completely, and that by and large Americans view their work with a positive attitude. In America today, we have an asset of inestimable 'value: a large, well-ed- ucated work force of men and women with a far greater potential concern for imp.roving the quality of our prod- ucts and services, and a far greater potential for making a commitment to their jobs than has been realized. The task of mobilizing our human re- sources, of revitalizing the economy by translating this potential into com- petitive vigor, will be arduous and vast. It will take very serious rethinking by management in places like Detroit. But it will be worth it, because our eco- nonfic and social well-being depend on it. 3. New Moral Rules. There is a Foundation News, JulylAugntst 1982 7 third transforming change that has rived less attention or at least has' sharp focus than the nuclear or economic issues: It consists ora cer- tain disarray in our social morality.' During the boom years of the post- war period, vast changes took place in the nation's social morality. We de- veloped what might be called a "good times" morality. We began to question long-held assumptions, particularly those that call for sacrifice and social conformity. We began to believe that individual choice should take prece- dence over social norms. There was a !~eneral assumption that good times permitted us to take a more relaxed attitude toward j6bs, personal rela- tions, obligations to others. People stopped asking "is this right or wrong? Is this my moral responsibility, my duty?" Instead, Americans adopted more convenient moral formulas, such as, "It's okay as long as it feels good. I've a right to be happy," a result, the power of social norms behavior has eroded badly. This erosion shows itself in a number of concrete ways. In recent years, for example, there has been a vast in- crease in the number of bankrupt- ties--and not just for economic rea- sons. Amazingly, about 40 percent of today's bankruptcies involve people who have assets. They siniply aren't influenced by the kind of social stigma that bankruptcy u~ed to convey. There has also been a vast increase in cheating on tax returns and in the rise of the underground economy. One estimate is that tax cheating costs the government in the order of $89 bil- lion a year, an amount that would have been enough to cover the national deficit. (The obi deficit, that is, not the new one!) In another sphere of social moral- ity, 75 percent of .Americans say it is morally alright to be single and have ldren. A generation ago this belief have been unthinkable. Today one out of every six births occurs out- side of wedlock. There has been an increase of 50 percent in illegitimate births in the last decade alone. $ Foundation News. J ulylAugust 1982 Now, it should be emphasized that many Americans strenuously resist this weakening of sbcial norms. They comprise aboiat 20 to 25 percent of the public, and they support groups like the "Moral Majority." But there is another, more surpris- . lng change.' three out of four who ' .comprise the actual majority are them- selves questioning the recent change in social morality. They are doing so on two grounds. First, they sense that today's eco- nomic realities are moving from good times to bad. As times change, Am..er- icans beginTto question their own p/'emise that a looser social morality is justified on the. grounds that we can afford it.- :- : Secondly, there has been enough experience over the last 20 years with the new morality for people to see its results, and these are not entirely sat- isfactory. In fact, they're hardly sat- isfactbry at all. Americans are redis- · covering what other peoples have discovered countless times through~ out the ages, namely, the limitations of hedonism. Somehow the picture- seeking ofhedonlsm doesn't fulfill the . promise of life. It generates heady ey5 pectations and glamour, but once you devote your life to the pursuit of pleasure, it just doesn't deliver the sat- isfactions people assume it will. So what does this discovery mean for the majority of Americans, the three out of four who have experi- mented, however fleetingly, with he- donism? They don't want to go back to the old ethic of {elf-denial, and yet they find the new philosophy of self- satisfaction not all that satisfying. When hard times come, people tend to fall back on their moral beliefs. Well, when a lot of Americans today look to their moral beliefs for support, they ,find a vacuum. They no longer have anything to fall back on. For most Americans, this is an acutely distress- ing and anxiety-provoking experience. We are 'facing an agonizing moral dilemma. A form of searching u.n- defiles all of American life today. 1R- sues such as abortion, crime, poverty, welfare, prayer in the public schools and pornography are symbolic of this . concern. .I want to emphasize one aspect of the moral issue that is quiet for the moment, but won't be for long: Like the nuclear arms race an.d the com- petition with japan, it is another of the inescapable issues of the 1980s. It is the issue of what to do about the "vulnerables" in our society. After 30 years of interviewing cross- sections of Americans, I would state: unqualifiedly that ours is a compas- sionate and moral country. But it is also a fiercely' competitive sodety where the stakes are high. The rewards for success are very great, but so are the penalties for failure. I am convinced that this is the way Americans want it. \Ve want a. society in'which you take your chances (as long a.s there is equal- ity of opportunity), with a big payoff for winning. Americans do not nec- essarily like. big penalties for losing., but they accept the inevitiable. ' However, Americans also 'assume that two rules soften the penalties for losing, and are indispensable for play- ing the socioeconomic game. The first rule is that those who cannot take care · of themselves~the aged, the infirm, the blind, young children~must be protected. This is tile "safety net" con- cept. It is significant that this concept is now a matter of national consensus. It is not a matter for partisan dispute. There may be dispute about the best ~ay 'to impl'ement it and how far the safety net should stretch, hut there is consensus in both political parties and among all Americans that some form of safety net must exist for those who are truly dependent. But there is a second ru. le on which consensus does not exist. This is the concept that those who are to help ~hemselves deserve to be given an as- sist if they have been disadvantaged. To have a fair chance in the compet- itive str.uggle they need a helpin'g hand. This group includes the victims of dis- crimination, recent immigrants, the handicapped, the functional illiter- ates, ex-cons, ex-addicts, ex-alcoholics 30-yhar olds and 40-year olds in this decade, which shifts the center of gravity once' again toward maturky. There is one demographic fact I' would single out as having an influ- ence th'at has not been fully realized. It is the change in the dependency ratio, the ratio of people who work to older people who don't work. In the pre-war period, for every person who was retired and alive over 65, there were nine people in the work force to help share the burden of supporting that person, and ~.he burden wasn't very great. In the 1980s the ratio shifts dramatically to three to one. By the 1990s, it will be two to one. Our national policies that provide protection to older Americans are compassionate ones. They dictate that old people on social security should not become the victims of inflation; that old people should have good medical care; that people should be able to retirein dignity and moderate comfort while they're still healthy. But these policies are based on as- sumptions about longevity, health care and its costs, and the ratio of workers to .non-workers that prevailed in the' past. They do not take into account the fact that people are living longer, that the number of older Americans is increasing steadily and the 'cost of care for the aged has risen astronom- ically and is still rising. Those in the work force are feeling the burden even more acutely and they are beginning to resent it. Nobody intended that this should happen. But the method of indexing social security to the consumer price index resulted in a massive redistri- bution of income in tl~e 1970s~ The .older retired person was fully in- dexed, but the average worker was only half indexed.. We had inflation for a d. ecfide. The result is a massive unintended redistribution of income. The political problem is that old peo- ple don't want to give anything back. And they vote. They vote with vigor, they vote with such vitality that there is no political leader who really has the courage to confl'ont this issue. I0 Foundation News, July~August 1982 This fact exacerbates whar'is prob- ably the central domestic political is- sue of Our times. It is an issue that sums up the other changes I've been discussing. Among the electorate there is a growing realization that we cannot at the same time do three.things: we cannot build up our defense budget, c6ntinue ~he policies of social well- being that we have accumulated over these past few decades (especially the costly program for the aged), and run an economy whose productivity is slackening and which is losing ground competitively. This is not a partisan issue. But tiow it is approached can be partisan. The presem administration, has. adopted one set of priorities. A new'adminis- tration may shill these priorities--but they will still find themselves faced ~dth the same constraifits, material and po- litical. If the economy does not pick up significant strength, what will wg do about the cost of defense? What will we do about .the cost of the vast array of social, cultural,.scientific and educational programs and objectives to which this country is committed? Will we abandon our goals and so-.. cial values, of which care for the aged is only one? I do nOt think we will. Will the pendulum swing back to big government once the present con- servative impulse has spent itself?. I don't think this will happen either. Public skepticism about the role of government is so deep-rooted in the electorate and it has built up for so long, that a strong swing back to New Deal and Great Society programs is not likely to happen. Role of Foundations Let me conclude with a brief dis- cussion about the role of the foun- dation in a country where these four i:hanges are likely to transform the social-political environment. I believe that the future role of foundations is tied directly to the fu- ture of government. For almost 50 years, national life was dominated by the assumption that Washington held the key to solutions via national leg- islafion and regulation. The high point of public confidence in government's prob. lem-solving role came .way back in 1958. There has been a'slow ero- sion of confidence ever since. $o we are caught up in a long-term trend which has caused the pendulum to swing to the opposite extreme, to the view that if we merely remove gov- ernment our situation will right itself. I believe that this extreme will prove as untenable and unrealistic as the view that the automatic solution to prob- lems is government legislation and regulation. In the near future we are likely to witness a very American so- lution to this dilemma. When we go too far in one direction, we then begin to shift back towards the center, which is truly the center of gravity of Amer- ican politics. The way we go through that exercise can invoh'e rather strange rituals.. Over this past year I've attended a number of conferences on industrial policy. They have all had the-same format. In the moi'ning, the speak- ers~many of whom are officers of the governmem~talk about getting thc government off our backs a.n..d how everything will be okay once we have less regulation, and once government has been removed from the picture. Then in the afternoon other speakers talk about how to bring the govern- ment into the picture to ac~.omplish certain specific objectives. The morn- ings are spen~' paying tribute to the current ideological fad; the after- noons in seeking to come to grips xdth practical problems in a realistic and pragmatic fashion. Someone once asked me my view on how to plan such a conference: I suggested we skip the morning session. In the future the role 'of govern- merit is likely to grow at once more complex and yet more modest. I think we are going to see a real diminution not so much in the total amount or government activity but in the role u litigation, lawyers, legislation, regu- lation and macro-economic policies, in favor of other ways of dealing with prohlems. I think we will see many We have seen-a gradual erosion of social norms in terms of their power i:o dictate behavior. and all those who are 10w on market- able or coping skills. We are speaking here of tens of millions of Americans.. It is inconceivable to me that our society can work well without intelli- gent address to this issue. It is simply going to' haunt us throughout this decade. It is a very difficult issue be- cause it has lost its moral underpin- nings. The moral basis for many social programs in the 1960s was framed in equal measure on affluence and guiltt the view that we are all responsible for the victims our society created. It is abundantly clear that this moral basis will not work in the 1980s be- cause most Americans feel neither af- fluent nor guilty. Atnericans used to say, "We are doing well so we are will- ing to give.a hand to the victims." Now instead, the~, are saying~ "Well, we are victims too. What about us?" And they are also saying'with respect to the guilt factor: "Times are .hard, we are not to blame, we have to look Out for our- selves." So or~e needs to find a new mora! basis. The compassion and the con- cern are present but the moral justi- fication has to be clarified. And once clarified, it has to be translated-into a new programmatic approach on the part of the people who can help them- selves but need assistance in doing so, anti on the part of the people who are in a position to be helpful. It is difficult to know how and when this new approm:h will emerge. One place to look is in the local community. It is'most likely that new forms of mu- tual support will emerge from the concern of citizens with their own community at the local level when people can say: "These are our neigh- bors, our fellow citizens. What can we do to help them?" 4. An Aging Population. As for the fourth significant factor influencing the 1980s, there are many demo- graphic changes that are having a ma- jor impact on our society. The society is growing older. The baby boom gen- eration is moving, on. There will be a 42 percent increase in the number of Foundation New, s, JulylAugua~ 1982 9 new forms of partnerships with gov- ernment as one party. The kind of relationsh!p :proposed by Jim Joseph and the Council regarding closer re- lationships between philanthropy and orga.nized religion is an excellent ex- ample of new forms of partnership. I believe we will Witness many new forms of social experimentation, with special emphasis on solutions at the local level--the community, the in- dividual company or plant. It might be a day-care center, or a home for the aged, or some other service re- flecting the kind of creative, positive new ideas that your president talked about for the Council. These services may be the fruit of cooperation be- tween a local church and a local ethnic group. Or they might involve the local plant of a national company, with the local union, individual citizens, local government, federal financial sup- port, and the foundation that helped bring the entity into being in the first pl~ce ~ No one knows how the future will evolve. But if the pendulum does swing toward the center, as I think it will, then the role of foundations may 'evolve around six emphases that I would en- capsulate briefly this way: First, an entrepreneurial role. This is a creative role, especially at the com- munity level. It involves supporting new id.cas, problem-solving, develop- ing approaches through funding the infra-structure staff, doing feasibilit~ studies and the like. Second, a managerial role. This in- volves a brokerage function, bringing new partners together, as uncom- fortable as they may be, and holding them together. Foundations must re- cruit and develop a new type of man- agerial talent: people of stature who can win the trust of individuals and organizations that-may themselves be partisa.n but who recognize the need for leadership that is not tainted with partisanship. There are many such people who would welcome an op- portunity for a career change to pub- -lic service, even at considerable sac- rifice in income. Third, a training/education role. ~eo- ' · ple who have been trained in special- ized institutions--business, govern- ment, charity, unions, universities, media--are often like fish out of water when they are out of their own insti- tutional setting. People become en- cased in their own areas of speciali- zation and find it difficult to understand other perspectives and frameworks. They want to do so, and they can with some training and re- orientation. But the training at pres- ent is meager; for all practical p~ur- poses, it is nonexistent. Leadership training of this order is a huge need · which everyone agrees exists but for which no one feels responsible. The initiative of-the foundatiohs can be critical here. Those in the Work force are beginning to resent the financial burden of car!rig for the elderly. Fourth, a technology-transfer role. It makes no sense to reinvent the wheel in Detroit, then Milwaukee, then Bos- ton and San Diego. We have to learn from each other's mistakes and suc- cesses. And this requires a very so- phisticated knowledge of the techni- cal paraphernalia of actually learning from experience. Otherwise, it will not happen. The present use of confer- ences, workshops and informal net- works to exchange ideas, swap horror stories, and check out other people's thinking is sound~as far as it goes. But it does not go nearly far enough. A more systematic approach is needed, one that is based on the principles of "action research." This involves the use of trained participant observers, extensive case histories, debriefing in- terviews, and professionals trained in the discipline of action research. The role of'the foundation is critical here because other institutions are just not equipped to do this, and it's a-crucial point if local efforts are going to be amplified to the 'national scene, and we are to learn from experience. Fifth, an involvin~-the-Fublic role. The processes of democracy in todaY's America are clogged. The media do an outstanding job in communicating news, but a terrible job in advancing citizen understanding of choices and alternatives, and helping people to confront the new realities. Maybe it is not their job to do this, but they hog the communication area. So they either have to take on this task, or make room for those who are willing to do it. We are an expert-dominated society where the experts cheat by foisting their own values on the public in the guise of technical solutions. This conceptual sleight-of-hand bewilders the public and turns them off. It makes them feel that their values and concerns are irrelevant, because the experts are concerned with esoteric theories couched in language that seems delib- erately designed to exclude the pub- lic~and does so successfully.. Foundations have an in~portant role to play in shaping the national debates on the great issues of our time and stripping away the technical gobble- dygook to get to their moral and prac- tical essence. ' S&'th, and finally, foundations can.hit a philosophical.ro'/e. I f we are to emerge whole from the great confusion that now besets us, we need to oblige the best minds of our times to transcend their own specializations and paro- chial interests, and to engage in a dia- ~.ogue on the meaning and purpose o[ our experience. Foundations have a truly critical role to play here. It seems to me a wonderful, exciting time to be in the foundation business. Thank you very-much. Da n icl }'ti n kelm,ich i; p resident of Ya nkelovich, Skelly & White. a leading public opinion re- search firm. He delivered these remarks in his keynote speech to the annual conference of the Council on Foumbttio,s lanai April in Detroit. Foundation News, july/Auguat 1982 11 H roid. Chucker W/~en the ~o~omy s~t~d job ~ -.Ore,on and Washington, troubled by ., depressedlumber and aircraft indus- tries, are trying to lure electronics · c~mpanies frmm.the crowded Silicon Valley of California~ '.~ :' -, .... .. - -: ~ -'.., ,,- ,::~., ~ ~.,..~'[f,' . : North Carolina, Michlgan,,Tennessee: and-West. Vir~nta: are. looldn&, too. With manufactttrin~ erodin~ as the- base; for: their economies., these-/ . :'s~ates"ancf others are ei~tertn~ thef.. · ' competition for "thoughtware~'..~ op-- , incubator for the metropolitan area. ' 'i "lqleh4echnolo~Y firms often Launch ·, / thor' operations in. the cil7~.but once they,start to ~ow, they move to the '. ~lburbs, hesaid;"::- '~;". :..'%..,~' :~ -: ; ThaffS ~i a "tofal I~ to 'th~ city,' it ~ , was· pointed'out, because: with the ~'state's fiscal-disparities law; Minne-. , i'ipolis sliares in the propen'y4ax lar- ~ ~ained by the' suburbs. 'Still;. ~' there-is a Ioss~f }obs forsome in the ci~ when a company'mo';'es, even-a .; '. ~toThardware"-typejobs. ,' :~. i . :/ "'."short'dismnce.~ThereisaconlinUing . ~ -!-~: ' : ;: .... ':' .. .~'::'~ ';: ;: .~:"<'.' :':'~/~.,-heed; therefore, " to~ am'ad' startup- · : What their'all want'-ika"~pver-.~ ':-'~Jompnnies and to-encourage the~tr Sion of another'Control Data, a '" i:~ eywell, a Xerox or.:a Medtronlc~-~-~.~ comPanies'with good ~rowt~ .poten-- ~- ~.'-.Citing the results of a congressional] rial that are labor-h~enslve, science--: _; :.'.-:: study,' Meininger noted ~hese' .as' -i: i _.based..and.. research-and-develol~ :~,':' ~ .~.'"':' ' ~" ~~ ' ? ' ' ~- ': ,'-'"~' -~'~, k-~' ; :. : .... '~.~ ~.~r,~ ~'-.'. ~--:'. :. Minneapolis, which is moving toward 'V: giving economic development as" i :'~"~tu~at~ ana:~iilfed:~orErorce? . !,, high a priority .as. housin& wouldn't" , ~-: mind having, ' more ~high-technoiogy] ~ :"-':'" '-jobs. The city is .better off than mc~ · : communities -- from-30 to 35 per- ' ' Cent of Its private-sector jobs are la < ~"~[ves the city':-a': les- up o~'. otl/er: "~ries. The.area's existing, complex of. -- computer" makers, health-sctenCe~ ,;~'ompanies and makers of/scientific. : [nstrumenis is a strong lure. fo/' o.ther? ; t'echnolo~y-oriented.companies. i S~c~ companies feed ~ff ~a~ ~th~, supplying components, ,set, rices and personnel--~ scientists, engineers -' and technicians :who frequently hop : from a maturing company to a start, · .' up firm that may~ offer a new chal- lenge or better career opportu~ties. :H(~e~, those attending ah"'~co- nOrnic development seminar involv- ~ ~n~ the- mayor and members'Of his '~l'I, city council member, the po- ~.ce chief and other high-ranking city offlcLals were told last week that because Minneapolis has a strong ~ high-technolng7 base it cannot rest on its laurels. · { ~able" labor costs;, a "reason- ~ . _ :~. fable" tax'<Hmate4 the .av~.ilabfllty of ': a~ademic institutions;' such as the ; ' University of Minnesota's Institute of' i ~ Technology and' ~chool' of Mannge-. ~ :.-,.ment; the interplay and technolol~ ~'!: transfer be'tWeen such institution~ -:' 'j--~'.and. companies; a ;'reasonable" cost~ :..Sf l[vin&' 'and-the-availability .'of ~ .ties, 'at least Ioi' high-technololD' -. ~ ' firms, are. goverameat..resuiatorT. -; practices, enersy costs, cultural amenities, c[tmate and access to materials. -". The seminm' mdved from the ab- stract to the real thing when it heard. i- how and 'why'one high-technology - decided to 1 .ocate in this ares. ~ . The company, a-' desi~tet"and pro- ducer of mintcomputers, ts a subsid- ' ~ of R2E o~ France, which in tufa is part of Cil-Honeywell Bull, French-based manufacturer of com- I~uter equipment. ...... - :- ~ R2£. of America was launched in.~ 1974 with a small team of engiueers in a 1,100 square-foot office in St _ Paul.. As the firm Ivew and began producing and marketing its equip- ment; it expanded, into Larser quar- ters in New Brighton, St; Paul and Bloomington.. 'l:oday it has about 80 employees and 70,000 square feet under one roof in Roseville. Last- year. the firm had sales of $40 mil-. lion; this y.ear it, .eXpect. to double Pierre Asancheyev, presidentof R2]E' of America, said his-company made ..a "logical"-decision In locating in Minnesota. The fact that Hone~veh. Inc., a l~art owner' of Honeywell BulL. has its world headquarters in Minne-, .~apolis had no~ing., to do with that Asancheyev and:others made a care-- ful study of location po.ss, ibillties in, , Arizonn, California;.Massachusetts;: '::-'-'Texas and:Mlunego~,a~-' High- on the: :." list of factors leading to the decision..: to pi~:k. Minnesota were the concen- tration of other technological finns-' [In the state and. the .presence. of · large 'number' 0f::.corporati 'hea~ ..'-'::quarter~;/custome~'. for the'~ R2£ The area's technological base made' it relatively simple to buy the equlp- ::'~ ment used tn makini the.R2E mtni~ "computers.' Suct/equipment includes' · software (programs .for computei's),i "silicon chips, and' peripheral equiP-, merit '(disks, printers, keyboards, Other factors included'the avaiLabil- Ity of a technically' oriented work' :-force, communications within the ' l~Inlted States and with France,' the costs of capital for investment, oper- ating costs and the social environ- ment -- the nature of labor relations and the presence or absence of so- ' !.' Equally important were the'sulbinty I of Minnesota's work. force and the educational fad]tries avatmble for training of engineers and scientists. "We can train assemblers tn a kew da~," Asancheyev said, "but we have to train our englneer~ contin- 'Minnesota didn't rank first in ever7 category considered-by R2£, but overall it came out a winner. _ Having heard those enc'o~raging - words, the Minneapolis officials con- .sidereal what they onght to be doing -. to make the city even more attrac- ' five to high-technolo~ firm.% - · 1118 effort, one. that would counter · the ba~ publicit~ .the: city and. state-: [have'reCeived about SUchZespects the weather,', taxes and the business , climate~ But. others 'sa~d' a' public. ~reIaUons' campaign, is' not needed; :~except perhaps to:build on the image ' ' of the atea's skUled and stable worir gethet:;:..n,. ~,~communic:aflo~r ..wne~e **new high-technology IlrmS *' could lo~tef But the problem in Min- :~ ne~p6Lts,' it: wes .pointed out, is,thn£ i no. im'ge, contiguous~ pm'ceis::of:land: ~ ar~avaU~ble fp~ an*ind~ park: :i? ~**Plnally, there was this question: ,,Do **we really have a problem?,". Simply · by. being n-;~gh-tecl~nology center, ..-'an' 'Incubator'"' for" Jobs nnd entre- i:"preneurs, '. the city cnn attract firms : that fit ,into.. tlmt' ;category, *it was ':**T~ere*, was .general 'a~eement on ' ttmt~ but the' seminm' pm'ticipants .~'..pe~,celved'.:a related problem, one *-- :-*:thnt*is anx~f~slioot of .r~pid tecbno- ;~.. logic~.:cttange_ .The qu. esOon is how ~'.to. retain. Lb..~.~"displa. ced. by new ~Another problem~ which has persist-. ' ed ~or years, is bow to provide entry- . level jobs for youths who*don't have 'the skills to make it in the Yin{orm~- 'Tbose'n:re 'questions ~nd problems' 'that could be the subject of another seminaY for city officials: .... - ' ' Harold C~ucker. is a tormer edttorP al page editor o! The Minneapolis St,tr and a speciaUst in economic affairs. CITY of MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 September 30, 1982 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Jon Elam, City Manager Jan Bertrand, Building Official Check list for Shopping Center Development I am listing what I feel should be the required approvals and informa- tion necessary to bring a site plan request before the Planning Commis- sion for the Shopping Center at Lost Lake: Site Plan to include: A. Location, area, and dimensions of existing and proposed: Lot(s), building(s), driveway(s)/street access, off-street parking, and utilities. B. Existing and proposed elevations. C. Distance between: 1. Building and.front, side and rear lot lines; 2. 'Principal building and accessory buildings; 3. Principal building and principal buildings oF adjacent lots D. Loca~'iOns of: Signs, easements, underground utilities, sprinkler lines, refuse storage, any screening and lighting. Engineer to sign site plan Submit soil reports Square footage of lot, parking areas, etc. Legal description of site. Approvals and/or applications filed with various regulatory agencies: 1. Hennepin County Department of Transportation 2. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District 3. Hennepin County Department of.Health (restaurants) I would like to review any submitted plans with the City Engineer, Attorney, Planner and Fire Chief before a final site plan would be approved. JB/ms