Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06-25-1990 Council Packet
1 PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO I ?V:/ftlmuL.n'mtUj MEETING DATE PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFOK-iATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER PRESENT FOR (from agenda) 1.i 1 ( P.l )H O c ‘ 1 Tw ^ i f 0 iOL • A r <7 e I 7./ 7^. ------------'L//u I ^ z 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. .0. .1. .2. .3. .4. ,5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 0. AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JUNE 25, 1990, 7:00 P.M. (*)Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Discussion will be held upon request. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet which may be obtained upon request from the Recorder.i ROLL CALL 1. CONSENT AGENDA* 2. Orono Tennis Team Recognition 3. Phil Bradley Recognition COUNCIL MEETING JUN 2 5 1990 CITY OF ORONO APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 4. Regular Meeting of May 29, 1990 * 5. Regular Meeting of June 11, 1990 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REPORT - JoEllen Hurr Rep. PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT ♦♦APPLICANTS**Immediately after the Council has reviewed your application please sign the three (3) original resolutions at the Recorder's desk. Applicants need not execute resolutions for subdivisions, vacations and denials. 6. 7. 8. 9. #1473 Jacquelynn Kelly, 2056 Shadywood Roa'’ ~ After-the-Fact Variance #1476 David & Susan Prass, 1065 Linden Lane - Reconsideration of Variance Approval #1510 Richard Brown, 2685 Shadywood Road - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution #1549 and #1550 Rod Crawford, 4705 North Shore Drive - Conditional Use Permit/Variancer - Resolution ENGINEER'S REPORT 10. 1990 Sealcoat Bid Award * 11. Pay Request #3 - Well #3 NAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT 12. West Suburban Human Services Appointment * 13. Park Commission Chair Appointment * 14. Appointments Process CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 15. Lake Use Management - 25 Year Plan Highway 12 Safety Improvement Consultant Engineer - Traffic Request for Funding - Art Center 1989 Financial Report Strategic Planning Transient Merchants 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JUNE 25, 1990, 7:00 P.M. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT Continued * 22. Temporary Employment - Golf Course 23. Facility Citizen Review Committee 24. Long Lake Annexation - Update 25. Orono Tennis Team Recognition - Resolution 26. Phil Bradley Recognition - Resolution 27. Police Annual Report 28. Administrator's Information Navarre/Livingston Storm Sewer Sandy Beach Resort County Road 15 Welcome Sign Bederwood "Grand Opening" Bederwood Park - Parking Lot Electrical Utility Territories Nature Conservancy/Bayside-Luce Line Big Island Tour - June 27 CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT LICENSES (29*) 30. A1 Penke - Solicitors License BILLS '31*) ACJOURNMJNT UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 06/14 - Citizens Advisory Committee 06/18 - Planning Commission Meeting 06/25 - Council Meeting 06/27 - Big Island Tour 06/28 - Citizen Advisory Committee 07/04 - July 4th Holiday (Wednesday) 07/09 - Council Meeting 07/16 - Planning Commission Meeting 07/23 - Council Meeting COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETIIWm o r. iQqn HELD MAY 29, 1990 JTJTI 0 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. CITY OF OROKO The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Grabek, and Councilmembers Goetten, Nettles, Peterson, and Callahan. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Public Works Director Gerhardson, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron, City Attorney Barrett. City Engineer Cook, and City Recorder Scheffler. NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY FRANCHISE ADOPTION WRIGHT HENNEPIN CO-OP ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION FRANCHISE ADOPTION PUBLIC HEARING 7:00 P.M. TO 7:05 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication was duly noted. Bernhardson explained that the purpose of this public hearing was to have Council adopt the franchise agreements for i;SP and Wright/Hennepin Co-op. Bernhardson noted that Cit> staff was waiting written confirmation of approval from Wright/Hennepin regarding a revision made to their agreement. He suggested that Council may wish co postpone their decision regarding Wright/Hennepin. Bernhardson stated that the franchise aareements do not address rate or territory regulations. He noted that a resident had recently asked whether a change could be made from Wright/Hennepin to NSP. He informed Council that information regarding territorial changes would be provided at the next Couiicil meeting. Thera were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was continued. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan. seconded by CounciImember Peterson, to continue the public hearing regarding the Wright/Hennepin Franchise Agreements until the June 11, 1990, Council Meeting. Councilmember Goetten asked whether she would have the opportunity to ask questions about either agreement. Callahan stated that his motion was intended only to postpone the Wright/Hennepin matter, and that the USP Agreement had yet to be addressed. Councilmember Nettles asked whether the City any authority to require that the power lines be buried in the ground. City Attorney Barrett had previously inquired about Nettles' questions and was informed that the City has no authority without approval of the Public Utilities Commission. He noted that it may involve a lengthy process in order to be allowed to require that the lines be buried. Netties said that burial of power lines is something that the City should consider and asked staff to put the issue on a future agenda. Barrett noted that the Franchise Agreements presented this evening will be in effect for 20 years. Peterson asked whether the City of Orono has ever charged USP or Wright/Hennepin a 5% franchise fee. Bernhardson replied that the City has not imposed the fee. - 1 - cl ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 NSP AND WRIGHT/HENNEPIN CONTINUED Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. It was moved by CounciImember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Goetten to table the NSP Franchise Agreement consideration until the June 11, 1990 Council Meeting. Nettles asked that staff look into the aspect of line burial and whether it is necessary to have the terms of the agreements last for 20 years. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. CONSENT AGENDA* Councilmember Goetten asked that items #5, removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. #17 and #29 be Councilmember Callahan asked to have item #27 removed for discussion. Bernhardson informed Council that it would be possible for Mr. Earl Freeman to attend this meeting to discuss his zoning application. Bernhardson asked Council where on the agenda Mr. Freeman could be placed. It was the consensus of the Council that Mr. Freeman be scheduled as item #14A under the Zoning Administrator's report. It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the Consent Agenda, with the exception of items #5, #17, #27 and #29, which w^re removed and discussed in the order appearing on the Agenda. The Zonirg Application of Mr. Earl Freeman was added to the Agenda as item #14A under the Zoning Administrator's Report. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. CONSIDERATION OF MORATORIUM PUBLIC HEARING 7:10 P.M. TO 7:45 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication was duly noted. Bernhardson explained that the City's Zoning Ordinance allows only Orono municipal facilities to exist within a residential area. Bernhardson stated that the City of Wayzata has expressed interest in constructing a municipal facility on property located in Orono within a residential zone. Bernhardson stated that the mortatorium would allow the City to more closely examine the options and possibility of amending the Zoning Ordinance to include conditions if such a situation is allo\;ed. Mr. Robert Gisvold, Mayor of Wayzata was present, as was Mr. Allan Orsen, City Manager for Wayzata. Mayor Gisvold stated that It had become necessary for the City of Wayzata to relocate its public works facility. He said that the property in question would be suitable for such a use do to the location being fairly hidden from view. He had hoped that they could work with the - 2 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 MORATORIUM CONTINUED City of Orono to accomplish that goal. He suggested that a shared facility v/ould be an option. He asked Bernhardson whether the City had established a time limit for the moratorium, if approved. Bernhardson replied that the moratorium could last 6 to 9 months, but could be terminated at an earlier date by Council if they so choose. Mr. Orsen presented sketch plans of the building they hope to construct. He stated that Sketch Plan A, sho\/ing the use of the property within Orono was pref#^rred. Sketch Plan B showed an option of using property within Wayzata. Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Orsen if v;ayzata had received approval from Orono to construct such a facility prior to their purchase of the property. Mr. Orsen replied that Wayzata had informed Orono of its intentional use o the property if they were in fact to purchase it. flayor Grabek stated that though Mr. Orsen and Mayor Gisvold had met with him and discussed their interest in the property, he had not made it clear that they intended to purchase the land. Grabek asked Barrett if he was aware of the procedure required in order to MHDOT to offer municipal property for sale. Barrett said. "I don't believe there is any requirement for MNDOT to offer the property to abutting cities. There is more than likely a bidding procedure or price consideration that have to be taken into account. Councilmember Goetten commented that she had spoken to Bill Crawford from MNDOT last week. She said that Mr. Crawford had been unaware of the fact that this property was within Orono until negotiations were well under way. She said Mr. Crawford indicated that normally out of courtesy, they inform cities of property within their borders that MNDOT has for sale. Goetten also asked whether the upgrade of Highway 12 will pose any problem for any ^ .ructure built on this property. Goetten said that at one point Wayzata had stated that MNDOT had assured them that Highway 12 would not interfere with their new facility. Goetten questioned Mr. Crawford as to how he could make that decision, since no one else seems to know where Highway 12 is to go. Goetten said the Mr. Crawford told her that he had never given Wayzata any assurances that Highway 12 would not interfere with any structure on that parcel. Nettles stated that if the City's Code does not clearly address this situation, that only Orono facilities should be - 3 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 MORATORIUM CONTINUED allowed on Orono property. He noted that he was comparing this matter to the existing situation with Long Lake. He said that it would be possible for Wayzata to begin annexation proceedings, as Long Lake has done. He believed that the moratorium is a good idea. Mayor Grabek stated that he would prefer not to have such a facility located at the entrance to Orono. even if were constructed on property within Wayzata. Peterson stated that in her opinion, Long Lake is proceeding with annexation because they disagreed with the conditions of use Orono required. She questioned whethe: such a situation would occur if Wayzata agreed to comply with conditions established by Orono. She asked how the Municipa' Board may view a request for annexation, especially since the property is non-taxable. Bernhardson replied that the property could become taxable in the future. He stated that should Wayzata construct a building on that parcel, that they \/ould probably have a stronger case in favor of annexation. Peterson asked Bernhardson v;hat plans the City would have for that parcel of land. Bernhardson said that the City would need to examine what is the most suitable use of the property. He stated that the moratorium will allow the City to consider uses for the land, whether it be Wayzata s proposal or that of another party. Mayor Gisvold stated that the City of Viayzata does not intend to go against, the wishes of Orono. He said this is an opportunity to relocate their public works facility to an area that will have little impact on either community. He said we do not feel it is necessary to annex the property. VJe only wish to be allowed to use it as we have indicated. Mayor Gisvold explained that they may be unable to wait 6 to 9 months for the moratorium to be lifted. He stated that their current public works facility is at the Widston School. They have received notice that they must vacate this site. Councilmember Callahan stated that he did not want V^ayzata to misconstrue a vote in favor of the moratorium as an indication that he did not want to cooperate with Wayzata. Callahan said that he did not know why, but felt it was undesirable to have two public works facilities located so closely together. He was hopeful that Orono and Wayzata could reach an agreement to benefit both cities and favored the moratorium for that purpose. Councilmember Goetten questioned why the City had decided to place a moratorium on the property at this point. She asked why - 4 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 MORATORIUM CONTINUED the Cit'- ‘^»ad not considered purchasing the land themselves. Be*;, irdson stated that he became aware of Wayzata's actual purchase of the property only a short time ago. He stated that there hc.d been no interest expressed by Council regarding the purchase of the land from MNDOT. Councilmember Peterson asked v/hatever became of the proposal to trade property in Orono for property in Wayzata. flayor Gisvold indicated that the discussions pertaining to trading properties were not very extensive. Callahan stated that he would not have been in favor of purchasing the property from flNDOT. Mayor Grabek asked Mayor Gisvold v;hat position the City of Wayzata has taken with regard to the location of Highway 12. flayor Gisvold stated that Wayzata has not taken a formal position at this time. He stated that Mr. Crav/ford had not used the word assurance when discussing Highway 12. Mr. Crawford did indicate that he strongly believed that Highway 12 wo*uld not go to the south, otherwise they \/ould not have considered disposing of the subject property. Mayor Grabek stated that because there are so many unanswered questions, a moratorium is necessary. Mayor Grabek asked that staff send a letter to Mr. Crawford asking him the reason the property was sold to VJayzata. The letter should also inquire about representations made to Mayor Gisvold regarding the construction of Highway 12 south of its current location. Mayor Grabek said that he was still concerned about the visibility of the public works facility should it be constructed on the Orono property. He ques" oned whetner the Wayzata City Staff had reviewed all other possible locations within Wayzata. Mayor Gisvold stated that there are no within Wayzata that would have adequate acreage. other locations flayor Grabek asked flayor Gisvold whether he would be amenable to discussions regarding joint use of a public works facility. •ayor Gisvold stated that he would welcome such discussions. He reminded Mayor Grabek that they do not have an unlimited amount of time in which to find an alternative location for their puDlic works facility. There were no further comments regarding this matter and Mayor Grabex closed the public hearing. - j “ ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 MORATORIUM CONTINUED It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Callahan, to adopt Ordinance #84, Second Series establishing a moratorium on governmental facilities apart from its own and the school district as set forth^ in the moratorium. Staff is directed to amend the existing code to clearly stav,e that it IS only Orono's municipal facilities that arc allowed to exist within residential areas. Motion, Ayes-3, Goetten, Peterson, Nay. Motion passed. Councilmember Goetten stated that she believed that 9 months was too long a period of time for a situation that has been ongoing for a year. Goetten stated that presently the Code does not prohibit other cities from building such facilities within residential areas. Peterson questioned whether this was an ordinance amendment and if so would not a 4/5ths vote be required. Barrett stated that a Statute under Chapter 452 authorizes cities to impose m.^-itoria with only a majority of Councilmembers voting in favor. A 4/5ths vote is required when amending the City Code. RECOGNITION-TERI NAAB, DEPUTY CLERK r'ujyor Grabek presented a Resolution to Ms. Naab recognizing her achievement of attaining the Minnesota Clerk's Certification. APPROVAL OP MINUTES Councilmember Goetten asked that the minutes be corrected to indicate that Councilmember Callahan asked Mr. Johnson to contac._ his neighbor regarding a shared use of the existing walkv/ay. Goetten stated that she had voted nay on this matter because she believed that staff should contact Mr. Johnson's neighbor. She thought it was inappropriate for Mr. Johnson to negotiate an issie that was of interest to him. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting held May 14. 1990. Motion, Ayes-5. Nays-0, Motion passed. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no public comments. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: 11467 CHARLES HOMMEYER 4125 OAK STREET VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2805 ... . ^ .uMr. and Mrs. Hommeyer were present and inaicated that they had no comments. it was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Counci Ime.mber Nettles, to .%dopt Resolution #2805, approving the after-the- fact conditional use permit and variances for a rewaining wal^ . 6 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 ZONING FILE #1467-HOKMEYER CONTINUED and deck. Motion, Ayes-4, Goetten, Nay,Motion passed. #1483 HARRY VOGT 1342 REST POINT CIRCLE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2806 Ms. Merle Vogt was present and indicated that she had no comments. Councilmemter Goetten noted that Council has been asked to consider whether or not the refrigerator may remain in the structure. Mayor Grabek indicated that he would be in favor of allowing the refrigerator to remain. Councilmember Goetten concurred, stating that her concerns were focused on the plumbing that had been installed in the facility. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2806 as amended to include language allowing a refrigerator to remain in the structure. Motion, Ayes- 5, Uays-0. Motion passed. #1511 CITY OF OROMO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUMP STATION VARIANCE Bernhardson explained that this application involved approval of the construction of a pump station on Highway 12. Bernhardson stated that the roof design of the building has been revised from gable to mansard. The building access will occur from the east side rather than the south side as first proposed. Bernhardson noted that initially there will be two pressure tanks to the rear of the building. Once the water tower has been constructed, the pressure tanks will be removed. He stated the staff has reviewed this proposal with Mr. Otten. Councilmember Goetten asked Public Works Director Gerhardson if he has reviewed the to-scale plans of the structure and what the height of the structure v/ill be. Gerhardson stated that he has reviewed the plans and that the structure v/ill be approximately 16H' high. Goetten asked whether the structure will require a setback variance. City Engineer Cook stated that a 3' setback variance will be required on the east side of the building. - 7 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 ZONING FILE #1511-CITY OF ORONO CONTINUED Cou’icilmember Goetten stated the City should abide by the reconuner.dation of the Planning Commission to provide evergreen screening. Councilmembcr Callahan noted that a survey is required for all zoning applications and that the City should not be exempt from meeting that criteria. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Callahan, to conceptually approve the conditional use permit for the construction of a pump house to be located on Highway 12. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1515 JEFFREY JOHNSON 3825 CHERRY AVENUE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2807 Jeffrey Johnson was present. Bernhardson briefly reviewed the current information regarding this application (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated May 25, 1990). Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Johnson if he had in fact discussed the option of sharing the neighbor's catwalk. Mr. Johnson indicated that he did discuss that option with his neighbor, but his neighbor had no interest in sharing the existing catwalk. Councilmember Goetten stated that she had gone out to the site and is more certain that Mr. Johnson's proposal should not be approved. She stated that she had not approved a similar application previously reviewed by Council. Goetten also stated that Mr. Johnson's neighbor should be asked to come before the Council because their catwalk is deteriorating and must recei'^e Council approval for repairs. Goetten again expressed h '• concern regarding the precedent-setting aspect of approving suca structures. Councilmember Nettles asked staff how many of these catwalks exist in Orono. Mabusth referred to a catwalk previously approved for property on Tonkawa Road and a bridge approved in 1978 for property on Farview. She said that similar situations more than likely exist in Orono, but could not provide specific locations at this time. Mabusth stated that at some point in the future, the City will be able to vacate the right-of-way for Cherry Avenue which - 8 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 ZONING FILE 11515-JOHNSON CONTINUED would allow the proper easements to be granted to Mr. Johnson's property. It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Mayor Grab.'k, to adopt Resolution #2807, approving a variance allowing an accessory structure to exist on a legally combined property divided by a platted right-of-way where the principal structure is not on the same parcel, as well as hardcover and setback variances within the 0-75' setback area. Callahan asked that staff initiate the process to vacate the right-of-way for Cherry Avenue. Motion, Ayes-3, Goetten, Callahan, Nay. Motion passed. #1516 VmiTNEY MACMILLAN 1560 FOX STREET SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION #2808 Mr. and Mrs. JlacMillan were present, as was Mr. Jack Taylor, Attorney, Mr. Larry Hanson, Schoell and Madson, and Mr. Herb Baldwin, Landscape Architect. Bernhardson reviewed the information regarding this application for a subdivision to create a single building lot (see Michael Gaffron's memo dated May 24. 1990). Mayor Grabek asked whether staff's access have been ansv/ered sufficiently. questions regarding Gaffron stated that ail questions have been answered. Mr. Taylor stated that the Resolution states that the applicants must sign a standard maintenance and dedication agreement. Mr. Taylor asked for the opportunity to \/ork with the City Attorney to revise the agreement. He said that some of whe language does not apply because of the creation of only one lot. Bernhardson stated that staff would work with Mr. Taylor so to have the agreement drafted prior to final plat approval. Mr. Taylor also stated that it will be necessary to transfer the title to portions of this property so that it will be under one ownership. He stated that it would be more simple to do this after the plat is filed. He asked that the resolution provide language providing him to do that without the need to come before Council. City Attorney Barrett indicated that there should be no problem with proceeding as Mr. Taylor has requested. Councilmember Goetten asked whether Mr. Taylor's requests would cause any of the information presented to Council to change. - 9 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 ZONING FILE #1516-MACMILLAN CONTINUED Gaffron stated that the subdivision will remain as it has been presented to Council. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by CounciImember Nettles, to adopt Resolution #2808, approving the preliminary subdivision for Mr. and Mrs. Whitney MacMillan. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. ilbl7 WHITNEY MACMILLAN 1560 FOX STREET CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION #2809 Gaffron explained that the MacMillans were seeking a conditional use permit in order to enlarge an existing pond. Gaffron noted that the MacMillars were also proposing to put a stone v/all, 2' in height, along tne outlet to serve as a dam. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2809, granting a conditional use permit to enlarge an existing pond. Motion Myes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1522 JAMES NORDLIE 2505 DUNWOODY AVENUE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2810 Mr. and Mrs. Nordlie were present, as was Mr. Gerry Roelofs, the Norlie's builder. Bernhardson reviewed the information in Gaffron's memo dated 5/24/90. Gaffron showed the Council the area of hardcover that would be removed in order to achieve 35% as recommended by the Planning Commission. Mr. Roelofs stated that the Planning Commission's recommendation of 35% seemed arbitrary. He said that removal of driveway hardcover presents a hardship in the winter. Mr. Roelofs suggested an alternative that would allow easier access in winter and would reduce hardcover to 36.09%. He asked Council to consider that option. Grabek asked whether staff had any objections to Mr. Roelofs' proposal. Gaffron stated that in his opinion, Mr. Roelofs' proposal was a compromise. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to adopt Resolution #2810 as amended to reflect that - 10 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 ZONING FILE #1522-NORDLIE CONTINUED hardcover be reduced to 36.09% as proposed by Mr. Roelofs. Callahan believed that it is possible for Nordlics to meet the 35%. He stated that slippery conditions only exist for short periods of time and portions of the sidewalk could be removed if it is necessary to retain more driveway area. Councilmember Goetten concurred with Callahan. Motion, Ayes-2, Goetten, Peterson, Callahan, Nay. Motion failed. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2810 as presented, requiring that hardcover be reduced to 35%. Mr. Roelhofs asked what options are available to his clients. Gaffron explained that the applicants could ask to have the matter tabled. He noted that hardcover could be removed from any location on the property as long as 35% is achieved. Mrs. Nordlie noted that they are only adding 100 s.f. of structure. Motion, Ayes- 5, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1525 WILLIAM V/ROBLEWSKI 630 PARK LANE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2811 Mr. and Mrs. Wroblewski were present. Bernhardson briefly reviewed tiie applicants’ request. Gaffron added that the applicants will be required to apply for variance approval should they decide to enclose the slab in any way in the future. Mr. Wroblewski commented that adding any further structure to the porch would detract from the design of the existing house. It wdfe^. moved by Callahan, seconded by Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2811, granting the hardcover variance for an addition to an existing concrete slab. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1529 JOHN THIESSE 3845 BAYSIDE ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2812 t'ir. Thiesse was present for the review of this matter. Bernhardson reviewed the pertinent facts involved with this application (see Michael Gaffron's memo dated May 24, 1990). Gaffron stated that the Planning Coimnission voted against enlarging the driveway area to provide a turn-around/parking area. He said that the Planning Commission had considered other options that may provide a more safe access. However, the - 11 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 ZONING FILE #1529-THIESSE CONTINUED options available offered nothing more than the applicant's proposal. Gaffron noted that the pitch on the roof of the attached garage will be approximately 3' higher than the house. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Hetties, to adopt Resolution #2812, granting side setback, street setback and hardcover variances to construct a 2-car garage. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. EARL FREEMAN 4545 WATERTOWN ROAD Bernhardson had asked that this matter be added to the agenda. Mr. Freeman resides in Chicago and was able to attend this meeting to discuss the status of his property. Bernhardson informed Council that the hazardous structure had been removed from the property sometime ago. He stated that a sheetmetal building remains on the property and that Mr. Freeman is asking to retain the structure until a principal structure is constructed. Bernhardson noted that concerns had been raised by Planning Commission and Council regarding the condition of the property. Mabusth stated that unlicensed vehicles, garbage and debris cluttered the site. She noted that Council had given Mr. Freeman until June 15, 1990 to clean up the property. Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Freeman if he would have a problem meeting the June 15 deadline. Mr. Freeman replied that he was not aware of the need for a variance to maintain the shed. He stated that he received notice of his violation one week after receiving notice that the guest house had been razed. He stated that he does intend to clean up the property and take care of the existing well. He iioted that City staff had indicated there were 3 wells, he knew of only one. Mabusth asked Mr. Freeman if he v/as aware that the items in the shed must also be removed by the June 15 deadline date. Mr. Freeman stated that he would have all items in the shed removed. Mabusth asked that Mr. Freeman provide staff with the names of his local agents. Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Freeman what plans he has for the property. Mr. Freeman stated that he had originally hoped to build a home on the property. However, he was transferred to Chicago. He stated that a developer has expressed interest in purchasing - 12 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 FREEMAN CONTINUED the property to construct a home. Mr. Freeman asked whether it v/as necessary for a building permit to be issued by October 31. Mabusth stated that Mr. Freeman is correct. Mayor Grabek asked when the building was razed. Mabusth replied that the guest house was razed in October, 1989. The principal structure burned down in 1984. Mayor Grabek stated that if the shed and grounds are not cleaned up by June 15th, Mr. Freeman v;ill be required to remove the shed. He informed Mr. Freeman that if a principal structure is not constructed by October 31, 1990, the shed must be removed. Mr. Freeman indicated that he would require additional time to sell the property and asked that the deadline by extended to next spring. Callahan indicated that an extension to spring would not be objectionable, but questioned whether Mr. Freeman would be able to meet that deadline if he could not meet the October deadline. Mayor Grabek suggested giving Mr. Freeman until June 1, 1991. He stated that staff may order the shed removed, with Council approval, if the cluttered condition retu-as. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, that the property be cleaned up by June 15, 1990. If the property is cleaned up, staff is directed to prepare a resolution allowing Mr. Freeman to retain the accessory structure on the property v/ith no principal structure until June 1, 1991. If the June 15, 1990 deadline for clean up is not met, the shed must be removed. If the property returns to a state of clutter any time before June 1, 1991, staff is directed to bring the matter before Council to have the shed removed. Motion, Ayes- 5, Nays-0. Motion passed. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT: CHANGE ORDER II, WELL 13* It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve Change Order #1 for Keys Well Drilling for $975.00 for placing silt fencing erosion control as needed. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. PLANS AND SPECS FOR PUMP HOUSE Bernhardson stated that this item was to provide approval of the pump house plans ana direct the Engineer to advertise for bids. - 13 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 PUMPHOUSE CONTINUED City Engineer Cook asked that the bid date be set for July 3, 1990 at 10:00 a.m. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by CounciImember Callahan, to approve the plans and specifications as presented for the pump house for well #3 v/ith the mansard roof and to direct the City Engineer to advertise for bids for a bid opening on July 3, 1990 at 10:00 a.m. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. LIFT STATION 10 AND 43 BID AWARD Councilmember Goetten asked Barrett whether he had reviewed this matter. Barrett stated that he recommended that the bid be sent to the bonding company. He understood that has been done and that the bonding company has verbally accepted the bid. He stated that due to vacation schedules, the bonding company has not yc?t responded in writing. He suggested that Council either approve the award contingent on the receipt of written approval, or that the matter be delayed until written confirmation is received. Barrett noted that staff is anxious to proceed. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten. seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to present the bid award to Latour Construction, contingent on the receipt of written approval of the bid from the bonding corapany. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT: PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINTMENT Bernhardson stated that Councilmember Goetten had asked to have the appointment process reviewed. In regard to the appointment to Planning Commission, he noted that Mr. Rollie Martin and Mr. Ward Edv/ards had withdrawn their applications. Councilmember Goetten opposed the manner in which the Park Commission applications were accepted. She stated that though there is no formal appointment process, a time limit was established for receiving resumes and applications. Goetten clarified that her abstention from the vote for the ParV. Commission appointment stemmed from that concern. She stated that she had no objections to the person appointed, only that Ms. Wilson had not met the deadline for applying. Goetten believed that the City should be more consistent in upholding whatever guidelines are established. She was also disappointed that Ms. Wilson had not appeared before the Council prior to the appointment. Councilmember Peterson concurred with Goetten. She had - 14 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINTMENT CONTINUED voted against the appointment of Sue Wilson beocuse of the process, not the person. Councilmember Nettles stated that it may have shed a different light on his motion had Goetten and Peterson discussed their concerns at the time of the vote. He asked whether fls. Wilson had in fact accepted the position. Gerhardson replied that Ms. Wilson had accepted the position. Goetten stated that she had attempted to make her objections known, but could not do so before Mayor Grabek moved on to the next agenda item. Mayor Grabek apologized to Goetten for overlooking her request to be recognized. He asked Councilmembers to interrupt and ask him to stop should such a situation arise again. Councilmember Callahan stated that the process has always been informal. He did not realize that there was any concern regarding the process on behalf of any Councilmembers. Callahan indicated that he would favor establishing a process as long as it remained simple and did not discourage citizens from seeking available positions. Mayor Grabek believed that the City is lucky to have so many persons interested in serving the Community. He also favored keeping the process informal and simple. Ms. Sherokee Use stated that she had applied for the Park Commission position. She said that two persons had called the City regarding the application process. Those persons were informed that if applications were not postmarked by the deadline date, they would not be considered. Ms. Use said that she was scheduled to go out of town on business and stayed up until 2:00 a.m. to prepare her application and meet the deadline. She said that it appears there are "mixed messages" being given and found that to be frustrating. Mayor Grabek stated that it was unfortunate that this situation arose. He said that he had reservations about turning av/ay anyone that expressed interest in serving the Community. He suggested that staff examine this process so to avoid this problem from occurring again, but that there be no formal procedures or rigid policies established. Mayor Grabek asked for nominations for the position held presently by Jeffrey Johnson. Councilmember Goetten nominated Jeffrey Johnson to serve for - 15 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINTMENT CONTINUED a 3-year term. CounciImember Callahan seconded the motion. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. v;ith regard to the second appointment, Goetten stated that there is a real need to have a lakeshore resident fill the position. Goetten indicated that though Mr. Bagley seemed very qualified, she had reservations concerning his absence during winter months. Mayor Grabek nominated Candace Rowlette to serve on the Planning Commission. Councilmember Goetten seconded. Motion, Ayes-4. Mettles Nay. Motion passed. Nettles stated that Steve Johnston had many qualifications, including perseverance, and felt that he was deserving of the appointment. ADMINISTRATOR'S REVIEW Mayor Grabek stated that based on the information received from Councilmembers, he recommends a 5% salary increase. He also recommended a $100/month increase in car allowance and a contract extension to two years. Councilmember Goetten expressed concerns about the contract length being extended. She said that it may pose problems due to any changes that may result from the upcoming Council elections. Councilmember Callahan thought to the contrary. He believed that because of the upcoming elections a two-year contract would provide stability to processes already in place while Council adjusts to any changes. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to accept Mayor Grabek's recommendation. Peterson thought the increase in car allowance was excessive. Peterson also objected to a 5% increase since other City employees received 4%. Goetten asked what the City Administrator's salary v/ill be. Grabek replied that it will be $57,755.00 if increased by 5%, or $57,205.00 at 4%. Peterson noted that the salary will actually be $61,900 with the inclusion of the car allowance. Motion, Ayes-3, Peterson, Goetten, Nay. Motion passed. Goetten stated that she had asked for improved communications as part of last year's review. She said that, and other expectations have not occurred. OTHER: Councilmember Peterson asked if it would be possible for staff to provide Council with their meeting agendas earlier in the week. She said that the present system does not allow adequate time to review the information. Goetten added that there is no time to contact staff or other persons for answers to questions or added information prior - 16 - ORONO REGULAR COUiNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 OTHER CONTINUED to the Council Meeting. Peterson also asked that Council be given a map with the zoning applications. Gaffron suggested providing Council with the Planning Commission packet earlier in the \/eek so they could begin reviev^ing the zoning applications as soon as possible. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: LAKE USE MANAGE^IENT Bernhardson reported that a meeting had recently been held to discuss Orono's position and response to the LMCD Managerial Plan. He presented a draft response to the Plan that had been prepared by Councilmember Callahan as a result of that meeting. Callahan suggested that the draft be reviewed by Council and that they contact him \/ith any proposed revisions. Mayor Grabek asked Callahan whether in his opinion, LMCD Representative Hurr was receptive to the ideas expressed by those attending the meeting. Callahan s'-ed that various comments made by Representative Hurr left him feeling pessimistic about the future of the LMCD. He noted that Hurr was cooperative and helpful. Callahan believed it v/ould be necessary for the City to make an oral or \/ritten presentation at the upcoming Public Hearing. He also suggested that this draft be sent to the other 14 lakeshore communities and actively encourage them to support Orono's poi.it of view. He further suggested that Representative Hurr be asked to accomplish the same goal of the City or vote against the Plan should it not meet that goal. Mayor Grabek, referring to the last suggestion, questioned whether Hurr would agree with such a request. Callahan stated that Hurr is a representative of the Community. He said that until now, she has not had the Council's consensus on this matter and has been able to only respond in a manner she thought best. Callahan did not believe that Hurr opposed the Council's consensus. Council agreed that they would review the draft and respond to Callahan as soon as possible. Goetten questioned whether the committee should meet again with Hurr prior to the Public Hearing to confirm the City's position with Representative Hurr. - 17 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 LAKE MANAGEMENT CONTINUED Gabriel Jabbour expressed concern about the last minute nature of the Council’s preparation for the Public Hearing. Mayor Grabek apologized to Mr. Jabbour and explained to him that there are currently many issues facing the City, not just Lake Management. He assured Mr. Jabbour that though it may seem that Council is not prepared, they are ready to address this issue. Councilmernber Nettles stated that Mr. Jabbour had not reviewed the draft recently prepared by Councilmernber Callahan. He informed Mr. Jabbour that the response strongly sets forth the Council's position regarding this issue. He assured Mr. Jabbour that Council v/ould get the job done. Callahan noted that there is additional time following the ,'ublic Hearing for the City to lobby. He said that the City's response is not untimely or inadequate. Callahan encouraged Mr. Jabbour to review his draft and call him to discuss his comments. Councilmernber Goetten suggested publishing Callahan's draft in the paper, however, it was determined that the deadline for receiving articles was today. Callahan directed staff to send the draft in its present form to the Councilmembers of the 14 lakeshore communities. Goetten asked Callahan whether his draft included her concerns regarding watercraft licensing, education, etc. Callahan replied that those concerns are addressed. There was no formal motion made regarding this item. NAVARRE/LIVINGSTON AVENUE STORM SEWER Mark and Karen Cuff, and their Attorney, Anthony Gleekel, were present. Bernhardson provided a brief history regarding this matter involving 3572 Livingston Avenue, property owned by Mark and Karen Cuff. Bernhardson referred to a lettler that had been received from Mr. Gleekel asking that the storm sewer project be ordered, despite the fact that a petition from the area neighbors has not been received. (See Mr. Gleekel's letter dated May 21, 1990.) Mr. Gleekel informed Council that the Cuffs had expended a great deal of time and money to have their soil tested for contamination. He said that the test results indicated that the soil was contaminated but not to an unsafe level. Mr. Gleekel stated that it would be too costly for the Cuffs to have more - 18 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 LIVINGSTON AVENUE DRAINAGE CONTINUED extensive testing done. He said that he and the Cuffs had discussed the test results with City staff. Mr. Gleekel reviewed the information in his letter regarding representations that had been made to Cuffs regarding the property. He said that his clients' backs are against the wail and they have exhausted all options. He requested that Council allow the storm sewer project to proceed. Councilmember Nettles asked the Cuffs how long they had resided next to the vacant lot before deciding to purchase it. He asked whether they had observed the runoff draining through the property. The Cuffs indicated that they had lived in their house two years. Due to the overgrown nature of the. lot, they did not notice water running through the property. Ms. Cuff stated that at that time they had no problems with water leaking into their basement. Nettles asked whether a change had occurred in the area to cause water to now be leaking into Cuff's basement. Gerhardson replied that nothing had changed since the Cuff's purchased the property. He said it is his opinion that a drainageway has always existed on that vacant lot. He noted tnat at one time a culvert had been placed in the street. Hov;ever, it created more drainage problems and was removed. Nettles asked whether there were options available to solve this problem. any other less costly Gerhardson stated tnat staff has reviev/ed this matter over a period of several years and has found no other solution. Mr. Gleekel stated that the Cuff's could not put in a pipe themselves because of the liability they would have should the runoff drain onto a neighboring property. Nettles was sympathetic to the Cuff's problem, but did not feel that the City had made any misrepresentations regarding the property. Mayor Grabek agreed that the City should continue to look at possible solutions to this, but did not wish to commit City funds to solve the problem. Mr. Gleekel asked Council to vote to either approve or deny the undertaking of a storm sewer project. He said that the matter has been pending for a considerable time period. City Attorney Barrett advised Council that there is nothing - 19 - C«ONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 LIVINGSTON AVENUE DRAINAGE CONTINUED specifically for Council to deny. He suggested that Council reiterate their previous motion asking the Cuffs to continue to obtain a petition of 35% of the area property owners. It was moved by Councilmember Mettles/ seconded by flayor Grabek, to direct staff to continue to explore options to resolve the drainage problem. In the meantime, the City maintains its position of agreeing to order the storm sewer project if 35% of the residents agree to sign a petition asking for the project. tMotion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR MEETING Bernhardson informed Council that he has not received confirmation of the date for the Policy Meeting. TRANSIENT MERCHANTS Bernhardson provided information regarding the history of Mr. Penke's business and apprised Council of the recent events that have occurred (See Mark Bernhardson' s memo dated May 25, 1990). Bernhardson stated that he has received letters from fir, and Mrs. Kramer, Bayside Floral, and Mr. and Mrs. Labatt, Spring Park Spur, expressing concern about the safety hazard Mr. Penke's business is creating in its present location. He said that Mr. Penke's attorney, Mr. Indritz, had indicated that Mr. Keaveny had given Mr. Penke permission to sell fror.i his property. Bernhardson also noted that a letter had been received from Mr. and Mrs. Butterfield protesting against transient merchants in general. Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Penke why he had not applied for a license in iihe last two years. Mr. Penke stated that at the April 11, 1988 Council Meeting, there was discussion as to whether he was classitied as . a solicitor. He said that Council had asked Mr. Larson, the property owner, to submit an application to rezone the property to CoiTimercial, but that did not occur. Mr. Penke said that he was notified of the need for a license by the Police Officer that ticketed and shut him down on Mother's Day. Mr. Indritz stated that in his opinion, communication has been a problem. He said that Mr. Penke has sold flowers from one location for 5 years and there have been no complaints about the business during that period of time. Mr. Indritz said that the safety issue seems to be a new concern and was not brought previously to Mr. Penke's at«-ention. He noted that it is Mr. Penke's competitors that have written to the City regarding the safety issue. He said that there have been no reported incidences of safety hazards during the last 5 years. Mr. Indritz stated that the Ordinance Amendment regarding transient merchants did not take place until after the Penke's appearance - 20 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 TRANSIENT MERCHANT CONTINUED at the April 11, 1988 Council Meeting. Mr. Indritz paid, "The Penkes were not notified of this change until they received a letter fro.-n the City dated r!ay 7, 1990. Mr. Penke received the letter on May 9, 1990, was visited at his selling location by Police Officers on May 12, 1990 and was shut down on May 13, 1990. Police Officers informed customers in the process of purchasing flowers that Mr. Penke wai no longer in business. Mr. Penke did shut down his business and the tickets were issued two days later while he uas in the process of cleaning up the site. It was at that point Mr. Penke sought my assistance. I have tried to reach a resolve to this matter with staff and have gotten mixed messages. I was first told that this was a safety issue even though there have been no accidents or reports of problems regarding safety other than the letters recently received from Mr. Penke's competitors. I was then told that zoning was the issue and that a license application would not be approved until the property was rezoned. Staff informed me that rezoning would not likely be approved because a commercial use had to be established for the property and Mr. Penke's business did not qualify. Despite the professionalism of the City Staff, I believe that they have over-stepped their bounds and stubbed their toes on working out an arrangement for Hr. Penke in this particular matter. There has suddenly been very drastic action taken, without giving Mr. Penke the opportunity to make application or investigate the option of relocating. VJe would like to work with the City and have now been given permission for other locations within the City that are properly zoned." Mayor Grabek stated that in light of the Penke's being legally represented, it was necessary for the City to also proceed cautiously and seek the advice of the City Attorney. He stated that he did not wish to put Mr. Penke out of business, but there were now some major issues that needed to be addressed. City Attorney Barrett referred the Council to Ordinance 5.30, Subdivision 1. He stated that Section 4 pertains to Mr. Penke's business. He said, "Mr. Penke's application is to be reviev/ed by the Chief of Police. If the Chief of Police finds a past history of the applicant, indicating violations similar to those declared unlav/ful in this section, or if he finds that granting the application is likely to result to hazard or danger, then he shall recommend denial of the license or registration. In this case, the Chief has recommended denial because he believes that there have been violations of this Ordinance in the past. If the applicant disagrees, he is allowed to come before the Council for a hearing. That is what is now taking place. However, if there is no application, there is nothing to review. Mayor Grabek suggested tabling this until an application is - 21 - V> J h I; i; : : i 1 ,:iO RfCUIJVR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 TRANS, received - .lANT CONTINUED •hief Kilbo can review it Mr. indritz stated that they were presenting the application to Council at this time. He said, "On Friday there was a verbal agreement with a commercial property o\/ner that would allow Mr. Penke tv. use a portion of his property. I notified the Chief of Police Friday to get his approval of that location. Chief Kilbo indicated that the location would solve the safety problems. I also left a message for the Building -and Zoning Administrator. By the time the Penke's arrived at that business location, 3 hours later, they found that the property owner had already received several calls from other business persons asking him to reconsider. Mr. Penke’s competitor was in the property owner's office at the time they arrived and pressured the property owner to withdraw his agreement. It was the City that notified the competitors of the potential agreement and solution Mr. Penke had to this problem. The Penke's were able to secure written agreements from two business owners for a location to sell roses. We would like the City to take action today." Mayor Grabek indicated that he would be unable to vote on the matter at this time. Ms. Candace Rowlette, & resident of Orono and owner of a Travel Agency in Long Lake, believed that it made sense for Mr. Penke's competitors to object to his mobile business. She stated that she would object to a person selling airline tickets from a mobile location. Mayor Grabek indicated that the City cannot discriminats against the manner in which a business owner chooses to go business. Councilmember Callahan suggested that if all other issues have been resolved, that tha Penkes submit their application and allow the Chief of Police to review it. Mr. Indritz asked that the matter be expedited to allow the Penkes to resume business as soon as possible. Mayor Grabek accepted the information presented this evening, and directed staff to review the application in relation to the Ordinance and to act accordingly as expeditiously as possible. Mr. Indritz asked whether it would be necessary to appear again before Council. Mayor Grabek stated that staff would make that decision. Mabusth advised that if *'he Chief denied the application, it 2 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 TRANSIENT MERCHANT CONTINUED woul.1 come before Council. It the Chief application, he could issue the license. approved of the fir. Indritz stated that the question of approval or denial rests on whether the Chief of Police believes that there have been past violations. He said, "My understanding of the Chief's position was that he was forced to refer to Council because he believed that not applying for a license in 1989 constituted a past violation requiring Council approval." Mayor Grabek replied, "I think we can straighten that out through staff, and if that is the case, no license will be issued, otherwise you will receive a license." RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION - TERI NAAB RESOLUTION #2804* It was moved by Councilmember Hetties, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2304 recognizing Teri Naib for her achievement of attaining the Minnesota Clerk's Certification. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT - OROWO GOLF COURSE* It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to employ Mr. Foerst Jostrorn, 5325 Edsall Road, Mound, as a temporary counter helper, effective May 16, 1990 at an hourly rate of $4.75. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. PUBLIC WORKS EMPLOYMENT - PART-TIME* It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to employ Erik Po\/man, 1535 Rainbow, Maple Plain, as a temporary park maintenance helper at a starting rate $6.00 per hour effective May 30, 1990. It is further moved ihat after 30 days and upon a s^isfactory performance a*i 1 1 c ♦-4-^^ n n r\ar‘ K/^iir- Motion,review, 1, ;,.k's salary be adjusted to $'#t00 per hour. Ayes-5, fiays-0. Motion passed. FACILITIES CITIZEN REVIEW COMMITTEE Councilmember Callahan wished to be informed by staff as to the progress of the Citizens Review Committee. He stated that due to the length of this meeting, that staff need not provide that information at tiiis time. Councilmember Goetten asked when the next meeting of the Citizens Review Committee will be held. Bernhardson replied that the meeting will be June 14, 1990. Council accepted the information presented, but took no formal action. - 23 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 MATER RESOURCE PROTECTION* It was moved by CounciImember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to table this item until June 11, 1990. Motion, Ayes-5. Nays-0. Motion passed. LOOP DRIVEWAY REQUEST - 220 WAKEFIELD ROAD* It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the loop driveway for 220 Wakefield Road contingent upon acquiring a land alteration permit. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. ADMINISTRATOR'S INFORMATION With regard to 1972 Shadywood Road, Councilmember Goetten stated that she agreed with the neighbor's concern about cars blocking the load. It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the City Administrator's Information regarding; Stubbs Bay Sewer, Spring Managers Conference, 1972 Shadywood Road, Public Works Director Leave, Highway Safety Improvement, .’'nrexacion Update, and 1355 Arbor Street. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays • ’* passed. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: City Attorney Barrett indicated that he had no report this evening. LICENSES* It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the following license(s); Baldy Sanitation, Inc. Blackowiak & Sons East Tonka Sanitation Westonka Sanitation Woodlake Sanitary Service Inc. Garbage & Refuse Collectors; Septic System Installers: Clover Hill Company Inc. McCarthy Water & Waste Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. bills* , ^ ^ wIt was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. - 24 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 29, 1990 ADJOURNMENT 10:30 P.M. It v/as moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to adjourn the Regular Council Meeting at 10:30 p.ra. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk - 25 - COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 JUN 25 1990 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. PITV The Council met on the above date with the foll<lN|i^yfei|||fg||Q present; Mayor Grabek, Councilmembers Goetten, Nettles, Peterson and Callahan. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron, City Engineer Cook, City Attorney Barrett, and City Recorder Scheffler. CONSENT AGENDA* City Administrator Bernhardson asked to have items #2 and #18, pertaining to the Orono Tennis Team, included on the Consent Agenda for the purpose of tabling. Councilmember Goetten asked that Consent Item #16 be removed for discussion. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the Consent Agenda, with the exception of item #16, which was removed and discui>sed in the order appearing on the Agenda. It was also moved to include items #2 and #18 on the Consent Agenda and that these items be tabled. Motion, Ayes“5, Nays-0. Motion passed. RECOGNITION - ORONO TENNIS TEAM* it was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Counciim.ember Peterson, to table this item. Motion, Ayes-5, N’ays-0. Motion passed. NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY FRANCHISE ORDINANCE #85, SECOND SERIES Bernhardson referred Council to his memo dated June 6, 1990 regarding staff's response to Councilmember Nettles' request to look into the option of underground installation of lines. He said that the City does have an ordinance requiring underground installation for new subdivisions, with a few exceptions. The ordinance does not address existing lines, or whether the City could require the burial of those lines within a certain amount of ti'.r.e. Bernhardson stated that it is his understanding that NSP charges for line burial. With regard to the length of the franchise, Bernhardson said that after discussion he and the City Attorney thought that a ten- year term would be more appropriate. He said that NSP has stated that they prefer to accept 20 years. Barrett added that the City does have the legal right under the statutes to grant the franchise. He said that NSP's policy requires them to charge back the cost of undergrounding line to customers to the extent that it is beyond the ordinary cost of designated service. Barrett stated that he has discussed the - 1 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 NSP FRANCHISE AGREEMENT CONTINUED length of the franchise with Mr. Peterson, and they were unable to identify a legal reason why the franchise could not be less than 20 years. Barrett stated Mr. Peterson did inform him that there would be a policy conflict if they were to allow the length of the franchise to be less than 20 years. Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Peterson what policy he is referring to. Mr. Peterson replied that NSP met with the Suburban Rate Authority and they recommended that the length of the franchise be 20 years. Mr, Peterson said that NSP recently discussed tne franchise with one of Orono's City Attorney's who recommended that a 20 year franchise be approved. Mr. Peterson said that is what NSP agreed to and as a result, portions of the agreement were revised to coincide with her recommendation. However, we could not change the 20 years length of the franchise. That is a standard agreement that we have with all other cities in our jurisdiction. Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Peterson when the boundary lines were drawn depicting NSP territory from V^right/Hennepin' s area. Mr. Peterson said that the first map was prepared in 1954, followed by a map in 1974. He said that NSP has filed a mere recent map in the early 1983. Mayor Grabek asked what the rate difference is between MSP and Wright/Hennepin. Mr. Peterson estimated that NSP‘ is charging $0.06/kilowatt hour and Wright/Hennepin is charging $0.08/kilowatt hour. Mayor Grabek asked the representatives of Wright/Hennepin if that is correct, and if so, why the*-® is such a difference. Grabek noted that he resides within Wright/Hennepin territory and became aware of the higher rates for Wright/Hennepin in comparison to NSP. He said that other citizens have asked him why there is such a difference. One of the Wright/Hennepin representatives replied that they serve mainly rural areas which require a greater amount of line per customer. He said that by using off-peak incentives, the cost of Wright/Hennepin service is competitive with NSP. Mayor Grabek asked if such incentives were available to Orono residents. The Wright/Hennepin representative replied that off-peak power may be purchased by consumers for 3.4t/kilowatt hour. - 2 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 NSP FRANCHISE AGREEMENT CONTINUED Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Peterson if NSP had a similar policy. Mr. Peterson said that NSP does have such a program and that he would supply Mayor Grabek with a copy of the rate sheet. Mayor Grabek asked to have Wright/Hennepin supply the same information. He asked the Wright/Hennepin representatives what could be done to either lower the Wright/Hennepin rate to be more in line with NSP or to have the boundaries changed to supply all of Orono with NSP service. He stated that it is unfair to consumers to be forced to use a service that costs more and asked why, if both are public utilities, should one be allowed to be higher than the other. Mr. Peterson explained that Wright/Hennepin is a Government- operated company and NSP is owned by investors. He said if it is desirable to change boundary lines, the changes must be negotiated, with Wright/Hennepin and the Public Utilities Commission. He said that NSP must explain why the changes are necessary and that the citizens could assist with that. Mayor Grabek asked if the 20-year Franchise would preclude any boundary revisions from occurring prior to the 20 years expiring. Barrett stated that the Franchise only agreement for the lines that are servicing Orono. addresses the Mayor Grabek believed that something should be done to assure that the citizens of Orono have the most economical service. He directed staff to research the process that must be followed to initiate a boundary change. Nettles questioned whether it may become less costly in the future to bury power lines. Mr. Peterson said that it is very costly to bury overhead lines. He said that it not only costs the individual consumer, but NSP as well. Nettles asked whether individuals could request to have their lines buried at any time, or if the Franchise Agreement would prohibit that from occurring. Mr. Peterson replied that NSP would be happy to work with anyone wishing to have their line buried. He stated that there is no criteria as to how many residences must request underground line at once. Goetten asked whether it is now possible for individuals to pay the entire cost of line burial at once. She noted that at - 3 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 NSP FRANCHISE AGREEMENT CONTINUED one time she was told that payments must be spread out over 20 years. Mr. Peterson replied that individuals can pay for the entire cost at once if they so choose. It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Mayor Grabekr to adopt Franchise Ordinance #85, Second Series, as a Franchise Ordinance with Northern States Power Company for a length of 10 years. Mr. Peterson interjected that NSP cannot accept lu years. Motion, Ayes-2, Peterson, Goetten, Callahan, Nay. Motion failed. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Franchise Ordinance #85, Second Series, as a Franchise Ordinance with Northern States Power Company for a length of 20 years. Motion, Ayes-4, Nettles, Nay. Motion passed. WRIGHT/HENNEPIN CO-OP ELECTRIC FRANCHISE ORDINANCE 186, SECOND SERIES The Public Hearing regarding this matter reconvened at 7:36 p.m. Pernhardson noted that there were two changes to the franchise agreement received from Wright/Henn^pin. One of the changes reflects the fact that Wright/Hennepin is a Co-op rather than a private company. The other change is the addition of language pertaining to tree trimming. Wright/Hennepin has asked that they be allowed to use herbicides approved by the EPA to control weed growth. Mayor Grabek asked where specifically the herbicides would be used. A Wright/Hennepin Representative replied that herbicides are used to control broad leaf and brush growing in the right- of-ways . Goetten expressed concern regarding the use of herbicides. The Representative replied that the herbicides are handled with caution and are used to cut costs. There were no comments from the Public regarding this matter and at 7:46 p.m. the Public Hearing was closed. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Franchise Ordinance #86, Second Series, as a Franchise Ordinance with Wright/Hennepin Electric Cooperative for a 20 year term. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion - 4 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 WRIGHT/HENNEPIN FRANCHISE AGREEMENT CONTINUED passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the information regarding the Council Minutes of the May 29, 1990 Meeting. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS: Planning Commission Representative, Charlie Kelley, present and indicated that he had no comments at this time. was PUBLIC COMMENTS: Rosemary Scheuer referred to the Shoreline Beautification Plan that was approved last year and asked whether Orono had plans to install a "Welcome to Orono" sign. She noted that both Mound and Spring Park had designed welcome signs. Mayor Grabek informed Ms. Scheuer that staff would provide her with information at the June 25, 1990 Council meeting. ************************* Mayor Grabek informed staff that he had spoken with Mr. Bill V?ear regarding the status of the clean up process along Highway 12. He said that Mr. Wear had stated that the condition of the access area for his property was such that it is having a negative impact on his business. City Engineer Cook stated that he has asked for information from three landscape companies in relation to the clean up work. He said he has received information from only one of the companies. Mayor Grabek asked Cook if he would expedite the clean up process and send Mr. Wear a letter informing him of a completion date. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: #1502 MICHAEL HILBELINK 2180 PROSPECT AVENUE VARIANCE Mr. Hilbelink, Mr. and Mrs. Jentilucci Heikkila, Attorney for Jentilucci's. were present and Bernhardson reviewed the information regarding application (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated May 2, 1990). Neil this Mr. Heikkila stated that his clients do not feel that it is necessary to grant a variance for this particular house design. - 5 - ORONO fvECyr.AR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 ZONING FILE #1502-HILBELINK CONTINUED He said that if another design or location was proposed, a variance may not be reguired. Mr. Heikkila said that the proposed location of the structure raises concerns regarding drainage. He said that permitting the house to be constructed where proposed will necessitate a change in drainage. He stated that though the resolution requires the final drainage plan to be reviewed by the City Engineer, it will not come before Council again. Mr. Heikkila said that there is no longer an area that will allow runoff to settle. Tne proposed location of Mr. Hilbolink's house is where drainage was stored prior to fill being added. The development of this property will cause more runoff to drain into the drainage pipe between properties. He stated that the Jentiluccis are willing to give the City an easement over that pipe. Mr. Jentilucci presented pictures of the vacant lot to the Council showing the condition of the property after a rain storm. He noted that the rain storm was not the 1987 super storm. Mr. Jentilucci stated that the existing swale is to the left of the storm sewer and that concerned him. City Engineer Cook stated that the City has asked for a 20' easement along the north property line. He said that the expectation is that there will be no change in the location of the swale. He said that the City cannot guarantee that the property will survive a 100 year storm. He said that the area is restricted in that it does not have overflow drainage. In most restricted areas, the City prefers to either provide for a 100 year storm or install some form of an overflow system. Cook noted that prior to the development of French Creek, there was no outlet for the storage pond. As part of the French Creek subdivision, a storm sewer pipe was installed and provides an outlet. Mayor Grabek noted that the resolution provides language requiring that the City Engineer approve the drainage plan before a building permit is issued. Mr. Heikkila said that the Jentiluccis preferred to have the drainage problems resolved prior to variance approval. Councilmember Peterson indicated that she concurred with Heikkila. She said that a drainage problem has existed in that area for the last 15 years. Peterson said that she could not approve the variances without seeing specific building plans. Mr. Hilbelink stated that he had tried to do that at the last Planning Commission meeting. Ke stated that the hardship for the variances is that the property is a corner lot. The Planning Commission recommended that only a 30* side yard setback be required which would be standard for non-corner lots. Mr. - 6 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 ZONING FILE #1502-HILBELINK CONTINUED Hilbelink also informed Council that he had beer, on the property since the heavy rainfalls occurred. He said that there was no standing v/ater on the lot. He '7'’'“stioned whether it was possible to provide for a 100 year storm. Mayor Grabek asked why the house plan submitted was not the actual plan that would be used to construct the house. Mr. Hilbelink replied that it will be necessary to downsize the plan shown, but that he was not asked to provide the City with the exact specifications. Planning Commission Representative Kelley informed Mayor Grabek that Planning Commission did not think it was appropriate to desigr the house for Mr. Hilbelink. He said that it appeared that the main issue was drainage. The Planning Commission provided Mr. Hilbelink with a building envelope and conditioned the recommendation on drainage issues being resolved with the City Engineer. Councilmember Goetten stated that the drainage issues involving this property perhaps warrant that more than the building envelope be established. Goetten stated that she would like to see the building plans prior to approving the variances. She said that the City Code requires that there be no additional runoff created by the development of a piece of property. Goetten asked Cook if he was assured that increased runoff v;ould not occur. Cook replied that there would be no increase in runoff from a normal rainfall. However, if a 100 year rainfall should occur. Cook could not guarantee that runoff would not increase. Mayor Grabek asked Cook what his recommendation is regarding the construction of a residence on this property. Cook said that constructing a house in the location proposed would reduce the water storage area by approximately r0%. Mabusth noted that storm sewers are constructed with 5 year storms in mind and often are not meant to handle 100 year storms. Mabusth stated that the issue here is how to direct the drainage that will occur due to the reduction in the size of the water storage area. Mabusth said that the Jentiluccis are asking the City to solve the drainage problem and are willing to grant an easement over a portion of their property. Mabusth said that it may be necessary for grading changes to be made to prevent drainage from flowing onto Jentiluccis' property. Mr. Jentilucci suggested that the City might look at the option of lowering the rear property elevations extending over - 7 - OROHO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 ZONING FILE #1502-HILBELINK CONTINUED the draintile that flows through the Dayton property. He said if the grade is lowered a foot or so lower, it will provide a place for the runoff to go. Mayor Grabek asked staff why this was being discussed at this point, yet there seemed to be no answers to what appears to be a serious drainage issue. Mabusth replied that this is a variance request, and as such, the City would not require the applicant to re-design the storm sewer. Cook stated that the problem area is the draintile that extends from the catch basin to the French Creek development. Mayor Grabek asked Cook how this problem should be addressed and solved. Cook said that the City could solve the problem, or ask Mr. Hilbelink to solve the problem. Callahan reiterated Mr. Jentilucci's point regarding the location of the proposed structure. He said that the pre existing structure was located higher up on the property. It seemed to him that placing hardcover over the storage basin would aggravate the situation more than necessary. He questioned why Mr. Hilbelink could not construct the house where the pre existing structure was located. Mr. Hilbelink replied that all of the drainage runs to the north and northeast. He said that any change in grade will move drainage away from the neighbors. He said that without a house on the filled area, all drainage flows toward Mr. Jentilucci's property. Mr. Jentilucci disagreed with Mr. Hilbelink citing v;hat Callahan had just stated. He noted that at one time ducks used to swim in the filled area where the house is proposed to be constructed. Bernhardson stated that Mr. Hilbelink could design a house with no variances required and construct it where he is proposing. He stated that options available to solve the drainage issue include the creation of an alternate ponding area, increasing the size of the pipe, or extending the swale all the way back to the Dayton property. Cook indicated that the last option would involve making j» 10' cut through the property to create the swale. Mayor Grabek said that in order for the house to be - 8 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 ZONING FILE #1502-HILBELINK CONTINUED constructed, the drainage problem needs to be addressed to Jentiluccis' satisfaction. He suggested that Hilbelink and Jentiluccis v/ork with the City Engineer to reach a mutual resolve. Mabusth offered to revise the resolution to require that Jentiluccis approve of the drainage plan prior to a building permit being issued. Mr. Heikkila asked that the matter be tabled for an additional two weeks to allow the parties to meet with the City Engineer. fir. Hilbelink indicated that he would like this matter resolved as soon as possible, but that a two week delay would be acceptable. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilraember Goetten, to table this matter until the June 25, 1990 Council Meeting. Cook asktfd to what degree is the City to protect the Jentiluccis. He said that it is probably feasible to provide protection from the 5 years storm, but not the 100 year storm. Mrs. Jentilucci asked Cook to define 5 year and 100 year storm. Cook said that a 5 year srorn refers to the volume of rainfall generated by a storm that occurs once every 5 years. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1510 RICHARD BROWN 2685 SHADYWOOD ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Mr. Richard B. M/n, applicant, and Richard E. Brown, applicant's son and purchaser of the property, were present. Bernhardson explained the information regarding this application, noting that today Mr. Brown submitted a written request asking that 28.9% hardcover be allowed, rather than the 28.1% suggested by staff. Mr. Brown showed the areas of hardcover that would be removed to achieve 28.9%. Mayor Grabek asked what the square footage of the house is. Gaffron estimated the house to be 3,000 s.f. without the inclusion of the garage. Councilmember Goetten stated that she had been out to the site. She said that Mr. Brown has indicated that he will eliminate the garage door access to the house. Kelley explained that Planning Commission believed that the - 9 * ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 ZONING FILE #1510-BROWN CONTINUED interior garage door would prove to be the most direct way to access the apartment, rather than using the primary entrance to the house. Gaffron noted that Mr. Brown intends to remove only the exterior garage access door, but that the interior garage door into the apartment is proposed to remain. Mr. Brown stated that he would then con^:,t! t an exterior doorway for the garage on the back side. He that having the door would provide a safe exit in the case < lire. Mayor Grabek stated that by allowing the interior garage door to remain, a duplex would be created from a single family residence. Councilmember Goetten stated that it had been her under ^ inding after speaking with Mr. Brown that he would remov, the i; ’erior garage door. She said that if Mr. Brown would agre to remove the interior door, she would look favorable on th application. Goetten stated that because of the property abutting a lake channel, the 75-250’ zone is significantly increased. She said that creates a hardship for the hardcover variance. Mayor Grabek stated that Mr. Brown may agree to remove door ”A'* the interior garage access door, but it would take little effort for the door to be reopened at a future date. He reiterated that a duplex is being created rather than a "mother-in'law apartment" which is the intent of the code. Callahan stated that the Ordinance allows for a duplex to be created provided that there is no separate access. He agreed with Mayor Grabek's concerns, seating that perhaps the Ordinance needs to be reviewed. Mr. Brown stated that he would comply rfith whatever the Council recommends. Bernhardson noted that the non-rental. guest apartment language was added to the Code back in 1985/1986 when the City received three applications similar to Mr. Brown’s. He said that Mr. Brown’s applicatio: is tiie first to be submitted since that time. He said that the language established back in 1935 was to prevent the possibility of a subsequent owner using the guest apartment for rental property. Mr. Brown noted that he is required to seek condil ..lal use approval for the apartment because of the proposed installation of a kitchen. - 10 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 ZONING FILE #1510-BROWN CONTINUED Nettles preferred to have Mr. Brown renove the interior garage doorway and retain the exterior garage door in its present location. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to direct staff to prepare a resolution approving the hardcover variance at 28.9% and the Conditional Use Permit for the guest apartment requiring the interior garage doorway be eliminated so as to conform with the Ordinance. Callahan suggested that the Ordinance be reviewed. Mayor Grabek stated that he would vote against this because of the precedent setting aspect of creating a duplex structure from a single family residence. He directed staff to not only review the existing Ordinance, but to review the structures that were previously approved for this type of Conditional Use to assure that no one is deviating from the intent of the Ordinance. Motion, Ayes-4, Mayor Grabek, Nay. Motion passed. #1513 WALTER KRAHL 4775 NORTH SHORE DRIVE VARIANCES RESOLUTION #2813 Mr. and Mrs. Krahl were present for this matter. Bernhardson reviewed the information pertaining to this application. He noted that Mr. Krahl has asked for a revision in hardcover from that recommended by the Planning Commission. He stated that Planning Commission's recommendation called for hardcover to be reduced to 49.7%. Mr. Krahl determined chat he cannot remove all of the hardcover needed to attain that percentage and is proposing 51.6% Gaffron showed Council the three plans that have been submitted by Mr. Krahl for the addition to his residence. Gaffron noted that the house sits lo\/ on the property relat.i'^e to the road, aad in light of that, the Planning Comm, sion recommended approval of the street setback variance. Gaffron noted that structure has been reduced from plan 1 to plan 3. Hardcover increased from plan 2 to plan j because there is easement over a portion of the driveway that is shared with tae neighbor. As a result, Mr. Krahl cannot remove that section of driveway as proposed in plan 2. Kelley suggested that in light of yet another revision being presented, that the matter be referred by to Planning Commission fr review. Mr. Krahl stated that only removal of a portion of driveway is at issue and that nothing else has changed. Mr. Krahl said that he did not realize the portion of the driveway had deeded rights to his neighbor until after the Planning Commission - 11 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 ZONING FILE #1513-KRAHL CONTINUED meeting. He stated that there is less structure on the property than proposed with plan 2 for which the Planning Commission recommended approval. Kelley indicated that in light of Mr. Krahl's explanation, he did not feel it necessary for Planning Commission to review the revision. It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2813, approving the hardcover and street setback variances as proposed with Council option #2 of the memo. Mr. Krahl asked which plan had been approved. Mayor Grabek stated that option #2 had been approved. Gaffron clarified that option #2 is to approve plan #3 per the attached resolution. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1524 TRINITY PRE-SCHOOL 2060 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION #2814 Ms. Wesley Hallquist was present. Bernhardson reviewed the information regarding this application, noting that fencing of the property was the major issue (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated May 17, 1990). Ms. Hallquist explained that the issue of fencing caught her off-guard at the Planning Commission meeting. She stated that she has been the director of several pre-shool programs and fencing was not required for any of them. She said that neither the State nor the City require fencing. Ms. Hallquist said that there is currently no outdoor play equipment, but she would still like to take the children outdoors for supervised play activities. She said that the location of the property lends itself v/ell to providing a play area without the need for a fence, especially in light of its proximity to the road. Mayor Grabek stated that he had mixed feelings. He said that the City should do whatever necessary to provide for the safety of the children, rather than leaving it entirely up to the watchful eye of the director. However, due to the location of the property and the fact that the State has no fencing regulations, the City should not require fencing in this case. Councilmember Goetten concurred with Mayor Grabek. Councilmember Callahan asked Ms. Hallquist how many supervisors there will be when the children are outdoors. Ms. Hallquist replied that State law requires that she have 1 adult for every 10 children. However, she intends to have 2 - 12 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 ZONING FILE #1524-TRINITY PRE-SCHOOJ. CONTINUED adults for every 15 children. Callahan noted that staff's memo referenced a possibility of Trinity Pre-School fencing the play area in the future. He asked what criteria the Pre-School would use to determine that a fence is required. fis. Hallquist stated that if there is an increase in the number of children, or if at some point she feels there is a problem, she would consider fencing the area. She would also consider fencing the area if outdoor play equipment is provided in that area because the equipment would make it difficult to see ail of the children all of the time. It was moved by Councilmenber Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2814, approving the Conditional Use Permit for Trinity Lutheran Church without a fence being required but that there be a ratio of 2 staff members for every 15 children. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1528 CONSTANCE M. SCOTT 2300 LONGVIEW CIRCLE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION #2815 Mr. and Mrs. Scott were present. 1990. Bernhardson briefly reviewed staff's memo dated May 16, It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2815, approving the Preliminary Subdivision for Constance M. Scott. Motion, Ayes- 5, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1531 CAROL KELLY 3020 CASCO POINT ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION #2816 iss. Kelly, Mr. Bill Clark, Realtor, an^ Surveyor, were present. r. Robert Smith, Bernhardson explained the applicant's proposal for this property. Mabusth noted that the applicant has provided an amended plan showing the 923 s.f. of existing improvements consisting of a paved area. Mabusth said that the lots do meet the 1/2 acre dry contiguous land. She stated that excess hardcover must be removed prior to staff bringing the plat before Council for final approval. It will also be required that the drainage ditch for Lot 2 be realigned prior to final plat approval. - 13 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 ZONING FILE 11531-KELLY CONTINUED Mr. Smith, using the sketch showing the additional 923 s.f. of paved area, stated that there is additional area extending to the street which was not included with the hardcover that is to be removed. He stated that taking that into consideration, it would be possible to remove that portion of pavement and leave a small portion near the house. Mabusth stated that the portion of hardcover to \/hich Mr. Smith referred, is in the right-of-way. She said that only hardcover located within the property lines is considered and that the right-of-way pavement was not included in hardcover calculations. Mr. Smith and Ms. Kelly indicated that they had no objection to removing the pavement all the way to the house. Mr. Smith suggested that a portion of the pavement may be retained for a walkway, as long as they can maintain the 25% level of hardcover. It v/as moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by CounciImember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2816, approving the Preliminary Subdivision for Carol Kelly. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT: HIGHWAY 12 SEWER/WATER - CONTRACT COMPLETION* It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the information presented regarding Highway 12 Sewer/V/ater contract completion. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT: PARK COMMISSION CHAIR APPOINTMENT Mayor Grabek suggested proceeding with the interviews of Mr. Flint and Dr. Vongries, but tabling a decision until the June 25, 1990 Council Meeting. It was the consensus of the Council for proceed as suggested by Mayor Grabek. Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Flint to regarding his interest in this position. address the Council Mr. Flint said that there has been an increase in the amount of time required to effectively serve on the Park Commission. He said, "At one point I was considering whether to resign or become more involved. As you knew, I became more involved and participated in the preparation of the Park Dedication Fee Ordinance amendment. Updating the 1980 Comprehensive Plan is* one of the major projects before us. We have interviewed consultants - 14 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 PARK COMMISSION CHAIR CONTINUED to assist with the project, but doubt we will have adequate funding to hire them. I think the Park Commission will have to take more responsibility for that project. v;e would also like to seriously approach the trail plan, but again, funding may pose a problem. We need to work more closely with the Planning Commission. There are instances where subdivisions are approved in areas where we plan to put the trail. It would perhaps be possible to discuss a trade of land for a reduction in the Park Dedication fees. I also believe the Park Commission needs to work more closely with Hennepin County. I have asked Commissioner Jude to send me the County's five year plan. Lastly, I would like to work more closely with the Council. I beli3ve that it would be helpful to have a Park Commissioner present at one Council meeting a month." Mr. Flint explained that he has nad experience with the preservation of open spaces. He said, "I served as President for the Sierra Club for two years and v/as the founding director of project Environment Foundation. I was the President of the local home owners association when I resided in Minnetonka." Mr. Flint concluded by saying that there is plenty of work to be done. He suggested appointing a co-chair to more effectively handle the upcoming projects. tlayor Grabek thanked Mr. Flint for his presentation. Councilmember Nettles asked Mr. Flint what he relieved the major obstacle for the trail system is. Mr. Flint said that he initially believed that staff would carry the ball for the majority of this project. He stated that due to the major projects and issues with which they must contend, they have not been able to do that. He said the Park Commission can work with staff get the project going. He said that both money and personnel are in short supply. Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Flint whether the Park Commission has explored the use of outside sources for assistance. Mr. Flint believed that it would be necessary lO have more of a concrete plan before seeking outside assistance. Callahan noted that the increase in Park Dedication fees should help the Park Commission funds. Mayor Grabek asked Dr. Vongries to come forward for his presentation. Dr. Vongries began by commending Phil Bradley, present Park Commission Chair, for his efforts. He said that he has served as - 15 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 PARK COMMISSION CHAIR CONTINUED a Park Commissioner for a year and eight months and has enjoyed it enormously. He assured Council that hi dedication are there. interest and Councilmember Nettles asked Dr. Vongries if he agreed with Mr. Flint's recommendation to have a co-chair. Dr. Vongries believed that co-chairmanship may pose a problem. He said, "Responsibilities get divided. I believe it is better to have only one person that is fully committed to that position and understands his responsibility." Councilmember Goetten suggested having a chairman and vice- chairman as the Planning Commission. Mayor Grabek agreed with Goetten's suggestion to have a chair and vice-chair. He suggested that Council make that determination at this time, but that future recommendations and promotions to those positions be made by the Park Commission. He suggested that there be an automatic progression that would occur from committee member, to vice-chair, to chair. Callahan noted that the Council makes that decision where the Planning Commission is concerned. Dr. Vongries stated that a secretary is needed. Ho said that Mr. Bradley was fulfilling both roles. He suggested that the secretary position be added to the progression. Mayor Grabek pointed out that perhaps a natural progression would create problems and that Council should contin- 2 to make the decision. Mayor Grabek thanked Dr. Vongries for his continuing interest and efforts. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: LAKE USE MANAGEMENT Mayor Grabek informed Council that he has receivtd numerous comments and calls regarding the document prepared by Councilmember Callahan. He said that the comments have all been positive and that Callahan has gained a great deal of support. Councilmember Callahan stated that the document was prepared as a collaboration of Councilmember Goetten and Councilmember Nettles' input as v/ell. Callahan reported that he presented the document at Public Hearing at 7:00 p.m. Callahan said that representatives from other cities that spoke at the Public - 16 - the the ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 LAKE USE MANAGEMENT CONTINUED Hearing were critical of the report in the areas of shoreland management, taxation and switching control of the Board. Our concerns covered more than those areas. Callahan stated that nis convictions that the LMCD has strayed from the functions they are to perform has been supported by Statutes. Callahan stated that it is the intention of the LMCD to now take this plan to the Met Council for their approval. He said that the LMCD appears to view this plan as a comprehensive plan. However, there is no basis of authority or means to carry out the plan. Callahan stated that the statutes provide the LMCD with jurisdiction over various aspects of regulating Lake Minnetonka. It is unclear as to how this plan provides for that continued jurisdiction and whether it will be necessary for the Met Council to approve any amendments that the LMCD may wish to make. The LMCD does not appear to be aware that this possible conflict exists. Callahan stated that the LMCD may be surrendering some of its authority to the Met Council and the DNR. Callahan said that representative from the DNR, Shoreland Division, was present at the Public Hearing. He indicated that he was pleased that the plan would enable them to now have their land management programs passed. Callahan stated that beyond the aspect of whether the plan is good or bad, is the fact that the LMCD has no expectations of \/hat will happen once the plan is approved. Mayor Grabek asked Callahan what, in his opinion, is going to happen next. Callahan stated that the LMCD has established another committee, LCMR, which is attempting to obtain a $100,000 grant to work with the DNR to prepare a plan regarding additional access. Callahan had asked JoEllen Hurr about this and she did not seem to be aware of it. Mayor Grabek asked how the LMCD could proceed with a lake access plan when the Lake Management Plan has not been approve,^. Callahan stated that he did not know, but that appears to be how the LMCD is proceeding. Mayor Grabek said that the LMCD must be certain that the Lake Management Plan will be approved. Councilmember Goetten stated that the LMCD has geared the Plan in such a way that it will be accepted by the Met Council and the DNR. Mayor Grabek recommended that Bernhardson, Kurr and the subco.iunittee of Callahan, Nettles, and other Councilmembers - 17 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 LAKE USE MANAGEMENT CONTINUED wishing to participate, meet with the City Attorney to determine how much funding the City has provided to the LMCD and how those funds were to be used. He asked them to investigate the avenues that may exist for the LMCD to have the plan approved even though the lake communities object to it. Nettles added that it may be appropriate for the City to emphasize to the LKCD that they have no legal authority to carry out aspects of the Plan. Nettles also suggested having JoEllen Hurr take the position of the City and make it clear to the LMCD. Callahan noted that Ms. Hurr has indicated that she will support the position of the City. Callahan suggested that the City submit an additional document to the LMCD and to try to notify the other cities as to what the problems and risks are. Mayor Grabek stated that the City should prepare a letter outlining a simple action plan that the other cities can take to combine their efforts in opposing the plan. Councilmember Goetten asked that the information previously sent to the other cities be sent directly to each Councilmember and Mayor. Callahan stated that he had asked that the document be sent to the Planning Commission and Park Commission. Charlie Kelley indicated that information. he had not received the Goetten reported that she had received a call from Gabriel Jabbour. He had attended the Public Hearing, and asked Goetten to express his appreciation for the Council's efforts. HIGHWAY 12 SAFETY IMPROVEMENT* It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the information presented regarding the Highway 12 safety improvement. Miotion, Ayes- 5, Nays~0. Motion passed. HIGHWAY 1? CORRIDOR MEETING Councilmember Goetten had removed this item from the Consent Agenda to inform Council that the Technical Meeting is scheduled for June 19, not June 18. She also informed Council that the consultant has not been signed on at this point. Callahan asked Bernhardson what he had found out from MNDOT regarding the direction of Highway 12 in relation to the land purchased by the City of Wayzata. Bernhardson referred Callahan to the letter from Mr. - 18 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR MEETING CONTINUED Crav/ford dated June 6, 1990 (attachment B). FACILITIES CITIZENS REVIEW COMMITTEE* It was moved by CounciImember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the information regarding the Facilities Review Committee and await the report of the Committee following conclusi «n of their process. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. ORONO TENNIS TEAM RECOGNITION* It was moved by Councilmember Councilmember Peterson, to table this Nays-0. Motion passed. Callahan, seconded by item. Motion, Ayes-5, ED BROWN RECOGNITION RESOLUTION 12817* It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2817, recognizing Ed Brown's volunteer service on the .Planning Commission. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. 1991 BUDGET PROCESS* It v/as moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the information directing staff to bring back initial tax and budget numbers at the first meeting in August. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. REQUEST FOR FUNDING ART CENTER OF MINNESOTA* It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the information presented on the Art Center of Minnesota's request for funding. Motion, Ayes- 5, Nays-0. Motion passed. EQUIPMENT PURCHASE - GOLF COURSE MOWER* It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to award purchase of a 60 inch greens mower for the golf course to Scharber and Sons for a total purchase price of $8,130. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. ATTACHMENT AND ANNEXATION UPDATE* It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the information presented regarding the update on the process. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. - 19 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 EMPLOYMENT TEMPORARY ON-SITE SEPTIC INSPECTOR STEPHEN J. WECKMAN* It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to recommend the hiring of Stephen J. VJeckman as an intern for the on-site septic inspection program at an hourly rate of $8.00 to commence employment on Thursday, June 14, 1990, through the end of September, 1990. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. ADMINISTRATOR'S INFORMATION* It was moved by Councilmember Callahan Councilmember Peterson, to accept the City Information regarding: 1355 Arbor Street, 1972 Spring Clean-Up Results, Forest Lake Drive. Engineer, Transient Merchant, West Hennepin Planning Board, Municipal Well #3, Disbursements-April, and Wire Transfers. Motion, Motion passed. , seconded by Administrator's Shadywood Road, Environmental Human Services Receipts and Ayes-5, Nays-0. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: City Attorney Barrett indicated that this evening. he had no report for LICENSES Mr. and Mrs. Penke and their Attorney, Dick Indritz, were present. Bernhardson reported that Mr. Penke's application to sell flowers had been received Thursday, June 7th. The application shows two locations available for Mr. Penke to rent. Bernhardson said that Chief Kilbo felt it was necessary to deny the application based on the previous violations. He said that other issues involve the safety of the location in front of Down East Craftsman. The Chief had indicated that Mr. Penke should be located farther back from the road. Mr. Penke stated that there is no shoulder on County Road 15 that would enable vehicles to stop on the street. Customers would have to pull into the parking area. He noted that part of his agreement to use this site is that he will not interfere with the existing businesses. He said if he moves his truck back from the road, he would be right in front of the building and would interfere with the businesses. Mayor Grabek stated that the Council should follow the recommendation of the Chief of Police. He suggested that Mr. Penke resolve that issue with the Chief of Police. Bernhardson asked whether the Council would approve two locations. Mr. Penke stated that the location at Ronnie’s Cleaners is - 20 - 1ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 LICENSES CONTINUED an optioi* available to him should the location a*" '*• Fast Craftsman not be approved. Cc jncilmember Goetten expressed concern regarding iv. enxe having tv/o locations. She believed that it would cause more concern amongst the citizens. She said that she would favor one or the other. Mr. Penke stated that he intends to have only one location at a time. Mayor Grabek asked how the City would view *:he request for other vendors to come in and sell from their veh-cles. Barrett stated that as long as the conditions of the Ordinance are met, mainly whether the business is legitimate and whether it poses safety or traffic hazards, the vendor would qualify to receive a license. Mayor Grabek suggested that the Ordinance be reviewed to assure that it will not allow the situation to get out of hand. He stated that he v/ould be willing to table this to allov/ Mr. Penke an opportunity to work v/ith Chief Kilbo. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by CounciImember Peterson, to table this matter until a recommendation is received from Chief Kilbo. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. Mr. Indritz noted that there is confusion as to the length of the license if approved. He asked if staff could inform him of that information. Bernhardson stated that he would provide that information. It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to approve the following license(s): Septic System Installation: Quickway Excavating Co. Set-Up License: Navarre Lanes Inc. 3435 Shoreline Drive Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. BILLS* It was moved by CounciImember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve payment of the All Funds .Account. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. [lotion passed. - 21 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1990 ADJOURNMENT - 9:46 P.M. It was "^oved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to jurn the Regular Council Meeting at 9:46 p.m. Motion, Ayes-5, Iiays-0, Motion passed. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk - 22 - f^OUHClL MEETIHG JUN 2 51990 L To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson CITY OF ORQNO PrcMB: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: June 21, 1990 Subject: #1473 Jacquelynn Kelly, 2056 Shadywood Road - After-the-Fact Variances ~ 2nd Review by Council List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Exhibit H ~ Survey Designating Areas of Existing Hardcover to be Removed within 75-250' Zone Planning Commission Minutes 1/16/90 Council Minutes 2/12/90 Original Plans for New Deck Applicant's Addendum Packet Staff Memo 1/9/90 Plan Study of Proposed Deck Retrofit Lakeside Elevation Review of After-the-fact Application - At the Council's February 12th meeting, applicant's attorney asked that Council table all action on the application. Applicant had asked for additional time to reconsider proposal before the Council. The many months of delay have been created by the applicant's busy schedule and awaiting the formal plans of the architect for the revised deck. Unfortunately, a very conceptual plan has been submitted and fails to designate a scale so that final hardcover determinations can not be made. In addition, the revised deck has not been shown on a sui✓ey of the property so that staff is unable to determine impact on average iakeshore setback and side yards. Based on earlier survey submittal, staff has approximated the location of the average Iakeshore setback and original deck setback on the plan stud>. Note the architecc did locate che Iakeshore setback. As in the original proposal, the applicant proposes removal of the all landscape areas with plastic underliner. landscape area totals approximately 1,681 square feel redu^-.*.g hardcover within the 75-250' setback area by 10.11. Stafi is unable to provide a total final calculation for hardcover within 75-250' setback area because we do not have final to-scale plans. The "plan study" shows the deck located out of the 75' setback area and out of the 10' side setback area. The revised plan shows the deck ending beyond the original 14* wide iakeshore deck. Zoning File 1473 June 21, 19S0 Page 2 of 2 On page 2 of the applicant's addcindum (Exhibit E), there is dicussion concerning the maximum height ^-f the deck in relation to the directives of Section 10.22^ Subdivision 1. Council should be advised that staff did meet with Mr. Johnson, applicant's attorney, in which staff had hoped the confussion of Johnson's original interpretation of the amended section was corrected. Staff provided the original code section noting the average setback dealt only with buildings. This specific amend ment dealt with standards for fences and walls allowed within the lakeshore yard at ‘i^.iitjific heights. Fences 3*?' or less are not considered an en ,-.Toachv-»nt of an average lakeshore setback line. Fences 3Jj'-»- to 6' were subject to the average setback line, but in no case could a fence exceed the 6' height in a lakeshore yard. Discussion ot ^he height of the deck structure has no bearing on an average setb*»ck line and principal variance review. Average lakeshore setback controls expand to all accessory structures within lakeshore yards, including grade level patios and pool areas. Grade-level decks are subject to the average lakeshore setback controls of the City. Once again, we are asked to consider a fabric underliner for the landscaped areas. Unless Council wishes to reconsider their previous ac.Tions concerning the use of fabric under-iner, applicant is advised that fabric underliner as well as the plastic underliner is considered hardcover. Landscape areas must be free of all underliners if they are to be classified as non hardcover improvements. Options of Action - T«ble application; A) Accepting submission of i. hardcover calc approval resolute. it's ^mended proposal but require survey locating dec.; with revised cns. Staff to dratt appropriate for Council action. B) Provide additional directive to applir**nt regarding specific alterations of proposed deck ar v.. additional hardcover removals, etc. Request a vised survei locating the deck, amended deck plansr revised hard cover calculations, etc. Staff to prepare the appropriate resolution for Council action; or Denial finding the deck as proposed unacceptable and direct totaff to draft denial resolution for formal Counc * action at your next meeting. Council to recommend a date .. required removal. MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 16, 1990 #1473 JACQUELYNN KELLY 2056 SHADYWOOO ROAD AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 8:10 P.M. TO 8:20 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Jacquelynn Kelly was present for this application, as was Mr. James Klien and Mr. Stewart Bear, attorney for ^:he applicants . Mabusth explained that this application involved approval of after-the-fact variances for a two-tiered deck that has b«en placed approximately 20* in front of the average lakeshore setback line. Mabusth said the deck is 3* in front of the 75' setback line and 9' from the side lot line and there is approximately 3.5% additional hardcover as compared to the deck area of the original deck. Mr. said that only a 2'-3' portion of the deck encroaches the 75' setback line, which is 0.0007% of the hardcover in zone. Kelley asked Mr. Bear if he was disagreeing with staff's calculations which indicated that hardcover in that area is 16 s.f. Mr. Bear acknowledged the fact that his clients did work without obtaining the necessary permits. He said that some changes did take place from what had existed, but that was primarily due to safety reasons. Mr. Btar said that the existing deck was in an unsafe condition and was a hazard. Mr. Bear said that the reason the applicants worked after a stop work order was issued was because they had the untreated lumber lying on the ground. They decided to put the deck up and "let the chips fall where they may", because winter was coming. Mr. Bear said that the applicants are intending to remove the rock gardens surrounding the deck to decrease the amount of hardcover on the property. Hanson referred to Mr. Bear's statement about the applicant's proceeding because winter was coming. Hanson noted that the citation was issued in September. Mr. Bear said that the work on the deck is not totally complete, the railings have not been installed. Kelley asked the applicants what their hardship to warrant the variance for the deck is? Mr. Klien explained that his original idea was to repair the deck and make some changes in the design of it. Ke said that once he began the project, he realized the condition of the deck and tore it down. Mr. Klien indicated that he had never lived on the lake before this and was unaware of the City's minutes op the planning commission meeting JANUARY 16, 1990 ZONING PILE(p.473-KELLy CONTINUED regulations. Mr. Bear said that the house has four 8' sliding glass doors in that location and he could not have them opening onto nothing. Mr. Bear added that the applicants have talked with the neighboring property owners and they approve of the deck. Mr. Klien indicated that the site lines were cut down because the old deck had more of a "boxy" appearance and did not tier down the hill. Mr. Klien said that the railing on the old deck was thick wood. Kelley observed that the new deck does not have railings, which he added are needed, and it is difficult to tell what the site lines will be once they are installed. Mr. Klien informed the Planning Commission that he is proposing tubular railings rather than wood railings. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. Kelley said, "We have been pretty consistent on decks, hardcover and hardships in Orono. From my point of view, you can replace what was there and stay within the ordinance. The increase in the 0-75' setback zone, even if it's minimal, is objectionable in my opinion, as I have been a strong supporter or maintaining the lakeshore protective area. In regard to the 75- 250' zone, if you can delete other parts of the hardcover on the property within that zone to bring hardcover back to 5*7.2%, I don't have any problem with that. As to the average lakeshore setback, I think we have to stay within what we were before. We have, however, in the past dealt with grade level decks a little differently. However, this does not classify as a grade level deck." Kelley advised the applicants that the deck would have to be brought back to the site lines that existed with the previous deck. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Moos, to recommend denial of ti.e average lakeshore setback variance of 19 to 20 , the variances to increase hardcover in the 0-75 and 75 25 setback areas, as well as the sideyard setback said that he would approve what pre-existed. could be done in the interim period to situation safe. Cohen said that the deck should be removed. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. • 1475 JOHN MCDOMELL 4045, 4105 C 4135 BAYSIDB ROAD PRBLIMIHARy SOBDIVISIOM ,n i, m CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 8:25 P.M. TO 8:40 P.N. Mr. McDowell was present for this public hearing, as was Mr. Thomas Owens, the Attorney for Robert white. 1 MINUTES OP ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 12, 1990 CONCEPTUAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN CONTINUED Council to plan for the future of the entire City. She said that the Council would not do anything without properly notifying those that would be affected. Goetten said the Council appreciates the 5-acre zone and would like to keep it as is. However, the Council cannot prevent people from coming into the City, purchasing and subdividing property. The Council has to plan for that. Goetten said that she welcomed the comments being brought forth this evening. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Nettles, to table this matter and direct staff to notify all affected property owners if there is any further action on the transportation plan. Motion, Ayes-3, Nay-0, Motion passed. #1470 DAN & RUTH PARTEN 4300 BAYSIDE ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by CounciImember Nettles, to table application #1470, as requested by Mr. Parten. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays-0, Motion passed. #1473 JACQUBLYNN KELLY ^ 2056 SHADYWOOD ROAD AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCES Ms. Jacquelynn Kelly, Mr. James Klein, Mr. Stuart Bear, Attorney for the "app1icant and Mr. Dennis Johnson were present for the review of this application. City Administrator Bernhardson provided a brief explanation of this request for after-the-fact variances. Mayor Grabek asked the applicant why work had continued after the Citv had issued a stop work order? Mr. Johnson replied that due to winter coming, work continued so that the lumber would not be laying on the ground. Counci Imember Goetten noted that the stop work order was issued in September, which she did not consider to be wi.nter. Mr. Johnson said that his client has complied with the recommendations of the Planning Commission. They have removed the portions of the deck extending into the 0-75' setback area. The neighbors on each side of Ms. Kelly have no objections to the deck as long as there is nothing built on top of it. Mr. Johnson said that Mr. Bear would be preparing a document that would place future land owners on notice that nothing further could be done to the deck. Mr. Johnson noted that the portion of the deck that extends into average lakeshore setback is lower than the pre existing deck. Mr. Bear said that it is the intent of the applicants to bring the deck into conformance with the 10’ side setback. MINUTES OF ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 12, 1990 ZONING FILE #1473-KELLY CONTINUED CounciImember Goetten said that the Council looks unfavorably on persons that build without the proper permits and then continue working afte^ a stop work order is issued. Goetten r.aid that she was happy to see that there will be no need for a side setback variance and that hardcover in the 75-250' is being reduced. Goetten said that she would like to see hardcover in the 250-500' zone also reduced. She said that they can rebuild the deck to be the same as the original deck. Otherwise the new deck can exist with only a step to the ground. Goetten informed Mr. Johnson that the City can include language in the resolution that would not allow anything further to be added to the deck. Mr. Johnson said that what his client would like to see is approval of the average lakeshore setback in exchange tor the hardcover bein removed. Mr. Johnson said that the agreement they are proposing to draft would immediately notify any future purchaser of the property that the restriction regarding the deck exists. Mr. Johnson also informed the Council that Ms. Kelly was not the person building the deck. He said that the violation matter is being handled through the normal ticket process. Mr. Johnson said that he would like to treat this as ii someone is looking to add to their property, but subtract in certain areas that will make the addition more acceptable to the Council. Mayor Grabek asked Planning Commission representative Cohen for his opinion regarding this matter. Mr. Cohen recollected that he and Chairman Kelley had recommended denial. CounciImember Goetten said that she was disappointed that the Planning Commission had not recommended that additional hardcover be removed. Councilmember Nettles asked what hardship existed to warrant approval of the variances? Mr. Johnson said that the pre-existing deck was not secured to the ground and was very flim.sy. Mr. Johnson said that there are glass doors extending across the front of the house. Mr. Johnson requested that the Council table this matter as opposed to denying it. Mayor Grabek asked who the builder was that constructed ^he deck? Mabnsth replied that to the best of her knowledge the contractor was a relative of the applicant from Arizona. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Counci lmera‘jer Nettles, to table this application. Motion, Ayes-3, Nay»-0, Motion passed. CHESTNUT & BROOKS PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION A'rrOIiNEYS AT LAW ' JACK L.CHESTNTT WILLIAM F. BROOKS. JR. KARL L.CAMBRONNE* CORT C. HOLTEN CRAIG A. ERICKSON DENNIS B. JOHNSON ALANB. DEMMER** ROBE»v A.LaFLEUR.CPA JEANE "E A. FREDERICKSON STUARTC BEAR BRIAN W. RUDE •ALSO ADMITTED IN WISCCNSIN ••ALSO admitted IN CALIFORNIA :J700 PIPER JAFFRAY TOWER 222 SOUTH M.NTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA S.5402 (612) 339-7300 FAX 10121.3.30-2940 145 UNIVERSITY AVE W. ST PAUL. MINNESOTA .5.5103 (612)291-1900 June 15, 1990 TO: ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Re: Jacquelynn M. Kelly Zoning File Number:1452 Dear Council Members: We represent Ms. Jacquelynn M. Kelly in her application to the City Council for zoning variances. We have reviewed the Staff Report, Planning Commission Minutes, and the City Council Meeting Minutes. Noting the concerns of the Staff, the Planning Commission and the City Council, we present the following revised plan. First, we want to clarify the fact that Ms. Kelly is the sole owner of the property in question. Mr. James Klein does live on the property. He was involved in constructing the existing deck with another individual. Mr. Klein was tagged for commencing construction without a permit, and also continuing construction after a stop work order was issued. These matters against Klein are presently pending and will be resolved through the prop channels. It is my desire that Mr. Kl< in's activities do not ser. to wrongfully prejudice Ms. Kelly's application. Ms. Kelly amends her application by agreeing to make the changes as drawn on the enclosed architect sketch on the exterior deck retrofitting. As this drawing indicates, and incorporating changes which were previously agreed to, Ms. Kelly amends her application as follows: 1. Bring the deck into conformance with the 10 foot side setback requirement. 2. Bring the deck into conformance with the 75 foot lakeshc^c setback requirement. 3. Reduce the hardcove*' in the 0 to 75 foot zone to 0%. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS June 15, 1990 Page 2 4. Reduce the hardcover in the 75 to 250 foot zone to approximately 47%, by removing existing hardcover. It should be noted that the adjoining landowners consent to this plan, and Ms. Kelly will stipulate that no further construction will occur on the deck surface, other than normal maintenance. As the drawing indicates, the proposed deck will consist of an upper level extending from the residence, and cantilevered over a lower deck. The lower deck will be approximately three steps down from the upper deck. The lower deck will be 30 inches off the ground on the upper portion of the hill, and no more than 42 inches off the ground on the lower portion of the hill. There will be an angular staircase from the lower deck to the ground, consisting of three or four steps, with a landing of no more than 30 inches from the ground. It is our intent that this revised plan meets all existing Orono City Ordinances, a*‘id, in particular, the average lakeshore setback requirement, as contained in Orono Code Section 10.22. This section provides; Subdivision 1: Lakeshore setback regulations. The setback from the shoreline for lakeshore lots shall be at least 75 feet and no building, fence oi wall over 42 inches, but not in excess of 72 inches in height above original grade may be located closer to the shoreline than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lots. This Ordinance, adopted on February 5, 1985, clearly prohibits improvements which are ever 42 inches m height and extend p vft the average lakeshore setback line. The upper level of the proposed deck, which exceeds 42 inches in height, only encroaches upon the lakeshore setback line by approximately one foot. See survey previously' submitted in this matter. The lower deck, however, does not fall within the requirements of this Ordinance because it is, at its highest point from the ground, 40 to 42 inches off the ground. Thus, the Ordinance has no affect on the lower deck, or the angular staircase from the lower deck to the ground. The only variance required for this Ordinance is foi the one foot encroachment by the upper deck. Due to the construction of the deck, the area where the one foot encroachment is located contains a main support beam, which is vital to the support of the ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS June 15, 1990 Page 3 entire deck. By requiring this support beam to be moved, it would be necessary to virtually reconstruct the entire deck, at a substantial cost and hardship to Ms. Kelly. In connection with Ms. Kelly's revised plan, gardens utilized in connection with the deck will include a commercial landscape fabric underliner designed to be water permeable. Information regarding this liner is attached to this Memorandum. The proposed deck plan will resu' ; in a reduction of hardcover in the 75 foot to 250 foot zone from the existing amount of 57.2% to 47.1%. Ms. ■ lly has done everything in her power to modify the existing eck to meet the Orono City Ordinances. She has also substantially reduced the hardcover in the zone where the deck is located, as a further accommodation. There is a hardship involved in this matter, in that the entire side of the house where the deck is located consists mainly of large glass windows and glass screen doors. The architecture of the house lends itself to a large, expansive, and elaborate deck. In fact, there are three sets of double glass siding doors, which contemplate this type of deck. Moreover, the lay of the land, with its unique slope and plateaus from the residence to the lake, contemplates a multi-level, expansive deck. I note that there have recently been other applications for variances involving the average lakeshore setback requirement and the hardcover percentage requirement. In particular, the following matters are very similar to Ms. Kelly's application. 1. George and Sallv Pillsburv - Zi rur:j File Number 1468. This matter involved a variance of the average lakeshote setback requirement and hardcover percentage. The Pillsburys desired to place new construction in the 0 to 75 foot setback zone. In granting the variances, the Council cited that, among other things, the new construction would not impair any existing lake views enjoyed by the neighboring landowners, the neighboring landowners consented to the now construction, and that by picking up some pavers in the zone, the hardcover would actually be reduced. This situation is certainly analogous to Ms. Kelly's, in that the height of her deck will not impair existing lake views enjoyed by neighbors, the neighbors have consented to the location of the deck, and Ms. Kelly proposes to significantly lower the hardcover in the zone. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS June 15, 19S0 Page 4 2. Marilyn and Walter Pemberton - Zoning File Number This matter also involved new construction in the 0 to 75 foot zone. The new construction contemplated enclosing an existing deck, to utilize as a new room to the residence. The particular hardship cited in this matter was the fact that the rooms in the Pemberton residence were very small, necessitating that the additional room be built. The Pembertons also agreed to reduce hardcover in the 0 to 75 foot zone. The Pembertons* variance application was granted. The hardship in this situation, unique to the Pembertons, is analogous to Ms. Kelly's unique hardship. Ms. Kelly has a home in which the entire side facing the lake has large picture windows. There are three sets of large sliding glass doors, which naturally contemplate an expansive, elaborate deck. Further, the lay of Ms. Kelly's laid is such that it will accommodate a multi-level deck. 3. James A. Mulvanny - Zoning File Number 1459. This matter involved an eight-foot room addition to an existing residence. The application impacted upon the average lakeshore setback requirement and hardcover. In granting Mr. Mulvanny's variance application, the City Council found that the eight-foot encroachment over the average lakeshore setback line would hav#» "no significant impact on lake views enjoyed by neighboring property owners." In addition, the Council indicated that the significant areas of hardcover on the property were necessary for functional use, but indicated that a slight decrease was commendable. It seems the hardship in this matter was the small rooms in tl-yi house. The small bedroom and kitchen area in the home * considered a hardship, justifying the zoning variance. Again, this matter is analogous to Ms. Kelly's matter. Ms. Kelly's plans have no significant impact on lake views enjoyed by neighboring property owners. Further, she h similar hardship, in that the architecture of he - rea.i-’ence le tself to the type of deck she proposes to build. It is for these reasons hac Ms. Kelly requests her zoning variances. By granting Ms. Kel.’v's zonl.ig variances, the Council will be acting in a manner --stint, reasonable, and in accordance with similar variance ^ ations. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS June 15, 1990 Page 5 If you have any questions or desire any further information, please contact me and I will be happy to accommodate you. DBJ:dh Enclosures r c c Technical Information Bulletin WeedBlock 6+TM commercial landscape fabric for dramatic reduction of landscape maintenance costs mmmsmm■■si’' ’ -y- tv-:./•.• . •V. i-.u '- fM ■f-A r * ■ . ’ * ,mS' .;r ' - -< Post Office Box 21025 • Waco. Texas 76702-1025 817 753-5353 • 800 327-9462 Contents Page Puroose of oroduci.................................. 2 Primary oenefils ................. 2 Pt'ys'cul orooerties of fatji'C............................2 Otner favorable orooerties ....................2 How rVeedSiocK »j ♦ oiocKs iignt .....................3 '■ffec on weed control ..................... ' 1* 'tenance required................................ J :n soil lemoerature ...............................3 economics o< use .........................................3 Otner uses ....................................................^ Directions lor use............................................4 Soec.icat an'i ............................................ 4 Soufc»*v .Woduci..........................................4 Purpose of product WeedBlock 6 + ■" Commercial Landscape Fabric is soecificaiiy designed to dramatically reduce weed growth while allowing the free flow of water, air and gasses to and from the soil This results m lower maintenance costs and healthier plants m land scape areas. 7^ r Primary benefits Lasts at least six years fully exposed to direct sunlight! Prevents growth of broadleaf weeds and most grasses while allowing air. water and gasses to flow through. Conserves soil m.oisture during dry periods. Moderates soil temperature extremes. Reduces wasn-away of bark and mulch. Reduces landscape maintenance costs. Eliminates or reduces the need for chemical herbicide use. Physical properties of fabric The special combination of poly resms and ultraviciet light mr.ibitors are manufactured by a patented m-lme-cast molding technique developed by Ethyl Corporation, the world leader m permeable film technology UniQue cnaractef SICS 100% uniformity 6 year life rating 590% elongation This results m three unique characteristics when compared with other types cf fabrics: 1.100% uniformity • every square inch of WeedBlock 6 + ^ performs to specifications. There is no variability. 2. Exceptional life span - WeedBlock 6-f ■* will not become brittle or break down for approximately six years, even when fully exposed to direct sunlight • lasts indefinitely i' protected from the sun, (Accelerated weather testing • 3.400 hours + ) 3. Remarkable amount of elongation - WeecHlock 6•^■* will allow 590% elongation before it breaks. This ■'stretch" is important when used under stone or m heavy tra.lic areas. WeedBlock 6 -f ■* will stretch under this stress rather than break or separate. -mm Ot (O Ot 4o o WeeaBtock6 ♦ ' fatxicmagniliea lOOX. TheoatenteU manulactunng lecrmique pfoouces m-cro funneis with UX5% uniiofmity Other favorable properties 1. 70 gallons/minute/square foot flow-through. This hign level of vertical permeability means WeedBlock S-*-' will allow water through as fast as the soil can absorb n. 2. 5.4% water run-off. When placed at a 10% mclme. WeedBlock 6 + ' allows 94,6% of water to flow through. This greatly reduces the amount of bark wasn-away. 3. 5.8% visible light transmission. WeedBlock 6 + ' blocks 94 2% of visible light. The amount of light transmineo is directly related to the number of weeds that can grow underneath C r How WeedBlock 6 + ^ blocks light, but lets water through The patented micro-tunnels taper at the bottom to block 94.2% of the available light. However, because the space between the funnels is rounded, water runs 'reeiy through Effect on weed control Expect approximately 95«ib control of normal .veed growth. Nearly all brcadleaf weeds and most grasses are controlled. Weed growth uro^ -at is minimized due to the high light-blocking effect of WeedBlock 6 Weed seeds that do germinate lack -he r th requ/ed to jh through the fabric. Weed growtfi on top u- .^e fab- •: is minimized because WeedBlock 6 will not absorb or hold moisture. This also results m less soil compacton. And. unlike fuzzy or cloth-like materials. WeedBlock 6 ' is not a good rooting medium. Weed seeds blown into the area may germinate m the bark or mulch above WeedBlock 6-»-■•. Generally, these are easily remove!.: due to poor root development. Weed seed germination m the mulch can be minimized by using large chunk bark rather than shredded or fine mulch. ( c Maintenance required Generally, only tw(Tcircumstances occur that require maintenance.- 1 If a fine organic mulch has been used, it may decompose to form a layer of humus. This results in an increased number of weed seeds germinating on top of the fabric. If this occurs, the decomposed mulch should be removed and replaced. 2. Although some rhizome grasses such as bermuda are capable of penetrating all fabrics, normal border trimming reduces rhizome spread on top of the fabric. If a herbicide treatment is required, it will be at greaUy reduced frequencies. Effect on soil temperature Tests show WeedBlock 6 ~ Commercial Landscape Fabric acts as a buffer to reduce the temperature variances of the soil. The son without WeedBlock 6 + ” gets honer during the day and cooler during the night than does the soil beneath WeedBlock 6 wuhoui W««dBleck • •'«nin WMdSleck • * * Economics of use WeedBlock 6 -i-' can be installed for about the same cost as two to three applications of herbicide. After installation, mainte nance cost reductions provide the payback. 2. Eliminate/greatly reduce cost for herbicides. 3. Labor cost reductions for applying herbicides and grooming beds. 4. Less bark or stone covering used. Where it is used, it s more for cosmetic than functional use. 5. Installation costs are reduced due to the ease of cutting - scissors aren't necessary - and WeedBlock 6 ' ‘s ability to con- c 70^.5^. a un,ve,s,^ repons labor sa.ngs o. 8 6 man hours per month per f .000 square feet of plant beds. This equals S.034 per square foot per month savings. r Other uses 1. Ground cover in greenhouses to reduce weed growth under and between benches. 2. Capillary mat cover to reduce algae growth. 3. Liner for potted plants and planters to reduce soil wash-away 4. Under brick or stone patios to reduce sand wash-away. weeds and settling 5. Under decks or wood walkways to reduce weed growth between boards. r Directions for use Preparation: Sod. grasses and weed.« siiouid be removed by stripping or a non-seiective neroicide treatment such as giy- phosate before fabric is installed. Note; In planting areas where soil has been tilled or new soil placed, dormant seeds may be activated. An initial pre-emergent herbicide treatment m combination with WeedUtock 6 ' will enhance results ^ Installation: Unroll WeedBtock e-f' over the planting area with smooth side up. Cut edges to fit. Cut an "x” or circle through which to plaht. Fit WeedBlock 6 ' around the plants. Cover with bark nuggets or pebbles for attractiveness. Note Because WeedBlock 6 ' is protected from sunlight degradation for 6 years. less than the traditional amount of bark or pebbles may be used. Use just enough to achieve the desired aooearance After planting; Unroll WeedBlock 6 + ' over top of shrubs with smooth side up. Cut an "x” or circle above each plant. Push fabric down to soil level. Continue to install as previous instructions. Note WeedBlock 6 'ts easy to cut with a razor blade or even a sharp shovel. Specifications for WeedBlock 6 + Commercial Landscape Fabric Product specification; The WeedBlock 6 ' Commercial Landscape Fabric shall be UV rated at 3.400 hours (6 year life exposed). It shall be 100% uniform in light transmission (5 8%). elongation (590%). and water flow-through rate (70 gallon/ minute/square foot). Flow-through Gal/MirVSqFt Porosjty CF/Min(*1) % of Water Runoff (*2) % of Light Transmitted Uniformity % elongation "Stretch (*3) Tensile Lbs. UV Rated (*4) 70 260 4.8%5.6%100%590%9 3.400 hrs. Available in lengths of 250’ and widths of 3'. 4’. 5’. 6’. 8 ’. and 12'. *1; masiures cube feet or air mat can mov« mrougn D«r mviute *2; maaaufM % or water runnvig off wr>«r) placed at a tooemcine *3. rneaiures now far material streicnes betore breakirfg •4 500 hours • aooroxsnately 1 year exposed to M mtonse suniigm Source for Product Easy Gardener, Incorporated® Post Office 00X21025 Waco, Texas 76702-1025 817 753-5353.800 327-9462 i;»»rA47ii rts>r? landscape outperforms other brands ★ Lasts 3+ times longer ★ Allows up to 3V2 times more water and air through P'-* m SMam .yt^OHPorrt-Landscepe Fabric after 500 hours sun exposure equivalency test t i :H H) u t: ;e ! ^ ilrlU It' In I * U **71 Blunks/Phillips Weed Control Mat after 500 hours sun exposure equivalency test ■■PjaWBMSaHBrlllMM ■■■I DeWitt Weed Barrier after 648 hours sun exposure equivalency test • iv vi33 WeedBlocld® Landscape Fabric after 1500 hours sun exposure equivalency lest Accelerated Weather Testing 500 hours test * approximately i year in full, intense sun. All laDfic samples tested at same time identical tests and conditions. Easy Gardener, Incorporated* Post Office Box 21025 • Waco. Texas 76702-1025 • 91 7 753 535.1 C^ancUiU/l Texas; 800 292-5052 • National. 300 EASY INCsource; Q • Panel Company. 1987 rABRIC SP£CIFICA!I08 COHPiSISOR a/18/39REVISEDr; ..,1 BEANO FLOV 1HS00G8 GAL./HIB./SQ.n. POROSm CF/H (ID S OF VATES RUNOFF (12) I OF LIGHT TRANSHITTD DNIFOENITY I EOHGATION •ST2ETCH* (13) TDISILE LBS. U.V. EATEO (. NEEDBLOO: 6*445 415 12X S.8X leex 598X 9 3,tC8 NEV VEEDBLOCX 3*517 215 9X B.ex leex 4S8I 6 2.858 !... DEVin 88 21 281 3.3X VARIES 14X 68 330 e; DUCN (BLUNI3)1,155 329 2.4X 22.2X VARIES 107X 9 308 i... TIPAR (REENAY)1,144 413 49.9X 35.8X VARIES 83X 16 453 .H., HEAIHASHAOE 9 28 88. ex 14.8X VARIES 38X 75 K/A DALEN'S MEED-X 38 8 leex 3.3X VARIES 44X 4 280. AYU 1,122 675 95X 29.2X VARIES 37X 4 156 EARIHFELT . . (POLYFELT)1,179 585 18X 17.41 VARIES 26SX V 14 330 TE.K3AR 925 233 98X e.e:VARIES 31X 7.6 456 ;:r 2IT-A-NEED ..... (AMOCO)1,148 583 95X 14.8X VARIES 2161 5 400 u; 11 -- naSURES CUBIC feet of air that cam move THROUGH PER HIHUTE. ♦2 - MEASURES PERCEHTAGE OF MATER RUMMIN6 OFF IHEM PLACED AT A Ifll INCLINE. 13 - MEASURES HOV FAR MATERIAL STRETCHES BEFORE BREAKING. 14 - 508 H6UBS * APPROIIHATEI 1 TEAR VHEN EXPOSED TO FULL, INTENSE SUNLIGHT. • - CRITERIA FOR FAILURE DEFINED BY NAPA. To: Mayor Grab^k & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission /ambers City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: January 9, 1990 Subject: #1473 Jacquelynn Kelly, 2056 Shadywood Road - After-the-Fact Variances - Public Hearing 4> List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit J - Application Applicant's Addendum Property Owners List Plat Map Plan for Current Deck - Comparison of Hardcover & Setbacks for Former & Current Deck Gaffron's Memo to Mabusth Re: Hardcover Gaffron's Worksheet/Sketch 1-3 Hardcover Fact Sheets Staff's Sketch of Variances Needed for New Structure Survey Pertinent Ordinances - Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 [(A) - Lakeshore setback required for current deck] Required = 75' Existing * 71.4' Variance « 3'6" or 4.8% (B) Average lakeshore setback required for new structure. Setback of 19-20' at maximum encroachment point beyond average lakeshore setback line. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Hardcover variances. 0-75' Zone: (note rip rap is excluded from hardcover calculations) Previous = 0 s.f. Current = 16 s.f. or .23% 75-250' Zone: Allowed = 3,161.25 s.f. or 25% Previous = 7,239.46 s.f. or 57.2% Current = 7,697.46 s.f. or 60.9% 250-500' Zone: No changes proposed within this zone. Excessive hardcover is reviewed at Allowed = 455.4 s.f. or 30% Existing = 984 s.f. or 65% (exclude portion within right-of-way « 835 s.f. or 55%) Zoning File #1473 January 9, 1990 Page 2 of 4 Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) required for current deck. - Side setback variance Required Proposed Variance 10 9' 1'or 10% Review of After-the-fact Application - On September 6, 1989 a Stop Work Order was issued for renovation and remodeling work within the interior of the home and deck addition being done without a building permit. On that same day a permit was issued for the renovation and remodeling work within the interior of the house. All work on the deck would have to cease until hardcover facts were submitted and an updated survey. On September 15, 1989 the contractor submitted hardcover calculations and an updated survey. The contractor was advised of the need for an average lakeshore setback variance and hardcover variances. At that time it should be noted that the partial deck structure had not encroached the 0-75' setback area. On September 19, 1989 a citation was issued because work was continued on the deck. Additional foundation posts were installed. On November 9th the 'Zoning staff conducted the customary on site inspection of the property as part of the variance application procedure. Staff found the deck completed except for required railings. Staff advised the City Attorney of the current status of the deck and requested that he send a letter to the applicant's attorney advising of the continuing violation. The City Attorney's office has advised the the owner's associate, James Michael Klein, has pleaded not guilty to the citation. A court date has not been scheduled as of this writing. The City Attorney has advised the City to continue with the variance review as the courts will be awaiting the City's final action on the variance application. Zoning File #1473 January 9, 1990 Page 3 of 4 Review of Deck Proposal - The applicant has constructed a deck that encroaches 19-20' in front of the average lakeshore setback line in addition to the 75' lakeshore setback. The deck has also been found to encroach the required 10' side yard setback. Hardcover facts have been noted above. The current deck would require hardcover variances in the 0-75' zone and approval of additional hardcover within the 75-250' setback where an excessive amount exists over the allowed 25%. Please review Exhibit E, the applicant's addendum has noted that there is no difference in the area of the former deck and the current deck. The plan shows the underlying 14'x36'5" deck with 3'x7' stair structure. Note that the increase within 75- 250' setback area is 442.2 s.f. or 3^5%. The previous deck was located 83' from the lakeshoie. The current deck is 71'4" from the 929.4 elevation of the lakeshore. Please also review Exhibit I, staff's sketch designating all required variances for current deck. Options of Action - 1. Denial based on the following findings: A) Unacceptable/insufficient hardships have been presented by applicant. What are acceptable nardships for this property? B) The encroachment of the 75' necessary r.or acceptable. lakeshore setback line is not C) There is no acceptable hardship that would allow the encroachment of the required side yard. The applicant has failed to support variance request with a matching removal of existing hardcover. If Planning Commission is consistent with previous Council approvals of similar variance requests, additional hardcovers would also have to be removed. Denial would require the immediate removal of the existing deck. Zoning File #1473 January 9, 1990 Page 4 of 4 2. :* le. Planning Commission may wish to table the i*.: , ication providing applicant with the option to come in wiiA a revised deck plan (no hardcover or encroachment of I'ikeshore setback - establish a reasonable setback beyond average lakeshore setback line) and plan for the removal of existing hardcover within the 75-250' setback area. Planning Commission may also wish a trimming back within the 250-500' setback area. Planning Commission may establish a limit as to an acceptable amount of hardcover percentage within the 75-250' setback area currently at 60.9%. What is an acceptable level for this property? What is consistent with previous similar applications? The total area of the property is 21,119 s.f. or .48 acres (required area is 23,560 s.f. - the property meets 90% of the area requirement). 3. Approval. If you can find that the current application meets the intent of the lakeshore regulations of the zoning code, the comprehensive plan of the City, and to be consistent with the City's action in previous similar applications, than Planning Commission members may grant approval of the proposed application. Obviously the only feasible options of action available to the Planning Commission would be either a straight denial or the tabling to allow applicant to bring in a revised plan more in keeping with the City's current standards and policies. 7oning File #1473 February 7, 1990 Page 5 Additional Comments & Planning Commission Recommendation - List of Additional Exhibits - Exhibit K - Planning Commission Notice of Action Exhibit L - Bear Correspondence 2/5/90 Exhibit M - Hardcover Fact Sheet 75-250' Setback Area Exhibit N - Consents of Adjacent Neighbors Exhibit 0 - Proposed Agreement by Applicant Exhibit P - Staff Sketch Exhibit Q - Amended Plan The Planning Cor.mibsion denied all variances requested by applicant for current illegal deck. Planning Commission recommended that applicant be allowed to reconstruct a deck that would extend no closer to the lakeshore than the previous deck (extend 14' in front of front line of residence). Review Exhibit P, this deck would encroach no more than approximately 2+' beyond the average lakeshore setback line. In addition, the revised deck could not extend into the required 10' side setback yard and held hardcover at the prebent 57.2% level. Since that i^eeting, staff *i3s spoken with Stuart Bear, applicant's attorney, and recomm'inded that with the revised plan realigning the= lakeshore deck per Planning Commission's directives, that it would be appropriate to also show reductions in existing hardcover, within the 75-250' zone. Mr. Bear was advised that the 57.2% recommended by the Planning Commission would be found too excessive. Mr. Bear agreed to discuss my recommendation with his client and has submitted an amended plan for Council's review and consideration (review Exhibit Q). Review of Amended Plan - The amended proposal shows the deck at the present configuration with the portions within the 0-75' being removed. As a result, there is no longer any hardcover within the 0-75' setback area. The current deck as amended would extend approximately 16' in front of the average lakeshore setback line. Review Exhibit P, The Planning Commission's recommendation asked that the revised deck hold to the original setback line. The revised proposal still shows the deck at the 9' side setback, which was against the recommendation of the Planning Commission. Applicant proposes a reduction of 10.1% hardcover within the 75- 250' setback area (please review Exhibits G, H2 and M). Landscape areas with underlying plastic totally some 1,681 s.f. of hardcover is to be removed. Applicant shows no reductions within the 250-500' setback area, now at 64.77% hardcover. The majority of that hardcover is landscape areas with underlying plastic and bituminous paving. Zoning File #1473 February 7, 1990 Page 6 Although applicant has proposed an agreement to limit any further intensification of the current deck as proposed in the amended plan, the City's own ordinances would require a variance approval if the subject deck was to be enclosed. If a deck is to be approved by Council, the resolution approving the structure would forewarn any property owner that the deck structure could not be intensified without the appropriate approvals of the City. Options of Action Available to Council - 1. Denial finding that applicant has not demonstrated sufficient hardship to allow for more permanent structural hardcover within an area already containing excessive amounts of hardcover, and to require the immediate removal of the structure; or 2. Approval asking for the following reconstruction of the current deck structure: Per applicant's proposal, remove structure within the 0-75’ setback area, but also require removal of that portion of the deck that encroaches the side yard setback area, and approve 75-250' hardcover at 47.1%. Council would be approving a 16' encroachment of the average setback line; or Per Planning Commission recommendation, hold applicant to the 14'width requiring a 2'+ average lakeshore set back line encroachment and approving no side setback variances. Council may consider allowing 989 s.f. area of current deck to be reconfigured within the 10' side setbacks and the 14' extension from the front line of the existing residence. Prior to Council acting on such a proposal, applicant would have to submit a revised plan showing the reconfigured deck. Council must also approve applicant's proposal to reduce hardcover in the 75-250' setback area to a 47.1% or request additional removals either in the 75-250' or 250-500' setback areas. Council Action - To provide staff with conceptual direction so that an appropriate resolution can be prepared for Council's action at the February 26, 1990 meeting. COUNCIL MEETINGTo: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson 2 5 |990 Prom: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Date: June 21, 1990 Subject: #1476 David & Suzanne Brass, 1065 Linden Lane - Reconsideration of Variance List of Exhibits - Exhibit A - Resolution #2738 Exhibit B - Staff Letter dtd 4/10/90 Exhibit C - Prass Letter dtd 4/14/90 Exhibit D - Staff Letter dtd 4/27/90 Exhibit E - Staff Letter dtd 6/4/90 Exhibit F - Survey In December 1989, the City granted approval of a variance to allow a pool structure and shed to remain on the subjecv, property without a principal residence. A principal residence was razed earlier that year as a result of a hazardous building action. A condition of that original variance approval required the applicants to install a permanent pool cover over the open water area by an April 1, 1990 deadline. In addition, the City would allow the pool to remain until September 1, 1990 deadline, at which time the applicants were to have applied for a building permit for a new principal structure. Please review the enclosed correspondence between staff and the applicants.^ The applicants have failed to install the permanent pool covering by the dead line date. A recent inspection of the site by staff confirms that the original snow fencing installed around the pool is in good condition providing the necessary temporary precaution. Please review Exhibit C. Applicants’ letter of April 14th appears to be asking the City to consider grade level wooden decking over the water retention area as a permanent answer to the problem of the pool remaining without the principal residence. Applicants' letter clearly notes that they have no immediate plans nor are capable of planning for c.ns.ruction of a new residence this year. The applicants have been advised that the staff has placed this matter before the Council at their June 25th meeting. Hopefully, the applicants will appear to present their position to the Council. At any rate, staff must have Council s further direction regarding the present status of the pool and for possible redirection on this matter. A) Require immediate removal of the pool as applicants have failed to comply with origina? conditions of approval and the applicants have confirmed that they would not be able to obtain a building permit for new construction by September 1, 1990 deadline; or 7 Zoning File #1476 June 21, 1990 Page 2 of 2 As proposed by applicant approve a permanent grade-level wooden deck structure to be installed over the water area of the pool to remain until a building permit is issued for a principal residence. Deck structure to be installed by July 30, 1990; or Require immediate removal of the pool. L CITV- - .OHONCt City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2733_ _ _ _ _ A A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9 (A) FILE #1476 WHEREAS, David & Suzanne Prass (hereinafter "the applicants") have an interest in the property located at 1065 Linden Lane within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows; Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Sectio’^ 10.03, Subdivision 9 (A) to permit a pool and storage s‘*--ucture to remain on the property that no longer contain.® a principal residence.^ The former residence was removed as " result of a hazardous bui.;: ing action initiated by the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1476. 2. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family La)ceshore Residential Zoning District requiring 1 acre in area. The property consists of 1.4 acres. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on November 20, 1989, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings; A) The pool structure is sound requiring only cosmetic repair. B) The residence was removed in October 1988 and had not been inhabited for approximately 2 years before that time. The pool area has not had daily supervision for over 3 years. C) The property exceeds the required 1 acre in area and 140' width standards, and can legally sustain a principal residence without the need for further variances. Page 1 of 5 CITY OF ORDNO City of OROIXO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.2738 The City Council has consi«3ered this application including the findings and recommcjndations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping v’ith the spirit intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (A) to permit a pool and storage structure to remain on the property without a principal residence, subject to the following conditions; 1. Applicants are to provide proof of current insurance coverage for the City of Orono's official recorcs throughout tih ^ duration of^tT>js—.va?;^ance approval._________________________^ 2. An approved permanent covering must be installed over ^he water retention area of the pool by April 1, 1-90^_____ 3. If an application for a building permit a new residence has not been realized by September 1, pool structure and storage structure ^^^t be removed within 30 days of the deadline date (October 2, 1990). a 12.05, Subdivision 1 (A) of the Municipal Cooe, a Certificate of Occupancy must be issued for the resia^ce within 24 months of the issuance date of the building perm u for the principal structure on the property. Per Section 12.05, Subdivision 2 (B), applicants are ^ that all exterior construction must be completed vith^n one year from the issuance date of a building permit .or the principal structure on the property. Page 2 of 5 CITY OF ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.2738 4. Prior to the City's filing of this variance resolution against the chain of title of thi. property, applicants must file with the City for the legal combination of the 5 separate parcels that make up the property by December 29, 1989. 5. Applicants may not construct a residential dock at the shoreline as the property does not contain a principal residence. A dock is considered an accessory structure. 6. Immediate payment to the City of S340.00 for legal fees resulting from a hazardous building action against tne property by December 29, 1989. 7. Upon application for a building pernit for a new residence, the survey submitted for this review must be revised to show principal structures on the property to the immediate north and south to determine an average lakeshore setback line. The new residence must meet the setback of the average lakeshore building line. 8. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit for a principal residence within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on th;i date (December 11, 1990). 9. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 10. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 11th day of December, 1989. A’lu .KbT; y ■ /Am ^ I D^othy Tallin, City CleS^ Jamep R. Grab6Jc2_Mayor Page 3 of 5 1 CtTY OF ORGIMCF CITY of ORONO Post Office Box 66* Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 * Munidpal On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka CERTIFIED MAIL April 10, 1990 Mr. & Mrs. David Prass 1774 Freemont Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55403 Re: Resolution #2738 of the Cit> of Orono Dear Mr. & Mrs. Prass: Per Condition #2 of Orono Resolution #2738, you were required to provide a perir;aner.t covering for the water retention area of the pool on your property located at 1065 Linden Lane by April 1, 1990. The Building staff inspected your property on April 2, 1990 and noted that the pool covering had not been installed. This failure to comply wirh Ccuncil's directive finds you in violation of the terms and conditions of the variance resolution granted by Council at their December 11, 1989 meeting. The required permanent pool cover must be installed no later than Wednesday, April 18, 1990. Failure to meet the newly established deadline date may result in your being issued citations and the original variance resolution referred back to Council for reconsideration. At your very earliest convenience please advise the Zoning Department as to why the pool covering has not been installed over the pool. Sincerely, iiljOunAJL feanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator JAM/tln cc: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Bruce Vang, Field Inspector BUILDING <& ZONING - 473-T357 ASSESSING administration & nNANCE - 473-7358 FAX-4734)510 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 IMJt. iJmCkO Di'.’i j Prssi 1774 Fremcnt i^.v«n'je So’jtr MinnAaoolis, Mip.nssota 53^103 (612/ j74 ”l373 APR 1 8 1890 c> Acnt 14, 1990 Jeanne A. MabusthBuildinQ and Zoning Administrator City orOrono M'jnicioa! Of-fioes Post 'jt»!oe Bo^ 65 ___ Crystal Bay, Minnesota Re: Resoi'jticn »2?33 :ne City o- Croro Dear Jeanne A. Macjsth; in r««oonse to our teleonor.e conversation last weey I ajn writing tnis letter o? exclLoation regarding Paiiure to comsiy m timely matter with ccnaitions o* tne vsr'irce resolution. I have been distracted to tne ooint ci neglect by oersonal circumstances. hse haan aarinneiv il] •nf' ajOTOy Iffiate''' ? vesr and abOUt S»y wee‘‘.S rOO ■^aar* aiirQarv"*rtp’tne second time. Because o? my fijnilies and my involvement as cLrioivJ?! i'nave not able to tocus on mucn else tnan care ano concern *or my mother. Particuiarly since the tirst ot the year. In retrosoect 1 wish I had ceer tola at.the time gP the Hazardous Sy'ijino ?f‘f«edings that I would nave to build ■immeoiatiatiy- or oe torceo to remove tne oool. li t^ose options had oeen oresenteo I micnt nave made a decision to correct .ne aett-.ienci.. .na. led to tne Order. At this ooint in time i am in not in an emot.cnai positign to.oroceeo witn tne design-ng »n«-’ construction oi » new nome. Tne removal ot tne oooi wouio oniy cost us uowarcs i25,000' to nave it raoiacea m the ♦uture. It nas oeen^suggested oy a swimming oool contra^’^or who i® very familiar with reconstituting ooois. that a oermanen. cvj.d oJ constructed across the oool maKinc it totally sate and w.tnout harm As reoarcs the Bectember l. deaol'ne tor sucmission ot a bui ’cing oerinit aDoiicat-.n I would reduest a deference to meeting that deadline. I look to vour further guidance in this matter. Sincerely, David Prass ; ..v Jij.-• -TTvr-<1 —— . I.• - .!•, - - .. ^ ■ ^%tm ----------------------------■; ■ CITY OF ORONO CITYof ORONO Post Office Box 66* Crystal Bay. MinoesoU 55323 • Municipal OfBcea On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka April 27, 1990 David Prass 1774 Freemont Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55403 Re: 1065 Linden Lane Dear Mr. Prass; The City is in receipt of your letter dated April 14, 1990 advising of your personal circumstances that lead to your inability to install a permanent cover over the pool on your prooerty located at 1065 Linden Lane. Your letter references proposed plans to construct a permanent deck structure over the existing pool. Is the deck proposed in response to Council s directive for a permanent covering for the pool, or is the deck proposed as a permanent structure to remain indefinitely until a new residence is installed on the property? Staff must have clarification concerning your intent concerning the construction of a deck covering for the pool. Staff must ask for further direction from you concerning how you wish this matter to be referred to Council. You should be aware that only Council can provide such direction or amend the special conditions of Resolution #2738. Please contact my office at your very earliest convenience. Sincerely, JAM/tln J6anne A. Mabusth, Building fi Zoning Administrator "T’ . : • BUILDING A ZONING-473.7357 •'.‘‘“ ASSESSING “1.. administration a finance - 473-735* FAX-473-0510 PUBLIC WORKS -473-7359 CITY OF ORONQ June 4, 1990 CITYof ORONO Post Office Box 66•Crystal Bay, Minnesota S5323• MunidpaJ Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka David Prass 1774 Freemont Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55403 RE; 1065 Linden Lane Dear Mr. Prass: You have failed to respond to my letter of April 27, 1990 in which I sought clarification regarding your request to inswal permanent wooden deck structure over the pool. As it is now June 4, 1990 and you have failed to either contact ray office o. install a pool cover, you must appear berore the Council for further direction. Staff will schedule your variance application for reconsideration by the Council at their June 25, 1990 meeting. A copy of your April 14th letter will be included in their packets. Please advise my office no later than June 15, 1990 if you wish additional information submitted for the Council's review. Sincerely, Jeanne A. Mabusth Building & Zoning Administrator cc; Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator JAM/lsv BUILDING A ZONING - 473-7357 ASSESSING ADMINISTRATION A RNANCE - 4T3-7358 FAX - 4734)510 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 I ■V ^: ^ ^ * k' li « / • - • 1 . ■ * ■1m#-’M.'-’ -iitw:-''-' ' ■ ■Igi;;--: ;S ' -■iiltl-- . ■■■i ■■ ::>^I.-: i, • ■m- >v ■ Iv ■■ff IP’iicSlisifitiimmm ,. . - :•• f. ■ I ^ i I jS# k ■# / From: Date: COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members jUN 25 1990 City Administrator Bernhardson CITY OF ORONO Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator June 18, 1990 Subject: #1510 Richard Brown, 2685 Shadywood Road Variance/Conditional Use Permit - Resolution List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Notice of Council Action 6/18/90 Exhibit B - Resolution Discussion Attached is a resolution for approval of the hardcover and average setback variances, and a conditional use permit for guest apartment use. Council voted 4 to 1 to conceptually approve this application at your June 11th meeting. The approval motion was for an increase from 28.1% to 28.9% hardcover in the 75-250' zone, and to approve the guest apartment conditional use permit subject to omission of the door between the garage and the apartment. ProposedMotion; Moved by _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ » seconded by_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _» to approve hardcover and average lakeshore setback variances and a guest house conditional use permit for the Richard Brown property located at 2685 Shadywood Road, per the attached Resolution. Vote:Ayes Nays CITY OP ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 APPLICATION NO. 1510 NOTICE OP COUNCIL ACTION 473-7357 Date of Notice: 6/18/90 TO;Richard W. Brown COPIES: Rick Brown 2685 Shadywood Road Excelsior, MN 55331 6167 Sunny Road Minnetonka, MN 55343 TYPE OP APPLICATION: Variance Conditional Use Permit DATE OP MEETING: June 11, 1990 VOTE: 4 For 1 Against COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: Conceptual approval for: - Hardcover variance to allow 28.9% in 75-250' zone - Conditional Use Permit for guest apartment, conditioned on omitting the door from inside the garage to the apartment A resolution for the above will be presented to the Council for final approval at their June 25 meeting, which starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 162, AND GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 3 (G) FILE #1510 WHEREAS, Richard W. Brown (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 2685 Shadywood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows; Tract B, RLS 1453, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1, to construct a residence addition nearer the lakeshore than the defined average lakeshore setback line, where no encroachment is normally allowed, and to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to hardcover in excess of the 25% normally allowed within the 75- 250' lakeshore setback zone, and is requesting a conditional use permit for a non-rental guest apartment per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (G) ii. Minnesota ; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1510. 2. The property is located in the LR-lB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on April 16, 1990 and Hay 21, 1990, and on a 4 to 2 vote r^ommended denial based on the issues of excess hardcover and unacceptable primary interior access for the guest apartment. 4. The City Council reviewed this application on June 11, 1990 and voted 4 to 1 i*. favor of conceptual approval of the requested variances and conditional use permit, based upon the following findings ; Page 1 of 7 a. Because the property is generally rectangular and contains lakeshore on two sides, more than half of the 1.17 acre lot is in the 0-75' zone where no hardcover is normally allowed. If the channel providing lake access to abutting properties to the northwest had not been dredged at some time in the past, this property with the proposed additions, would not need a hardcover variance. b. Hardcover in the 0-75' zone is 1.1%, with no additional hardcover proposed in that zone. This provides a significant area for filtration and absorption of run-off. c. Applicant has agreed to remove specific items of excess hardcover in the 75-250' zone, such that the existing 28.1% hardcover in the 75-250' zone will only increase to 28.9%. The proposed guest apartment and garage addition is located so as to make use of existing driveway areas without adding more driveway hardcover. d. The proposed additions will have no impact on lakeviews enjoyed by neighboring lakeshore property owners. The entire existing house encroaches past the average lakeshore setback line, and no new view obstructions will be created. e. Council finds that the guest apartment as proposed will meei- the intent of the guest apartment ordinance if the proposed access door between the new garage and the apartment is eliminated. This will make the lower level access through the interior of the house function as the primary access to the apartment. f. The applicant's intent is to sell the house to his son, Rick Brown, who will live year-round in the house. The applicant and his wife will live in the guest apartment during the 6 months each year that they spend in Minnesota. g. The attached garage will provide for adequate parking for the quest apartment. The design of the exterior of the house will not appear as a duplex, but as a single family residence. h. The apartment addition could be easily modified by removal of kitchen facilities to revert to single family use. Page 2 of 7 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but are necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; are necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the guest apartment use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air, nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to the Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 to allow additional structure to encroach past the average lakeshore setback line where no encroachment is normally allowed, and grants a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to allow 28.9% hardcover in the 75-250’ zone where only 25% is normally allowed, and grants a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 3 (G) ii, subject to the following conditions; 1. The second dwelling unit is allowed as a guest apartment only, to be used for relatives and non-paying guests of the property owner. The unit may not be rented out. 2. Conditional use permit authority granted by this resolution runs expressly and solely with the current property owners, Mr. and Mrs. Richard W. Brown, and their son and daughter-in-law, Mr. and Mrs. Rick Brown, with the intent that Mr. end Mrs. Rick Brown will be providing the guest apartment for the seasonal use of Mr. and Mrs. Richard W. Brown or other family-members or non-paying guests. At such time that the property is no longer owned by either of the above mentioned parties, the guest apartment use shall cease. Any subsequent property owner would have to reapply Page 3 of 7 for this type of use or remove the kitchen facilities from the guest apartment. 3. Utilities shall not be separated but shall be metered jointly with the principal residence. 4. The guest apartment shall not have a separate street address. 5. Hardcover on the property shall not exceed 28.9% in the 75- 250' zone, as indicated in the sketch and hardcover calculation attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. The applicants are advised that any future proposals to increase hardcover on the property will not be approved, but might be approved only in conjunction with concurrent removals of existing hardcover, yielding no net increase in hardcover. 6. The doorway between the proposed 2 car garage and the proposed apartment shall be eliminated, therefore the primary access to the apartment will be through the lower level of the main residence. 7. The applicant is advised that the exir^ 'ng boathouse on the property is considered as a nonconforming jcture, subject to the ordinances pertaining to such structures. 8. Variance approval granted by this resolution runs with the property not with the owner, but is permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or the special variance approval conditions of the resolution will expire on that date (June 25, 1991). 9. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 10. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 4 of 7 1990. ATTEST; Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 25th day of June, Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 25th day of June, 1990, by James R. Grabek & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 5 of 7 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _—known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free acc and deed. NO'" , PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared _ _ _ __ ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 6 of 7 Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson OOUNCiL MKIiNG JUN 2 51990 I’ TY OF ORONO Fron: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: June 15r 1990 Subject: #1549 & #1550 Rod Crawford, 4705 North Shore Drive Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinance- Section 10.22, Subdivision 1? Lakeshore setback variance required. Applicant proposes the screening/enclosure of an existing patio area located beneath a second story lakeside deck. Approximately 1/3 of the deck is located within the 0-75' protected area. If intensification of portions of the structure located within the substandard setback are to be allowed, variance approval is necessary. Required = 75' Existing = 71' Variance = 4' or 5.3% (112 s.f. of hardcover within the 0-75' setback area) Section 10.22, Subdivision 2: within the 0-75' and 250-500'. Excessive hardcover exists a. b. 0-75' setback area = 6,304 s.f. Allowed = 0 Existing = 413 s.f. or 6.5% Proposed = 212.5 s.f. or 3.4% Total Reduction = 205 s.f. or 3.1% 75-250' setback = 17,873 s.f. Allowed = 4,468 s.f. or 25% Existing = 5,132 s.f. or 28.7% Proposed = 4,359.5 s.f. or 24.3% Total Reduction in Hardcover = 772.5 s.f. or 4.4% No hardcover variance required. The entire house structure is located in front of the average lakeshore setback line. Refer to Exhibit D. Any intensification or change in the existing residence would technically require variance approval. Based on a site inspection, staff can confirm that the new detached garage is located behind the average lakeshore setback line determined from the property to the immediate east once again to Exhibit D) and on existing house to the west of the property. There is no resident structure on the lot immediately adjacent to the west lot line. c. Zoning File #1549 June 15, 1990 Page 2 Section 10.03, Subdivision 19: Conditional use permit is required for filling activities in excess of 100 cubic yards that have no connection with the construction permit to be issued for detached garage in street yard. Fill brought in to protect foundation/footings of detached garage would be covered under the building permit. It is the land alteration for the installation of a new curb cut and turnaround drive that requires the conditional use permit. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit A1 Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E “ Exhib/t F - Exhibit G - Exhibit H - Exhibit I - Exhibit J - Exhibit K - Exhibit L - Application “ Addendum Property Owners List Plat Map Certificate of Survey Topographic Survey of Existing Contours Existing Hardcover Plan Proposed Hardcover Plan Hardcover Fact Sheet 0-75' Hardcover Fact Sheet 75-250' Retaining Wall Elevations Cook's Report Site Plan Review of Variance Phase of Application - Applicant proposes the screening of a patio area located beneath the second story lakeside deck of the house. The screened enclosure will have no impact on the adjacent residence because of the topographies, location of mature planting within yards and location of house in relation to adjacent homes. Applicant proposes an overall reduction in hardcover within the 0-75' setback area with the removal of existing stone walls and landscape areas found to have underlying plastic liner. Applicant's builder has been questioned concerning the owner's future desires as to the creation of a 3—season porch beneath the second story deck. Applicant's builder has advised that only a screened porch is proposed because applicant spends majority of the colder weather months in the state of Arizona and will only reside in this residence during the warmer summer months. As already noted above, the detached garage proposed within the street yard shall be located beyond the average setback line. The garage will be located 40' from «_he street lot line and 19 + ' from the west side lot line meeting all required setbacks. Hardcover within the 75-250' setback area was at 28.7 and is now proposed at 24.3. Approval of a hardcover variance within the 75-250' setback area will not be necessary. Zoning File #1549 June 15, 1990 Page 3 Options of Action Denial - If denied please refer to the necessary findings in the variance section of your zoning code. Approval - If approved the following findings and hardships may be considered; 1. The house was placed on property in 1968 prior to the current regulations for the development of lakeshore properties. 2. The original permit for house covered the lakeshore deck. 3. There is no visual impact created by the screened enclosure of the patio area because of the existing topography and mature trees that surround the residence. 4. Applicant is reducing hardcover within the 0-75' and 75-250' setback areas. Staff has no recommendation for specific conditions except to ask for hardcover removals as proposed by applicant. Planning Commission may have others. Review of Conditional Use Permit Application The City staff and the County reviewed the request for a loop driveway to facilitate safe access from this site. The County approved the creation of a new curb cut at the east end of the property finding that the steep topography of this property presented a reasonable and acceptable hardship based on the County's standards. Dave Zetterstrohm has contacted my office to confirm the approval of the County. Unfortunately, the staff has yet to receive written confirmation. Staff has had an opportunity to convey early review comments of Glenn Cook to the applicant and applicant has provided an amended plan. Applicant's revised plans now show the retaining wall in the west side yard with positive drainage being provided within the 10' west of the retaining wall. Cook recommended that the existing retaining wall that runs parallel to the loop road within the street yard be increased in height approximately 9 to 10'. At this height the slopes can be retained at 6:1 ratio. The side slopes at the east side must be increased to a 3;1 ratio and swale must be totally located out of east neighbors property. The City will require fencing at the top of this retaining wall. Zoning File #1549 June 15f 1990 Page 4 in fact where there is a drop of more than 30” to existing grade, fencing will be required at the top of all retaining walls. Upon the submission of detailed plans to the building Department at the time of construction, inspectors will call out where fencing will be required. Applicant's architect has callfo out that there will be steel mesh fencing at approximately 4 in height placed above the retaining wall that runs parallel to North Shore Drive in the street yard because it will be part ot the fencing proposed by new owner to maintain dogs within yard. Such fencing has been located on the site plan (Exhibit L). Cook's report also calls attention to the steepness of the west access drive as it enters the right-of-way of North Shore Drive. Concern is that in bad weather it may be difficult for a car to back out and up the slope to then seek access via the eastern curb cut. Once again we note that the specific owner is not planning to live on this property in the winter months and secondly, this kind of sloping condition in driveways is quite consistent with the other lake homes in this neighborhood that are served from North Shore Drive. Planning Commission may consider some of the following findings in the approval of the conditional use permit: 1. The installation of the loop drive will provide a safer access to the County road. 2. Steep topographies within the street yard require land alterations/modifications to existing topography in order to provide safe and easy access. 3. Proposed filling project will have no impact on the existing drainage nor on the adjacent properties. Approval will be subject to the following conditions: 1. 36" fencing will be required whenever there is 30" or greater distance from the top of the wall to existing grade. 2. Prior to the City issuing a land alteration or building permit for the construction of retaining walls, a Hennepin County permit must be submitted to the ^ity showing approval of the proposed grading changes within the County right-of-way. Zoning File #1549 June 15, 1990 Page 5 3. A separate building permit will be required for all retaining walls constructed on the site. Applicant's representatives should consult with the Building Department to determine what type of information will be required. 4. A separate land alteration permit will be required for the proposed filling and grading on the site. During the filling process appropriate erosion control will be required and at no time shall applicant or applicant's representatives restrict natural drainage flow. Zoning File #1549 June 22, 1990 Page 6 Additional Comments and Planning Commission Recommendations The Planning Commission had no concern with the variance phase of the application that would allow the screened enclosure of the patio area beneath the second story deck and accepted staff’s findings. The second phase of the application involves a conditional use permit to create a new access drive providing a loop roadway from the County road. The additional hardcover created by the new access drive is offset with the removal of existing gravel areas within the street yard and some 460 s.f. of plastic underliner area adjacent to the existing house. The applicant has submitted a revised grading plan based on Glenn Cook's review comments {Exhibit L). A 9-10' high wall has been replaced with a 2-tiered wall minimizing the visual impact from the lake. The maximum height of the highest section of the 2-tier wall is 4-1/2 to 5'. The slopes to the new driveway are at a 6:1 ratio parallel to the street and along the side at a 3:1 ratio. All drainage continues to flow through the property down to the lake. Prior to the City issuing building permits for the retaining walls as shown on the revised grading plans, the City must be in receipt of the Hennepin County permit approving land alterations and the retaining wall within the right-of-way of North Shore Drive. Staff has reviewed once again the hardcover calculations and notes the following changes: Allowed = 4,458 s.f. or 25% Existing = 5,132 s.f. or 28.7% Proposed in original plan = 4,359.5 s.f. or 24.3% Proposed based on staff's recalculations = 4,444.5 s.f. or 24.8% (Increase resulting from 85 s.f. of additional hardcover from retaining walls) The enclosed resolution has been drafted based on the approval of the variance that would allow the screened enclosure of the lower portion of a second story deck and conditional use permit that would allow 460+ cubic yards of fill to construct a new driveway access resulting in an overall reduction of hardcover within the 75-250' setback area of 3.9%. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22* SUBDIVISION I AND GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19 FILES #1549 & #1550 WHEREAS, Rodney A. Crawford (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 4705 North Shore Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 1, Tristana Cove, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section J-0-22, Subdivision 1 to permit the screened enclosure of a patio area beneath a second story deck, portions of which are located within the 0-75 lakeshore protected area where no such structure is allowed and approval of a variance to the average lakeshore setback as the entir proposed structure is located in front of the average lalceshore setback area. In addition, applicant seeks approval of a conditional use permit per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19, that would allow filling and grading within the street yard to create a looped driveway requiring installation of retaining walls and access stairs resulting in an overall reduction of 3.9% hardcover at 4,444.5 s.f. or 24.8% where 5,132 s.f. had existed. Minnesota : NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1, This application was reviewed as Zoning Files #1549 and #1550. 2, The property is located in the LR-IB zoning district requiring 1 acre in area. The property consists of 24,177 s.f. or .55 acres in area. 3, The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 18, 1990, and recommended approval of the variances as proposed based on the following findings: Page 1 of 7 a. The house was placed on the property in 1968 prior to the current regulations for the development of lakeshore properties. b. The original permit for house covered the lakeshore deck. c. There is no visual impact created by the screened enclosure of the patio area because of the existing topography and mature trees that surround residence. d. Applicant is reducing hardcover within the 0-75' and 75-250' setback areas. 4. The Orono Planning Commission recommended approval of the conditional use permit based on the following findings: a. The installation of the loop drive will provide a safe access to the County road. b. Steep topographies within the street yard require land alterations/modifications to existing topography in order to provide safe and easy access. c. Proposed filling project will have no impact on the existing drainage nor on the adjacent properties. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions# light# air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant# but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of rhe appli cant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow grading and filling activities to install a loop driveway on the property will not be detrimental to the health# safety or general welfare of the public# would not adve*\^ely affect light# air nor pose a fire hazard or other dansar to neighboring properties# nor will it depreciate surrc .*n'%?.ng Page 2 of 7 property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in Keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. COHCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 to allow the screened enclosure of a patio beneath a second story deck and grants a conditional use permit per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 to allow grading and filling activities involving 460+ cubic yards of fill to install a loop drive within the street yard of the property subject to the following conditions: 1. All hardcover scheduled for removal shall be completed prior to City*s issuance of building permit for new construction. Such removal is to be confirmed upon building inspector's initial inspection to site. Hardcover removals within setback areas are as follows (refer to page 5 of this resolution): 0*75' setback area 75-250' setback area 23 s.f. of plastic underliner 177.5 s.f. stone retaining wall = 42.5 s.f. stone retaining wall 72 s.f flagstone walk 458.4 s.f. landscape areas underlain with plastic sheeting 2. 36" fencing will be required wherever there is 30" or greater distance from the top of retaining wall to existing grade . 3. A separate building permit will be required for all retaining walls constructed on the site. Applicant or applicant's representative is advised to consult with the Building Department to determine what type of information will be required with filing of permit. 4. A separate land alteration permit will be required for the proposed filling and grading on the site. During the entire land alteration appropriate erosion control will be required and at no time shall applicant or applicant's representatives restrict natural drainage flow. Page 3 of 7 5. Prior to the City issuing a land alteration or building permit for the construction of retaining walls, a Hennepin County permit must be submitted to the City sho- 'ng approval of the proposed grading changes and retaining v,a ] ' within the County right-of-way. 6. Authorities granted by this resolution an with the property not with the owner, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (June 25, 1991). 7. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terr-- and coi'iiitions of this resolution shall constitute a violation line zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority c nted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 8. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 4 of 7 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 25th day of June, 1990. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Acting Mayor Property Owner(s ) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 25th day June, 1990, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Acting Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 6 of 7 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY CC:-1MISSI0N EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said County, persona ;ly appeared ____ known to xecuted theme to be the person(s) described in and wh foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (tiiey) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 7 of 7 L. H IJJM M a| i o a _i -I Q> UJ lU S|SSS 5 M il555 i §i|5 ®8““«9>« u u CO 3 5 -i 2 -I M < 111 M o »- oe K 'Oa. Ill M z Ki to _j M m N z ^ o ui i2S£“- 3*3j!»s I m* 111 Z M ^ oe o to z ujj g •T 2 >n Z ^ 2 •-I aoc Si: M M M O I- 5I oe 111 < oe X ^ K N. V- °?!2 ro cQ a rC OKI O « “a ui oe S1 2UJ Z KI“sa•• a eI* |3| Ui KI QrH z a g* KI M KI X <U »- K o a o KI -> ce X in ... a (/} m rlg-^x • z z o zr» Ui Ui za in X X g 9> a. a. in Z^ Ui Ui O' 2a «r K K >o g KI o a M <0 Z « a X \< & X >• S'g cS d X X a o 22 x52g"i.a X u u a «U X < U UI « ^^alglS iis-E^ 2 i:i*og„„ ^ m a X X ^ x^ ga < K a a2«< X < lU Ui XX r a a < X a s!sS M HLa f 8 £ >• UJ uj i3d‘« :3 “i2axiz-rrrAi K UJ UJ »-o tn ^ ^ g M X <t z K o U <M 3 9. a iga s O UJ M(MX ae 9 M /y) o o o >o - S S ... S M /y) o o o ^ M X o o UJ tn (M f- u. u. oc m rlSiiS•H 2 « K U) pH U U ^ o in S S s! CO <r UJ UJ m o X z ES a -I Z K <9- i/» Z M .O I O -J S > K O < '•H < < □ I O O O Z N. a K I- _ 0 0 4 4 QM X X in z O U L> Kl O O o M M O KKl o X a .a- o K iu X X X ? iH X UJ u> u ^ <n 2“55ui2K> -> > O M 2Kl M O X ihil Kl^lSzS > < U Ul < M M in2iairn-is f.> «• K h> •• X 10 .»• 4Kl O UJ UJ si Ih 4 4 UJ §ti “2«g UJ UJ > -J <M 2 o z M in K a g o 4rliu K UJ K> O ^ > UJ O Kl X X O' Z I'* X U Kl 3 SS3^$2 0 s °8, «sg g 0 -J -1 CM X lU .0Kl (/) X sO ° Z -J 4 CM UJ > J 4Kl M X _ M3 KlxggiS CM »- > >- (A in rlS^^z ? •‘-‘I5K (A (A 2 0 >H M M 0 Kl 4 z g In CM ^ (A M m K 0 0 4 4 riAi K. Z K* 0 in (A 0 . g (M 1- in z 4 4 z CM 3 0 ^ UJ UJ 0 g Kl 0 0 0 4' £9Szk*;?2 O' o o ^ o z X X oKl UJ UJ UJ X in M X > > O o rLg^^zr-|5 o o M II gsiisi CO O Ul Ui ^ Q Kl O O O ^ £ M>§i§ UJ UJ ^ g QC O > \ ss X 4 4 g®2S 4_ UJ .0 Ml (0 Z X X >0 Kl Z CM I- rl* <J U O Kl ®®5B a^SSEs I M M Q £ h* KHZ ®S{2£2M,i Ko X X Kl 3 CO ^ Z Z 5 Kl O U U 4^ Z X^ g 0 4X0 OZ^4 X 4 lU auja X O UJ Xox a (M X X X UJ ^ I X M MK> g o o Xz o Kl UJ UJ g in H I- Kl z V) </) in 3 o UJ UJ Q Kl o -j -j .0 £ w X X £ a 0 4X0 liii X O K> S4 §;; g CM uj UJ <f Kl M X •« > X X O Kl Kl 4 UJ UJ X in«M ^ >- > 0 m s 9^ O ^Kl OC M °s __CM M ca 9Kl O _ fc M> Kl'^.jgSS CM >- -j X o inI O M 4 CL::s9gH•1 X (/) z rl 9 Kl4|S pH 4 Kl UJ Cl z X 4 si?. i» t' CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLIC^^^ PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ^-|7r>^ /[Ic^irfU- ^ Vff\} ^r^fZ/^AfZ>__________ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ^“7~‘//7^ 3 OV^Srrv nr OFFICE ? f» ‘.'f W‘/KMIA w'w*Vtavy vvv ^ r Please attach legal description to application if not includedv"i;vL.P’ ^‘^''0.00 ^ on required survey. nm-1'’" ^ APPLICANT fiihn: F’rcunK K^dcu// Phone (home) ^-7^ Name _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Phone (work) _ _ _ _ _ _ Address ^g O'TU _ _ _ _City<^^^i;i5 Ac Zip OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) _ _ _ _ _ Ncime (f^OV C f^Of^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Address^CTm fYvR/)0\/\LLJ?, ^____________ City fSyCfyL5J£/l Zip <7^? Date Property Acquired ___________________________ (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee __ _ _ $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application _ _ _ _ $125.00 Residential accessory Use _ _ _ _ $150.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _ _ _ _ $150.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _ _ _ _ $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg _ _ _ _ $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use ^ $200.00 Land Alteration _ _ _ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ly Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more _ _ _ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore _ _ _ _ PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS _ _ _ _ $200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _ _ _ _ $250.00 Vacation _ _ _ _ $175.00 Easement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _ _ _ _ $250.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _ _ _ _ $100.00 Appeals Other - see fee schedule PRESENT OSE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Describe request in detail: REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271). 3. Plat Map. 4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). 6. Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OP LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPY (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date- - - - - - - - - - APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her )cnowledge. Applicant's signature ^Date ?/? cr/y/) 7 / OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and veri/ica^oiv^of this request. , . ^f Date _ _ _ _ _Owner's signature - - - - - - ^ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advis' the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION #1550 /r Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address A/^ ^ iZn tJ (D Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT , ~j?e^da./l Name Phone (home) _ _ Phone (work) Address:Citvi^T^A/lS Zip; OWNER (if different than applicant) Name (?r>V r/iF^lVPC4lb Phone (home ) 47^-* ^ XDi "7 ___ Phone (work) Ci\iYIdP-^ Zip; ^ ! _________________ (month/year) Address; 5~A)^a 4)/\LU? Date Property Acquired _ _ _ _ _ I (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Present Use of Property _ _ _ _ _Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQOFST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request ir detail; ll\) llt^Oi'ZO- VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ _ Lot Area Lot Width _ _ Setback Variances ( y Front/' ^ Other _ _ Hardcover Side Rear) . I HARDSHIP . ^Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strictenforcement of zoning regulations:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ DESCRIPTION OP ONUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150* (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. 6. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views. 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OP LARGE DOCUMENTS OR_ _ A WORKING COPY (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Applicant's Signature Certification by Clerical Department that Variance Application is complete. Initialed by Clerical Staff:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best^of his/her knowledge. Date j OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification oft this^r^^uest. DateOwner's Signature Applicant must have all submittals'±ht^ the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. Itt (Jz JJq^ (Cicfr^__________ ___________C^Vr^ 4> ^ i/Luu 2n^c^.,<LtjL /_ __-.- ......................................................................................................- --. --------------- K^^SJMtJJJCL^ ^U^-4-AMru!___c>U-^a.y^ <2-<^Lk2uL,^------- u^:^72, /^ur?-r)«L 6^-^ ------ ___Ow-/^...(X^ __^^^-z::^JtAa/ __(X^'L.ClAj-tf^tiu. . ^T^L l ^jlus C ,-V^_________ __________^ . _________________________________________________________ _________i/jX' iyy)£.iL^'. S^A>2, yO<^4s8-x-^ ____________"7^ _________!^l£l . P/ULCjL^^(Zy^ ^ _________jS^jUv r.<^t._ (Lz^tc^oM^., P^-. -P^LaJup^ ^^^.Uefi^^-'C'TL^’^^^^fU- _€/ Apd-/:- -----1„ - CliUp-' upi^ 6cxtuUf' y^pLcx. --------------- i/. * I ‘.' k- i.- J------------- 7^'•i i/zJLL/lJjt^ ^rCLjcJu^Krj Ct.<^ a ^ ^ "T UjrtruJ^ d^yn-' (jLdLaLi-u:^ ^7^ d^<^L.^ssC CcZ^yTLjS^ ux.^ ^ ^ S<J.L^6z.cjAstk.ur:?^ <Z>^^ Uxr^^ex,.r\^ 0-v-lp l Us(jLL> 'iMl HuId^'L C/rtL^xJ^ ^ (2dL^ L^'txJj^^ ^ LtAdCA.^^ X_jcJ^iL^ CacJ^jur^ \..ydylu^ Sd&^judx^crrd Ccr^tJjd^ L'']J^^<xXL^ L^ i'rL^*'iXst^7L^^^ ixu-t^ ^nX ’U^^ ^ clX^ .JLt^ ^'■AxUK^ (Lc^-t^\) 0'dU"lxa^lL,/l^, dZ.'Ui /?ir)e.^jMy)<^ {JULAJ l X~> Cj^OiXJ^ t^'L'^.'UriiL^^JL^ cX-vu^ tdt^Ly)l^:-^-lX-/y^ ?i^3o ^ -^c^t.^fcuu/^ £,^ iAj£iJ ^iXiX^fLy- y:iJa^r^ d-iciXdt LX^ dxnjJud^ ,\d^ UJt^ CL6 z <JL cI LA^i-rri crzxx^ ,.<X^________ K^Xo^l X, utriL. Uihy(ju\j <2^Tt^£UA.a:tjuryuJCCCrU. 'jJu^'?r\aJ^ ■ __________^.............................................. I I k:)' tH '.'5 ^ i^r*»ki• «i*»‘^«?**•»<*• I#23TIi1lii<*•# 2.r;- ■*; rr • r:.'; ••:•.:; u. -. m *r , • • V •• .• I •*!- •-, *•»! !•.• %'■•»•»• f »r «»»IV t»%P»* i n %■ A "r I , I* 4 • 'r • . . • • . •••^J .*lwr*T -*r Bonestroo Rosene Anderllk & Associates Engineers 4 ArcNtects June 18. 1990 Oao G SonesnxL BotxffT W Boiene PE jowi C AnoefWt. PE M«V«1 L Sorvau PE P<rviia E Ti#me» P£ Jam« C Ojor, PE Gieno » Cook. P£ TNjmii E PE 9oee<T G Sc^unicnt PE So jn M EDOfkn. C P A kMn A Goraon PE lUnna w Fcjwf. PE Oonjkl C SurqjntX. PE xtry A Soukion. PE Mark A Hkmon. PE >0 K F«kJ. PE M«njf T R«utm«vi PE jtxn ’ ®W*fne. PE ' O UJMeta PE Tnotrn* M P«Mon PE VKnjet C Lyncn PE Jkmn « MMndL PE (Cennetn P AnOewi PE M<rk « Boft PE BooefT C Bunek. aia Thonni E Angul PE HOWVO A iarHon PE Dkruet j Edgenon PE MJfk A Sf« PE P^Ap J CiswW PE lynioi Mjmnei PE Mkfk O VAon. PE Thomas • Anoe-son AIA Gary f Byianoer. PE Mrir< B Jensen. P£ L PtMkp &ai«« ML P.E Bene C Pkimart. A lA Agnes M Bma AlCP Jerry O Penzicn PE Ceciko Ovier PE Charles A Enckson Leo M Pawe *ky HananM Olson '/O l||U51990 ®®Wli OMW 2 0 1990 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay. Minnesota 55323 Attn: John Gerhardson He: 1990 Seal Coat Our File No. 13955 Dear John: Bids were received for the 1990 Seal Coat project on Friday, June 15th. The following is a suamary of the bids received. Allied Blacktop, Inc. Bituminous Roadway. Inc. ASTEC, Inc. $37,221.00 $43,391.25 $47,025.00 The low bidder on the project has completed seal coat work for the Cit/ vhe last two years. We would rec" nd that the bi^ be awarded to Allied ? acktop, Inc. Please contact this of ou have any questions. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK £ ASSOCIATES, INC. End. grc/62 2335 \»test Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 1 ,1 II ! « :« HI sn y i 5 ^ i i I t} Ip ill oI i a s «-» u i I w 5 S k. W o is a ! 8 8 i i <► c 2 ii 5 ii 3 8 -S U ■ II « M ♦-* »- 18? I 8 J 5 Sm-r- « ^ O U. U o S ffi ik 2>• •-• a H i.A» If I Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & |\j| Associates Engineers & Architects June 12, 1990 Ono G Bon«OWJ PE uoben 'M tosene. PE joynt' C Aroeflik PC Matvtn L SorvM PE Ihcnw E Tumef PE j»TiM C Oior PC Oem R Cook PE TrxxMj 6 Noyw. PE RDCen G ScPurcK PE Sufcin M Eoe'W' C P A Kenn A Go#0on PE Picnj« W FoiWf PE Oona«j C Bu»gj«L PE jerry A SoonJon PE Mjrti A Mjnjon PE TW K FtV PE M<rwe( T Riultnarwi PE aooert » PWUffie. PE D»nd O lotttota. PE Thornjj "Wervxr PE MKfvet C Lyncn. PE Jamej P Mjtjna, PE Kennev) P Anaenon PE Mam » toPv PE Sooeri C PuiieA. AIA Thomjj £ Angui PE HoiA(a« A Sintom PE Oanier J Edgertoo. PE Mar* A Se«a PE PM*0 J PE ijmaei Mamr«. PE Mark O \Mti PE Thomaj R Anoeoon. A i A Gary F ffvander PE Mii« B Jenien PE L PTMp Graver m PE Rene C Pturnart. AIA Agnn M Pmg, AIC P Jerry O Pfrmcn. PE CeCPio Okvier. PC. c^artei A Ericksori M PaweHky Orton iETING n >2^^ JUN25r990 OF OROHro % City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Attn: Mr. John Gerhardson Re: Well Nr.a^'er 3 Pay Request Oro-.'. , piJinesota Our Fii. rto. 13949 Dear Mr. Gerhardson: Attached is Pay Request Number 3 for Orono Well Number Three. The Pay Request covers work complet-»d through May 31, 1990. Please take action to pay the Contractor the amount due. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Daryl L. Kirschenman DLK:dh End. dlk/42 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 . • REQUEST FOR PAYMENT D4TE:June 12. 1990 FOR PERIOD: PLACE:From: Hay 1. 1990 PROJECT:Municloal Well No. 3 16" Production Well SPECIFIED CONTRACT & cwww a • PROJECT NO. CONTRACTOR: ADDRESS: FILE NO.: 13949 COMPLETION DATE: Revs Well DrillinR Company June 15. 1990 413 North Lexinaton Parkway St. Paul. MN 55104 TorMav 31. 1990 REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO.i. SUMMARY! 1. Original Contract Amount Change Order - ADDITION Change Order - DEDUCTION Revised Contract Amount Value Completed to Date Material on Hand Amount Earned Less Retalnage 5 Z Sub-Total 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Less Amount Paid Previously AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO.:. 70,155,00 70.155.00 45.044.00 0.00 45.044.00 2.252.20 42,791.80 31.771.80 11.020.00 Recommended for Approval by: BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK fc ASSOCIATES, INC. )l^L OWNER APPROVAL: By_ _ _ _ _ _ By_ _ _ _ _ _ Date:Approved Bvr KEYS WELL DF.ILLING COMPANY PR13949 PsnTFrTi Munlcioal Well No. 3 16" Production Well PAYMENT NO.t 3 PLACEt Orono. Minnesota FILE NO. :13949 roMTRACTOR! Kevs Well Drilline CrnpanY DATE:June 12. 1990 STATEMENT OF WORK Unit Esfd Quantity Amount Contract Item Unit Price Quantity To Date To Date BASE BID II - 16 INCH PRODUCTION WELL Item 1 Mobilization, transporting of materials & equipment & setting up same for construction of 16* production well L.S.$6,000.00 L S 0.5 $3,000.00 Item 2 Drill open hole into top of Limestone to set 16" production well casing L.F.35.00 315 310 10,850.00 Item 3 Place 16” casing in open hole L.F.32.00 315 312 9.984.00 Item 4 Place neat cement grout in annulas around 16" production well casing C.Y.200.00 20 24 4,800.00 Item 5 Drill 16" open hole through the Limestone and Jordan L.F.25.00 160 190 4,750.00 Item 6 Dynamite for blasting incl. labor for shooting, caps & wire Lbs.2.00 300 30 60.00 Item 7 Bail C.Y.40.00 400 250 10,000.00 Item 8 Furnish, install 6 remove air compression equipt. for air surging of the well L.S.1,000.00 L S 1 1,000.00 Item 9 Air surging of the well Hrs.100.00 40 6 600.00 Item 10 Furnish, install, 6 remove teat pump for capacity test of well L.S.2,500.00 L S Page 1 PR139^9 rPIOJeCT: Municipal Well Wo. 3 16' Production Veil PLACEr_ _ _ _Orono, Minnesota_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ CONTRACTOR: Revs Well Drilling Company_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PAYMENT NO.: FILE NO.: DATE: 13949 June 12^ 1990 STATEMENT OF WORK Contract Item Unit Unit Est'd Quantity Amount Price Quantity To Date To Date Item 11 Test pumping Item 12 Televise completed Hrs L.S Item 13 Sterilization of veil upon completion, cleanup k veld cap on 16” casing L.S. TOTAL BASE BID II - 16” PRODUCTION WELL 90.00 950.00 1,000.00 100 L S L S $45,044.00 Page 2 PR13949 PROJECT PAYMENT STATUS CITY! Orono, Minnesota PROJECT! Municipal Well Mo. 3 - 16* Production Well FILE NO.! 13949 CONTRACTOR! Keys Well Drilling Company ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT $70,155.00 DATE NO, 1 2 3 TOTAL CHANGE ORDERS $0.00 CHANGE ORDER DESCRIPTION REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT $70,155.00 TOTAL CHANGE ORDERS - ADD $0.00 PROJECT PAYMENT SUMMARY: PAYMENT NO. PERIOD FROM PAYMENT THIS VOUCHER VALUE COMPLETED RETAINAGE Start 4- 1-90 5- 1-90 3- 30-90 4- 30-90 5- 31-90 TOTAL PAYMENT TO DATE RETAINAGE FOR PAYMENT NO, TOTAL VALUE COMPLETED PR13949 $21,456.70 10,315.10 11.020.00 $42,791.80 2,252.20 $45,wh4.00 $13,850.00 33.444.00 45.044.00 $1,129.30 1.672.20 2.252.20 61490.2 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat DATE: June 14, 1990 SUBJECT: West Hennepin Human Services Appointment i;cui»a MEErmc JUN 2 51990 i-!TY CF OROf^O Attachment: A. Gary Printup Letter Dated 6/6/90 ISSUE - Selection of a individual to serve as the City's 7e"^resentative to the West Hennepin Human Services Board. INTRODUCTION - As you may recall LaDean McWilliams has been the City's representative to the West Hennepin Human Services Board for the past 5 years. Her terra continues until the end of 1990. The other individual who had been appointed was apparently not able to serve and the City did advertise for this position on June 4, 1990. DISCUSSION - In response to that, the City received one applicant who has been unable to attend the Council's last meeting. Given the Council's past interviews of this person the item was placed on the agenda to determine if in fact the Council would like to interview the person for this particular position or if they would choose to make the selection without such an interview. Additionally the City has had Lt. 3ary Cheswick representing the City but because of shift schedules etc., this has not been an appointment compatible with the meetings of the group. As such the Chief of Police has reviewed this and at this time recomiv ds that West Hennepin Human Services seek a representative * another perhaps larger police agency that could provide son.»_ whose work assignments are compatible with that of the Humtn Service Board and their meetings. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that Council having considered the applicant, appoints Gary Printup as one of its two primary representatives to the West Hennepin Human Services Board. Ayes __, Nays __. aiYCf ORONOIniiissa^ Gary Printup 1261 Briar Street _ P.O. BOX 104 ^ mUN Crystal Bay, MN 55323 6 1990 I Oy> o-^ Co-u^ai^: (Xnp/>A.cL ^zJ/iZ Cm-^c'^^ p - cxX^e^ (j)^-S-^t> AtyuZ .o/t U ^ ' ' ' /! / ''^ < cZMj^ 0-*- ZA jL /Hi-^ C^ZX.^ 0->-^ jJb^^c^ -u^ e/'^ ^ t X »\ ■ 53190.1 TOs Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Berhnardson, City Administrated DATB: May 31, 1990 SUBJECT: West Hennepin Human Services Appointment Attachment; A. Newspaper Notification B. Current Representatives ISSUE - 1. Allow Council the opportuniuy to interview individuals interested in serving on the West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board. 2. Appointment to that body. INTRODUCTION - The City has been represented on the West Hennepin Human Services Board by two primary appointments and an alternate. LaDean McWilliams continues as a primary representative. The City had appointed Marc McCabe, however, there apparently was not enough interest by Mr. McCabe in fulfilling the appointment. DISCUSSION - At the time Mr. McCabe was appointed there were not others interested in the position and as such no alternate was appointed. Notice was placed in the paper for the week of June 4, 1990 to determine if anyone was interested in the matter. To date the following individuals have applied. ALTERNATIVES 1. Interview. 2. Select. 3. Table for further consideration. 4. Extend timeline for additional applicants. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council extend the timeline for applications for this position. 990-55SS Municipal Members of West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board Suggest criteria for appointing citizens as municipal members of the West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board. 1. The individual should live in the municipality they represent. 2. He or she should have demonstrated an interest in one or more the human service areas: mental health mental retardation chemical dependency child care refugee needs services for the handi capped domestic abuse services medical/health care income assistance/maintenance job training/employment programs child welfare services services for adolescents services for the elderly services to assist low income people 3. The appointed member must be willing to: attend board meetings once a month (usually held the first Tuesday of the month, in the evening, and at a community center in the West Suburban area). _ _serve on one committee of their choice. report periodically to their city council about activi- ties of the West Hennepin Human Service Planning Br rd. 4. The length of the appointment term is generally two yearr , The West Hennepin Human Service Planning Board is a community agency formed under a municipal Joint Pcwers Agreement dedicated to icenti- fying human service needs of >-esidents in V suburban Hennepin County. It advocates for tb/. development c rvices when needed and for improved access to servivzes by resident! the area. The Board is composed of volunteer representatives irom member munici palities and agencies located in the west suburban areas. ► The City of Orono is currently seeking persons interested in applying for appointment to the West Hennepin Human Services Pla’^ning Board. The West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board acts mainly as a planning and coordinating agency through which citizens are a part of the decision making process in delivering needed health and social services for the West Hennepin area. Interested persons may apply by contacting Dorothy Hallin, City Clerk, at 473-7357 prior to Thursday, June 7, 1990. Publish as a general news item in the Pioneer the week of June A, 1990. 62190.2 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bcrnhardson, City Administrato ATE: June 21, 1990 SUBJECT: Park Commission Chair Appointment COUNCIL MEETING JUN 2 51990 CITY OF OROHO a death in the family of one of the candidates it is Jed this item be tabled to the July 9th meeting. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _ tabled to the July 9th Council meeting. Ayes that this item be , Nays. 53190.3 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato DATE: June 14, 1990 SUBJECT: Advisory Commission Appointments COUNCIL MEETING JUN 2 51990 d^ClIYOFORMIO Attachment: A. Planning Commission Appointment Memo Dated 5/24/90 (Memo Only) ISSUE - Delineation of process for future appointments. INTRODUCTION - At Council's May 29, 1990 Council meeting discussion was held regarding the appointments process. It was indicated by the Council that there was not a desire for a formal process, but that there were issues discussed that CounciImembers would like to have addressed. DISCUSSION - Attachment B represents an "informal" process thw*c would be appropriate to both the timely submission of applications together with addressing the necessary level of expectations for candidates. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Accept the information for consideration. 2. Adopt. 3. Amend and adopt. 4. Table. 5. Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - Iw is recommended that the Council accept the information and table until the July 9, 1990 meeting for discussion. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by __, Council accept the information and table until the July 9, 1990 meeting. Ayes _, Nays_. 53190.4 'J V CITY OP ORONO ADVISORY BOARD SELECTION PROCESS ADOPTED The following represents an outline of a flexible appointments process that the Council has adopted for guidelines to staff and applicants during the selection for vacancies of its various Boards. 1. When a vacancy occurs or when a term is to expire advertisements will be placed in the City's legal newspaper together with other appropriate notification of the impending vacancies. Advertisements will not be required for appointments of Chair and Vice Chair. 2. Notices will contain a closing date for accepting applications for purposes of administrative ease. The Council by a majority vote can either direct further solicitation of people or indicate by majority vote ones that they will accept after the established application deadline . 3. Applications should be in the form of a letter expressing interest and a resume of experience, particularly experience that may be relevant to the position from individuals who are new to the process. Letters of intent will be requested from incumbents. 4. Council will hold interviews at one Council meeting and may extend the interview period if it desires to a subsequent meeting unless a different process is indicated prior to such interviews. 5. Following interviews Council will then decide what appointments they desire to make to the various vacancies. 6. Upon appointment of an individual, the City will send out letters from the Mayor's signature indicating appointment or thanking people for participation in the process. 51690/5 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City AdministratJ DATE: May 24, 1990 SUBJECT: Planning Commission Appointments Attachments; A. Planning Commission Appointments Memo Dated 5/1/90 B. Petition Dated 5/23/90 C. Ordinance #31, Second Series D. Use Letter Dated 5/23/90 ITTJlatfftVCHjr'A ISSUE 1. Discussion of appointment process 2. Determine if Council desires to appoint two vacancies on the Planning Commission. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's March 26, 1990 meeting Council directed staff to solicite additional applicants to see if there were persons, primarily lakeshore residents, who might be interested in serving on the Planning Commission. As a result of that, the City received 5 additional applicants, most of whom were interviewed at the May 14, 1990 Council meeting. On May 16, 1990 the staff received a call from Mr. Rollie Martin that he had not received the notice, but would be available for the May 29th meeting. Staff requested he be present. In a conversation on May 24, 1990, CounciImember Goetten requested that the issue of appointment process be placed on the agenda in advance of the discussion of the appointments. DISCUSSION Issue 1. Appointment process. The Council has not had a formal appointment process adopted. In the past an informal process was used establishing application "deadlines" for the purpose of being able to send out letters of application in the packet to Council. Interviews were set for a meeting and generally the decision made at the following Council meeting. In the past Council has allowed applicants who could not be at an initial meeting to do so later and also applicants for one position to be included with selection process for vacancies on other Boards after the "deadlines" for those other Boards where vacancies had occurred. The only effective deadline was the actual appointments with Council being aware of which were late applicants and which appeared for interviews. Some cities have formal processes established where others do it on an ad hoc basis. Issue 2. The following individuals have expressed their interest in serving on the Planning Commission; Jeff Johnson Steve Johnston Candy Rowlette Rollie Martin Ralph Bagley Randy Weestrand - Lakeshore Resident - Lakeshore Resident - Lakeshore Resident - Lakeshore Resident Rural/Urban U R R U U R (Subsequent to the meeting of May 14, 1990 Ward Edwards requested his name be withdrawn. On May 1 5, 1990 at a visit to City Hall regarding the Park Commission appointment Sherokee Use indicated a possible interest in applying for the Planning Commission. In a follow-up phone conversation this week staff asked if she was interested in applying. As she indicated in her letter she felt it inappropriate to apply after the dealine.) The designations established for the Planning Commission are 2 Urban, 2 Rural, 2 At Large and 1 Lakeshore. The Council guidelines on the matter allow them diversions as they see fit. Designations of current Planning Commission members are: Charles Kelly Maureen Bellows Ed Cohen James Hanson Sara Moos At Large At Large At Large R ALTERNATIVES Issue 1. 1. Continue an informal process on a vacancy by vacancy basis for advisory Boards. 2. Request staff develop a formal process for presentation to Council at the 6/11/90 meeting for advisory boards. 3. Table for further consideration. 4. Take no action. Issue 2. 1. Appoint persons to fill the vacancy. 2. Table for further consideration. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that Council appoint _ and as members to serve three year terms on the Planning Commission, these terms will expire March 31, 1993. Ayes _, Nays _. cc: Applicants (Memo only) L 5190.(Irr^Qffmrr /f TO: FROM: DATS: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator May 1, 1990 SUBJECT: Planning Commission Interviews Attachment: A. Planning Commission Appointments Memo Dated 4/6/90 B. Letters From Applicants: Candace Rowlette Rollie Martin Ralph Bagley Randy Weestrand ISSUE - 1. Interview persons for Planning Commission. 2. Selection of person INTRODUCTION - At the Council's April 9, 1990 Council meeting requested that additional persons be solicited for As a response staff placed additional ads Council Planning Commission. _ ^ in the newspaper to determine if there were persons interested particularly those who were lakeshore residents. DISCUSSION - In addition to the two individuals Jeff Johnson, who is currently an incumbent on the Planning Commission and who may soon become a lakeshore owner together with Steve Johnston, who had applied last year for a position, the City has received the following as applicants: Candace E. Rowlette (Unable to attend 5/14 because of previous commitment) Rollie M. Martin Ralph C. Bagley Randy Weestrand As you will recall you will be appointing two persons from the 6 interested of which Jeff Johnson is an incumbent. In addition the Planning Commission has not had the Planning Commission Chair and Vice Chair officially appointed effective 1 April, 1990 so they request the following persons be appointed: Chair - Charles Kelley Vice Chair - Maureen Bellows ALTERNATIVES - 1. Interview the candidates. 2. Determine if other candidates should be solicited. 3. Appoint two Planning Commissioners. 4. Appoint a Chair and Vice Chair. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that following interviews that the Council table the selection of additional Planning Commission members until its May 29th Council meeting, at which time it might have the chance to interview those not able to attend this Council meeting, but that it select _ _ and _ _ as the Chair and Vice Chair for the Planning Commission for 1 April, 1990 to 31 March, 1991. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by , the Council table the selection of additional Planning Commission members until the May 29, 1990 Council meeting. Council appoints _ _ and _ _ and Chair and Vice Chair of the Planning Commission for 1 April, 1990 to 31 March, 1991. Ayes _, Nays _. 61490.3 /S TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat DATE: June 14, 1990 SUBJECT: Lake Use Management COUNCIL MEETING JUN 2 51990 CITY OF ORONO Attachment:A. City of Orono Letter Dated 6/18/90 (Previously transmitted to Council) B. City of Orono Letter Dated 6/19/90 to Other Cities (Letter only) C. Lake Use Committee Memo Dated 5/7/90 (Memo Only) D. LMCD Memo on Cooperative Agreeemnt for Jurisdictional Dredging Dated 6/12/90 E. Village of Minnetonka Beach Letter Dated 6/15/90 F. City of Spring Park Letter Dated 6/12/90 G. City of Minnetonka Letter Dated 6/8/90 H. City of Wayzata Letter Dated 6/6/90 ISSUE - 1. Presentation to Council of submittal as part of the public comments review process on the LMCD plan. 2. Allow opportunity for Council to discuss further action steps they desire at this point. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's June 11, 1990 meeting it was requested that a letter be prepared expressing concerns regarding the plan as it relates to the statutory authority for review. Additionally it was directed that a letter with action steps be transmitted with those comments to other cities. DISCUSSION - At this point further activity on the plan it would be appropriately delayed until the LMCD Board has an opportunity to review the comments and decide what direction it may take on the plan at a meeting of the LMCD Advisory Committee presently scheduled for Thursday, June 28, 1990 at 7:00 P.M. (Should Council members desire to be in attendance it may be of assistance in pro’^oting the City's objectives.) Depending on the Lake Use Task Force/Committee direction it may be appropriate that they begin developing objectives for other lake use related items which the City itself can undertake. Issues for local adoption could include: - Undertaking governance of dockage as part of the city's land use licensing - Have input on the LMCD's consideration for dredging as noted in Attachment D. - Develop means to be more effective in the control of marinas. In addition the Committee may desire to look at developing alternative means to enhance the environment for adoption by the LMCD including items to better allocate use during peak periods. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Accept the information. 2. Establish another meeting. 3. Select topics for such a meeting. 4. Table for further consideration. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that after accepting the information wait for the work on the LMCD's plan pending the outcome of the Board's review of comments, but in the meantime establish a date for committee to establish its goals and objectives for the next 6 to 12 months. QF.;*; aRONCih CITl of UKUi^O Post Office Box 66 •Crystal Bay, Minoesou 55323 • Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka June 19, 1990 This letter and attachments were mailed 6/20/90 to: Manager, Mayor and individual CounciImembers of LMCD member cities Orono Planning Commission members Orono Park Commission members Department Heads LMCD 25 Year Comprehensive Plan Jabriel Jabbour LMLOA, P.O. Box 596, Excelsior Dear On behalf of the City of Orono, we appreciate the way you have helped your community by participating in the review process for the LMCD's 25 Year Plan. As noted at the meetings, several issues were raised. The attached information is the City of Orono's additional submission as part of the public process. As mentioned previously in our preliminary draft, the City of Orono is concerned as to the LMCD's traditional role vs. the emphasis we see in the Plan. Additionally, in the attached letter, we have raised the concern as to t*ie authority related to the 25 Year Plan objectives and its review process. It is our understanding that the LMCD Board will be meeting to discuss comments and direct a consultant to develop a final draft. We encourage you to undertake the following steps: Spend the time with your representative to ensure that he or she is reflecting your concerns in the final draft of the plans. (The Advisory Board is presently scheduled to meet at 7:00 P.M., Thursday, June 28, 1990 to discuss the comments received.) If there are substantial changes, encourage your representatives to vote for another review period. If substantial changes have been made in response to the cities' comments, such a rehearing may gain critical support and stop submission to Metropolitan Council as a "comprehensive plan". BUILDING & ZONING - 473-7357 ASSESSING ADMIMSm^TION & HNANCE - 473-735* FAX - 47341510 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 •• m City June 19, 1990 Page 2 If submission is made to the Metropolitan Council as a comprehensive plan, continue to present your position for review, and together, we as cities, can then take further steps to protect our rights and the future of the lake. We appreciate your timely reviews of these documents cuid all the work that it enta: Is. Again, we remain available for your comments• Sincerely, James R. Grabek Mayor " TO: FROM: DATE: @^[F 4390. Mayor and city Council Mark E. Bernhardson, city Administrator May 7, 1990 CL SUBJECT: Lake Use Management Attachment: ISSUE ?■its: St: - ?? E. Lake Use Manafement Or|aniliuon"""®^®”®"'= <Javelopment for to lake management Partfcu!l"^"« interest A. Structure for development of policies. -LL%e"rV/rTi”/uY= Because of the 1 srirs.n.H.: MMafemeLL"e°s*i:ab]Thdeal with on «T^ ‘®® *=° <ievelop policy ^'al'e Use ^ISCUSSi nw - The ' Sthi? thaS strictly the '®=°™anding-a broader look‘at'the . ' ''^.V^VeTZr 'rr:* Many of these apply to lake use in general. Such concerns include the amount of traffic generated on the lake particularily as it relates to power craft. Additional issues relate to the impact on both land and lake use of facilities such as marinas may have on abutting and other lakeshore residents. The ouroose of any committee formulated would be to determine if there is an appropriate policy direction that the City desires to undertake along with attendant strategies to achieve it. STRUCTURE — The possible development of a Lake Use Management Committe e; whose primary focus is on Lake Minnetonka with an eye to other lake resources in the community, could be composed of three to seven persons including CounciImembers , Planning Commission, Park Commission members and other interested residents . SCOPE - The scope of the Committee could be broad enough to include all lake use management issues but the proposed areas for initial discussion (to some degree borrowing the format of uMCD s report) are as follows: A. General Philosoohy - One of the keys to determining whether the policy directions formulated in the LMCD s plan are in concert or opposition to those of the City of Orono is to look at the general premise on which the plan is based. If such premises on the surface differ from those of the City, determine if there is a way to jointly achieve the objectives of each. B. on Shore Facilities - This is probably the area of largest concern at the present time because it is the one that most directly generates the amount of traffic on the lake. This includes (perhaps in a broader definition than LMCD's) marinas, lake oriented parks, Dublic access, residential docks, municipal docks, and homeowner docks. The fact that the plan does development of certain facilities that generate traffic, may well be of concern. C Shoreland Regulations - These are the regulations which generally apply to land use within 1,000 feet of the lakeshore/ While in Orono not all the land within 1%00 feet is within our lakeshore district regulaiions, the vast majority of it is. These regulations gen.^rally let minimums and most of ® (fen'?!above those setforth in Attachment A of LMCD s , regulations. It is .presently anticipated thst .^e^oh _ community.is free to be.more testrictive, but not,less^ , restrictive than the regulations. ... D. -Lake Ose Management Organization - This 4®• . • ‘as to^haTorgaiiizanons have jurisdiction, how-that s,.-v .... -coordinated; and, how that kev organization (if-there is =is governed,; 7 - continuation of the present LMCD organization - Al?er1fativl°^stricture ^for*^LMCD or an alternative organization It is anticipated that a City Lake Ose Management Committee would Ho advisory to the Council on policy matters and that policy recommendations would be forwarded for working either with LMCD, develop into City ordinances where appropriate commission and/or establish as operational priorities for the City. alternatives - ■ 1. committee Structure a. Determine number or members b. 'ny categories of members c. Nominating people to the Committee d. Defining role of the Committee 2. Scope of Activitya. Range of issues to be addressed b. Recommendations as far as: Policy Objectives iglo meetYng wLther they desire to go ahead or not. “if i\ is desYredf would be established together with nominations for service on that Committee. Ay — y — cc: JoEllen Hurt, LMCD Representative Gabriel Jabbour, 985 Tonkawa Road, Long Lake Department Heads _ . .*rTi 1 !. -1-!*-y ^I ••• . i . . . . - - . , -i- -- V I « .« . -m I ... .. .^ • * » •-»> • ^ i .* ... • • -•* »• * •••• f ’ « .V ;/ • LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING iQ TTiVOiWnexrr D LAKE MINNETONKA DREDGING POLICY Proposal for an Interagency Agreement 7i00 p.m., Wednesday, June 27, 1990 Tonka Bay City Hall JUfi 13 1990 BACKGROUND: Minnesota Statutes Sec. 105.42, Subd. 1, requires a written permit from the MN DNR commissioner for excavating the beds of public waters. The MN DNR and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District regulate improvements by riparian land owners of the beds, banks and shores of lakes, streams and marshes in order to preserve them for beneficial use. The DNR's purposes in regulating dredg^'.^ serve to limit excavation of materials through dredging in order tr. 1. Preserve the natural chaiacter of Lake Minnetonka and its shore. 2. Minimize encroachment, change or damage to the environment, partic ularly the ecosystem of the lake. 3. Control deposition of materials excavated from Lake Minnetonka. 4. Preserve the waters and adjacent lands from sedimentation and other physical and biological effects. The MCWD's purpose in regulating dredging are to: 1. Preserve the natural appearance of shoreline areas, recreational, wildlife and fisheries resources of the waters. 2. Preserve the water quality. The littoral zone of the lake (that part less than 15' deep) is most sensi tive to being disturbed. It is the most biologically productive and sensitive portion of a lake. The sensitive ecosystem supports plant and animal life. Clay and muck bottom is known to retard seepage of water from the lake. Dredging policies have a direct impact on recreational and navigational uses on Lake Minnetonka. Alternatives to dredging, such as dock extension, floating docks or alternative dock locations require review and approval of the LMCD. This public informational meeting proposes to examine dredging needs, effects and alternatives. Dredging depths presently allowed and proposed for the duration of low water lake level conditions will be evaluated. Your presence and comment with representatives of the above three organiza tions is encouraged and appreciated. 6-12-90 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT LAKE USE COMMITTEE AGENDA 4:30 p.in., Monday, June 18, 1990 LMCD Office, Wayzata 1"1 Publication date of Personal Watercraft Ordinance: 6/13, effective 6/14 2. Summer rules amendment to incorporate Personal Watercraft rules and minor adjustments 3. Critique of June 9 Water Structures/Lake Environment Jnsoection 4. Progress report and update on Summer Olympics events scheduled for July 8-12 on Lake Minnetonka, per Bert Foster 5. Charter Boat renewal applications received in last 30 days: A1 & Alma's XII, Choral "C", Godfather II, Godfather III, Miss Minnetonka 6. Underwater Found Obstructions siting and buoy placement status 7. Special Event deposit refunds: to James McNaraee, Chairman for Westonka M.D.A. fishing contest, Saturday, May 26 8. Water Patrol report: a. Citation incidents b. Observations on lake use density c. Charter Boat inspection results d. Additional reports 9. Additional business recommended by the committee 6/12/90 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT unless the PWC is being driven perpendicular to the shoreline, and to or from the nearest point of water 300 feet from the shoreline or parallel to the shoreline from one location to another in a manner which is not repetitive. AUTOMATIC CUT-OFF DEVICE. Automatic cut off device provided by the manufacturer must be used. The device must not be altered, disabled or removed. WAKE JUMPING. Jumping wakes of another watercraft is not allowed within 150 feet of that watercraft. CARELESS OPERATION. A PWC must at all times be operated in a reasonable and prudent manner. Maneuvers which unreasonably or unnecessarily endanger life, limb or property, including, but not limited to weaving through congested boat trafficor swerving at the last possible moment to avoid collision shall constitute careless, reckless or grossly negligent operation. RENTAL. Persons renting a PWC are subject to age and operator permit requirements. Minimum age for rental is 16 years. Rental agencies must provide summary of the laws governing the safe operation of PWC on Lake Minnetonka. PROLONGED OPERATION. No personal watercraft shall be operated in a single area for more than thirty consecutive minutes. A person in control of such watercraft shall be subject to citation. A single area is defined as an area of the lake which is so small that the noise emanating from personal watercraft operated continuously within it is liable to be a nuisance or cause substantial annoyance to residents of one or more shoreline properties during all of the time of such continuous operation. (continued) LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT NEWS RELEASE Contact: Gene Strommen 473-7033 June 6, 1990 /. SUBJECT: Personal Watercraft Ordinance for Lake Minnetonka adopted, effective June 14, 1990 The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) has acted to bring a balance among personal watercraft (PWC) (jet ski) users and other persons enjoying the waters and shore of Lake Minnetonka, according to LMCD Chair Dave Cochran, Chair, Greenwood. A series of user group meetings and equipment noise level testing started in August, 1989. That was followed by a public hearing, public committee and board meetings. The final ordinance resulted from its adoption May 23 by the LMCD Board. DEFINITION. The ordinance defines a "pprc^nal watercraft"as a water craft less than 14 feet in length which uses a motor powering a water jet pump, designed to be operated by a person sitting, standing or kneeling on, rather than the conventional manner of sitting or standing inside, the watercraft. HOURS. Hours of operation are limited to between sunrise and sunset. SPEED. Speed is limited to 5 miles per hour or a minimum wake within 150 feet of any shoreline, swimmer, anchored bcit, person fishing, mooring, dock or other water structure. OPERATION WITHIN 300 FEET OF SHORELINE. Operation between 150 and 300 feet of the shoreline Is also limited to 5 miles per hour or a minimum wake (continued) LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT PERSONAL FLOTATION DEVICE. A U.S. Coast Guard approved personal flotatloii device must be worn by all persons operating or riding on a PWC. AGE OF OPERATION. State of Minnesota statutes govern operator age for PWC operation. State statute requires that, except in case of an emergency, no person under the age of 13 years shall operate or be permitted to operate any personal watercraft over 24 horsepower unless there is present in the watercraft, in addition to the operator, at least one person of the age of 18 years or over. No person 13 years of age or over, but less than 18 years of age, may operate a PWC greater than 24 horsepower, without possessing a valid operators permit issued by the commissioner of Natural Resources, unless there is a person 18 years of age or over in the PWC. LMCD Lake Use Committee Chair Bob Pillsbury, Minnetonka, credits subcommittee chair Bert Foster, Deephaven, and the entire committee and board for their support of enacting this important regulation on behalf of maintaining a quality recreational experience on Lake Minnetonka. Complete copies of the ordinance are available through the LMCD, 402 E Lake St, Wayzata 55391. 473-7033 XXX Paul D. Baertschi Aiiorney al Law Direct Dial (612) 337-9230 Holmes & Graven CHARTERED 470 Pillsbury Center. Minneapulis. Minnesota 55402 (612) 337-9300 June 5, 1990 Eugene Strommen Executive Director Lake Minnetonka Conservation District 402 East Lake Street Wayzata, MN 55391 RE: Boating Guide Pamphlet Amendments Dear Mr. Strommen: Mr. LeFevere asked me to suggest some additions to the boating handbook based upon the personal watercraft ordinance. Following is a list of some suggested additions. In the paragraph entitled "Age Minimum for Operator of Watercraft" after the phrase "operate or be permitted to operate any watercraft," add "(including a personal watercraft)." At the end of that sentence, add the following sentence: "Persons at least 13 years of age, but less than 18 years of age may operate such watercraft with a valid watercraft operator's permit from Minnesota or the person's state of residence, or with a person 18 years of age or older in the watercraft." A new section entitled "Personal Watercraft" as follows: "Personal watercraft means a watercraft less than 14 feet in length powered by a water jet pump and which can be operated by persons sitting, standing or kneeling. ALL WATERCRAFT LAWS APPLY TO PERSONAL WATERCRAFT UNLESS THEY CONFLICT WITH PERSONAL WATERCRAFT LAWS, IN WHICH CASE THE PERSONAL WATERCRAFT RESTRICTIONS CONTROL. Soeed Restrictions. *^^o person shall operate a personal watercraft at a speed in excess of five miles per hour or at a speed which results in more than a minimum wake within 150 feet of any shoreline, swimmer, anchored boat, person fishing, mooring, dock or other water structure. Between 150 and 300 feet of shore, the five mile per hour and minimum wake restrictions apply unless the personal watercraft is being driven perpendicular to the shoreline and to or from the nearest point of water 300 feet from the shoreline or parallel to the shoreline in a non-repotitive manner. Eugene Strommen June 5, 1990 Page 2 Other Restrictions. No person shall operate a personal watercraft with an altered, disabled or removed automatic cut-off device. Jumping the wake within 150 feet of another watercraft is prohibited. Careless or reckless operation of a personal watercraft, such as by weaving through congested boat traffic or swerving close to another watercraft, are prohibited. Operation of a personal watercraft in a single area for more than 30 consecutive minutes such as may cause annoyance to others is prohibited. Operation is prohibited between sunset and sunrise. U. S. Coast Guard approved personal floatation devices must be worn at all times when on a personal watercraft. The minimum age provisions for watercraft operators apply to operators of personal watercraft as welL Rental of Personal Watercraft. No person shall rent a personal watercraft of any kind to a person who is less than 16 years of age or who is age 16 to 18 and not in possession of an operator's permit required by law. Persons renting personal watercraft must provide to renters a summary of laws and rules governing the operation of personal watercraft, instruction as to the actual operation of the personal watercraft, and a U.S. Coast Guard approved personal floatation device." Very truly yours. Paul D. Baertschi PDB:jes RECEIVED JUN 8 1990 VILLAGE OF MlNNETONKAr^fe MINNETONKA BEACH. MINNESOTA I 'm 1 8 1990 June 15, 1990 TO;Mayors of LMCD Participating Cities SUBJECT;LMCD's Long-Term Management Program Enclos^-1, please find for your information, a copy of the Resolution of the City of the Village of Minnetonka Beach with respect to the LMCD's Long-Term Management Program. This was adopted at the June 11, 1990 City Council Meeting. Yours very truly, Robert P. Abdo Mayor /jls ■ ^ City of the Village of Minnetonka Beach June 11, 1990 Minnetonka Beach, having participated in LMCD's deliberations, appreciates the considerable efforts of the many people who have worked hard to develop LMCD's Long-Term Management Program. Much valuable information has been compiled about the lake and its future. Many desirable suggestions have been made for its management. After considerable discussion regarding LMCD's Long-Term Management Program the following resolution was adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council held on June 11, 1990 upon motion by Councilman Melamed, seconded by Councilman Broderson: RESOLUTION NUMBER 1990-7 WHEREAS, Minnetonka Beach is located in the center of Lake Minnetonka, and virtually surrounded by its waters, and; WHEREAS, Lake Minnetonka is its principal resource and the reason most of its inhabitants have chosen to live in this residential community, and; WHEREAS, Minnetonka Beach and its residents have a vital interest in seeing that the lake is managed and preserved as a precious local as well as regional asset, and; WHEREAS, The Village of the City of Minnetonka Beach has an established Long Range Plan with a Mission statement which reads as follows; The Village of Minnetonka Beach has, through its elected officials, the mission to govern and provide services to residents that will enable them to enjoy a quality of life that is . ^ . comparable to the best available in Minnesota, consistent with the present Village land areas, and to do so with minimum ordinances and regulations. Elected officials, employees and resident volunteers shall anticipate community needs, ensure that the Village lives within its means, and retain the confidence of the residents. WHEREAS, parts of LMCD's program appear to give LMCD authority over land use within 1,000 feet of the shoreline and over dock tnat extena into the lake from shore which conflicts with portions of the Mission statement that charge elected officials to govern and provide services to those who live within its boundaries and do so with minimum ordinances and regulations, and; WHEREAS, Minnetonka Beach recognizes that there are 14 municipalities whose lands adjoin the Lake and that the Metropolitan area, Hennepin County and the State of Minnesota have interests and tnat there is a need for cooperative effort by these governmental bodies in conservation of the lake^ 1. That the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District is the logical entity to best suggest guidelines, to encourage cooperative efforts and to provide assistance as requested by individual municipalities with respect to use, maintenance and protection of Lake Minnetonka. 1st of 2 Pages 2nd of 2 Pages 2. That LMCD should work through established lakeshore governments on matters over which such governments have responsibilities within their own boundaries such as: shoreland management; onshore facilities; private docks of lakeshore home owners; wetlands and upland environmental protection. 3. That since individual lakeshore governments lack powers to set uniform policies on the lake itself, LMCD needs powers beyond persuasion in matters such as: boat density; balance between various classes and sizes of boats; public access; public docks; marinas; condominium docks; navigational markers; noise levels; public safety; water quality; and fisheries. 4. That LMCD should work through and not duplicate but coordinate services provided by existing governmental bodies or agencies which have responsibilities and authority over matters concerning Lake Minnetonka. These include: law enforcement; pollution; licensing; navigational marking; etc. 5. That the concept that those who use Lake Minnetonka should help bear the costs of maintaining and enhancing it is endorsed. 6. That expanding the Board of LMCD from 14 to 18 members by the addition of one representative from each of the four governmental bodies, as suggested in the Long-Term Management Program, is not inconsistent with the objectives of Minnetonka Beach. 7. That, while it is impractical for Minnetonka Beach to critique each and every item in the proposed LaJ^e Minnetonka Long-Term Management Program, it requests the plan be revised to comply with the position of Minnetonka Beach as set forth herein. 8. That the City Clerk is instructed to file, prior to June 18, 1990, a certified copy of this resolution with the LMCD office in Wayzata, Minnesota. The City Council voted unanimously in favor of the above resolution. Attested by Mayor ( City Clerk The above is a true copy of a resolution adopted at a regular council meeting of the City of the Village of Minnetonka Beach at which a quorum was present held June 11, 1990. June 11, 1990 City Clerk Date Cit D/ttna P 0. BOX •152. SPRING =APK, MINNESOTA 55254 • SEone: 47t-5Q5l • QN LAK£ MINNETONKA Mayor Jerome P PocKvam 471-9515 Councitinemtiers Don Dili 471-3185 Pon Kraemer 471-7229 wm. 0. Weeks 471-7255 June 12, 1990 Mr. Eugene Strcmmen, Executive Director Lake Minnetonka Conservation Di.strict 402 East Lake Street Wayzata, 55291 Dear Mr. Strotrnen: Carl Widmer 471-3429 Pursuant to the review process whic.h has been established by the LMCD, Spri.ng Park has analyzed and evaluated the draft Lake Minnetonka Long-Term Management Program. On behalf of Soring Park, we are submitting a formal position paper which is attached outlining t.he City's conceins with the LMCD Plan. I.n summary, the LMCD Plan aoplication wit.hin Spring Park is unacceptable with regard to its current form. There is great concern with the Plan's lack of attention to detail and spec ifics as it relates to existing land use patterns in shoreland areas. II the LMCD Plan is going to be an effective planning tool, it must specifically address the local exceptions includ ing the high density residential, commercial, and industrial land uses found in Spri.ng Park. In this regard, we feel t.hat the LMCD's present plarr.ing effort has fallen far short of a realistic land use treacnent for ail lake area communines. Eased on t.he imolamentution schedule of t.he Plan, tne LMCD would like ail M lake ccmmunitias to adopt the Appendix C Shoreland Regulations wit.hi.n one year of t.he Plan adcotion. The City of Spring Park cannot endorse or adopt an ordinance that would in effect .nake much of its existing land uses non- conforming . Another matter to be emohasized is that Spring Park is very much opposed to the LMCD becoming a review authority in shore- land development matters. There is no desire to see ma;jor increases in LMCD staff, responsibilities, or funding needs . We feel the prooosed LMCD review is a duplication of the City process t.hac will result in additional cost and delays. Frankly, we are also concerned that the proposed advisory role of t.he LMCD will eventually evolve inco approval aut.hority removing the City’s ability to control its own deveiocment. CITY OF SPRING PARK SPRING PARK, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 90-U A RESOLUTION RESPONDING TO THE PROPOSED LAKE. MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT'S LONG TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN 'im 18 WHEREAS, the Like Minnetonka Conservation District has prepared a long term management plan for Lake Minnetonka in an effort to attain goals set in the following areas: (1) Recreation Management; (2) User Exper ience and Satisfaction; (3) Shoreland Protection; and (4) Environmental Protection, and WHEREAS, the City of Spring Park acknowledges the need for these concerns and the general protection of the Lake against pollution but feels the LMCD has over-stepped its bounds as sec forth by MN Statutes in the fol lowing areas: (1) Reducing local control of land use; (2) creating another level of government with the power to levy taxes without elected representation; (3) Reducing inherent property rights of riparian owners; (4) Failure to recognize the different natures of each of the 14 member communities; and (5) by diluting and surrendering local control of the LMCD by expanding the board to include State and County agencies WHEREAS, because of the differences in community structure and land use it is not feasible or realistic to apply a single set of guidelines for all cities on the lake, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Soring Park hereby opposes the Management Plan as wrlf’en, and submits the attached summary of concerns for the record. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY SPRING PARK THIS _ _^DAY OF JUNE, 1990 APPROVED: MAYOR ATTEST: Adminisirator/tierK/ireasurer TO: THROUGH: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL JAMES F. MILLER, CITY MANAGER ANN PERRY, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING JUNE 8, 1990 REVIEW OF THE LMCD LONG TERM MANAGEMENT PROGRAM The City has recently received the attached draft Long Term Management Program for Lake Minnetonka, prepared by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD). The Program's purpose is to maintain and enhance the recreational, environmental and aesthetic qualities of the lake for a 25 year period. The LMCD is currently taking testimony on the Long Term Management Program. Staff is requesting the City Council to react to the Program based on this review. The City Council's comments will be conveyed to the LMCD in writing. The impetus for the Program preparation came from the Metropolitan Council in 1983 following conclusions of the Metropolitan Council's Task Force on Lake Minnetonka stating that a new process for planning and regulating surface water of the Lake was needed. The LMCD Board appointed the Long Term Management Program Advisory Committee to develop the work program and oversee the preparation of twelve preliminary plans. Apparently, the Long Term Management Plan is a summary of those plans. While staff applauds the LMCD efforts for preparing the Program and inviting public participation, we have severe misgivings regarding several major policy objectives. First, the responsibility of the LMCD for managing a regional resource is a fundamental philosophical issue that should be raised with the State Legislature. Recently, the Citizens League published a report regarding the responsible entities for managing metropolitan lakes. The report was prepared because of continuing concern regarding access use conflicts, water quality and continuing shoreland development of the metropolitan water resources. This report, which staff supports, advocates that the metropolitan area lakes should be viewed as a system and that the Metropolitan Council should be responsible for planning and coordinating management of metropolitan surface area. However, this does not mean the abdication of local control or all of LMCD powers. It suggests that local entities retain power to regulate surface use to reduce conflicts. Also, the report suggests that efforts to provide public access to lakes should conti.nue to occur with responsibility resting with the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). ^ Management Plan Page Two In essence, the Citizens League report is advocating that regional lake access, planning and environmental policies be^ adopted on the regional level with implementation occurring on the local level. Staff feels that this position would benefit the City since water resources would be ^ consistent manner dependent upon their use and would benefit the public as a whole. A second major issue relates to the funding and intergovernmental objectives of the Program. Program recommends that a special taxation district be established for funding LMCD projects and operations. Further, it recommends that the appointed membership of LMCD be exoanded to also include one member of the following agencies: Metropolitan Council, Hennepin County, Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed Diltrict. While staff does not have issue with the increased membership, there is no direct fiscal accountability because the Board would continue to be appointed rather least at the present time, there is some accountability because partial funding comes from the cities. Other minor issues center upon the . eland use environmental objectives of the Program. The L^jD is advocating that the lakeshore communities adopt the DNR regulations in a consistent manner. Secondly, it is recommende that the communities abide by the requirements of the 509 Plan (water quality) now being prepared by the Minnehaha .Creek Watershed District. While staff does not foresee or issues regarding these objectives, it is unclear what the will be between the cities, watershed district and LMCD in implementing these measures. The following discusses the above issues in more detail. It should be noted that throughout the draft Management P^J^ram, the objectives are unclear in meaning and in how implementatio will occur. Staff's comments, in many instances, are questicpn regLding what is meant by the objectives. These exist even after staff met with the LMCD officials in an attempt to clarify them. Management Structure The IMCD was established in 1967 by the State '^2^®!®'=^!® broad cowers to regulate the use of the Lake. The legislation also provided > limited funding mechanism for the ^^®^; The 14 member cities proportionately share the budget based upon city-wide assessed valuation. However, no ci ^ ® . affects more than 20% of the budget. This provision currently affects only the City of Minnetonka. Management Plan Page Three Each of the LMCD communities appoint a representative to the Board of Directors which serves as its governing body. The board, in turn, hires a full time Executive Director and other staff to administer the budget and implement its policies. The proposed program would significantly alter the organization and funding of the LMCD. This raises several concerns, especially for the City of Minnetonka which would probably continue to be, either directly or indirectly, the largest funding source. First, as mentioned, it is felt use and management of Lake Minnetonka should be controlled on a regional basis, as recommended by the Citizens League report noted earlier, rather than on a modified local basis, as suggested by the proposed Long Term Management P^^“. It is apparent that the ^.*d management of Lake Minnetonka should also be considered from a regional or state-wide standpoint rather from that of the communities abutting the Lake. The LMCD Program proposes to gain a regional and State-wide perspective by adding a representative from the Metropolitan Council, Hennepin County, Hennepin Regional Parks, and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The Program contemplates that the LMCD should maintain its existing authority, but does not state how the overall public policy of promoting public use, discouraging overcrowding, and improving water quality will occur, except in a limited context. It is staffs opinion that it is difficult to address these broad issues from a local perspective and that regional policy should be adopted to coordinate long-term planning. regional policy is adopted on overcrowding, for example, all lakes would hopefully operate under similar standards for access. Then, people would have access opportunities at all lakes of similar types which may disperse current overcrowding on some lakes, such as Minnetonka. It may be the opportune time to address this issue from a regional perspective since legislative changes are required to approve the membership and funding proposals of the LMCD. Again, staff believes that the proposal offered by the Citizens League should be further explored. A second issue regarding management structure centers on accountability. As mentioned, the membership of the LMCD board will be expanded to include representation from four regional and State agencies. If this proposal is implemented, and if the LMCD obtains independent taxing authority as it is apparently suggesting, the result would be a non-elected board with ^ V . indlpendeni taxing authority. This raises serious Vi accountability questions, which the plan fails to address. Management Plan Page Four The third concern with the management structure relates to financing. The plan states that the LMCD will have new powers to essentially create a new taxing district. The new taxing district will he based upon a two-tiered approach. The first tier will tax ail fourteen lakeshore communities to a maximum of one mill. Because the "mill” concept was changed during the 1989 legislative session, it is uncertain how the LMCD will accordingly alter its proposal. Since the current legislation allows the LMCD to levy the equivalent of no more than one mill, the new authority could sub^^'ar.tially increase its budget. Apparently, existing limitat , (20% of the budget) would continue to apply so the City . Minnetonka's contribution would be capped. In addition to the tax on the lakeshore communities, a second tier, including all of Hennepin County, would also be taxed. Again, this amount would be dependent on the LMCD's annual budget. It is unclear if the second tier overlaps the first. Because of the first tier levy being applied to all of Minnetonka, a homeowner residing on Ford Road would pay the same proportionate share as one residing in the Gray's Bay area. If the second tier levy also includes Minnetonka, which is probable, then residents of Plymouth who may live close to the lake would pay less than ri;sidents in parts of Minnetonka who are farther away. Another problematic aspect of the financing plan is that the LMCD will have the same authority that cities have to issue special assessment bonds for certain activities. It is uncertain if debt service will be outside the LMCD tax levy is the case with cities. It should also be noted that LMCD obtains bonding authority, it will be virtually to eliminate it or radically alter its structure if ever desired. The bond covenants requiring taxes to bonds would most likely take legal precedence over limit as once the impossible that were retire the such attempts. Because the mCD is seeking authority to issue improvement bonds under the same statute that permits cities to incur debt for streets, sewer and water, etc., it is presumed that the same statutory regulations would apply. This means that assessments would probably be required in addition to tax levy to repay debt. Depending on the circumstances, a referendum may or not be required. It should also be noted that it is not immediately clear if creation of a special taxing jurisdiction is really the intent. For example. Management Objective 4 (page 77) says that the LMCD tax levy should be outside the statutory limitations of other \V Management Plan Page Five jurisdictions. If the LMCD is intending to levy its own taxes through a special tax district, rather than collect them from its members as is currently the case, there is no apparent need for this provision. The remaining ambiguity concerns whether the LMCD would have the authority to charge for special projects and activities through special assessments or some other mechanism beyond its taxing limit, regardless of whether they are pledged for bond repayment. It should be clear from the above that the proposed funding strategies are skeletal at best. Considerably more information is necessary before the City can be comfortable that these additional financing powers would equitably treat Minnetonka residents. This concern is compounded by the lack of any detailed information concerning future expenditures. At a minimum, in addition to refining the proposals contained in this section, the LMCD board should probably also be requested to prepare a long-range Capital Improvement Plan and operating projections for review by the cities and appropriate agencies. The preparation of these financial plans could aid in the future accountability of the LMCD if the organization exists in the future as proposed. Shoreland Protection The Management Program proposes two strategies to minimize adverse affects of development on the lake. The first strategy is to encourage lakeshore communities to adopt the DNR Shoreland Management Rules and the second is to exercise more control over granting variances and conditional use permits in areas visible from the Lake. The DNR Shoreland Rules were adopted in 1972. Under Minnesota State statute, all counties and cities were to have adopted these rules. Because of concerns in the metropolitan area, the DNR did not require the urban cities to adopt the shoreland rules until certain changes were made that were more reflective of an urban environment. In 1989, the new DNR Shoreland Rules were adopted by the state. Cities within the metropolitan area have two years to adopt these rules. As part of the 1986 Zoning Ordinance, Minnetonka adopted its own shoreland regulations which were based upon the DNR rules. Prior to their adoption, staff had negotiated with the DNR staff ^ regarding the' shoreland zoning ordinance standards. However, Management Plan Page Six because the metropolitan area was not subject to the state-wide shoreland rules, the DNR was not able to approve the Minnetonka shoreland ordinance standards. The LMCD proposes to act as a clearing house to encourage communities to adopt a shoreland ordinance that follows a model that was developed by the 14 shoreland communities. The shoreland regulations contained in the LMCD model are essentially the same as the DNR regulations. The LMCD encourages cities to adopt the model as minimum standards but would allow the cities to be more restrictive. While staff does not disagree with the philosophy that the LMCD is promoting with this objective, it is felt that Minnetonka is better served with its own shoreland ordinance that is negotiated independently with the DNR. The reason for this is because we already have a shoreland ordinance that reflects the development values of the community along Minnetonka lakeshore. More importantly, there are numerous other lakes in the City that are also governed by the shoreland ordinance and by the DNR shoreland rules. It is felt that we should not treat Lake Minnetonka any differently than any other lakes within the City. Lastly, in terms of implementation, it is felt that the City is more able than the LMCD to assure consistent regulation of the shoreland rules within the City. A second major objective of the LMCD Management Program is that the LMCD encourages cities to "exhibit restraint in approving variances and conditional use permits for buildings that will be visible from the lake surface and shoreline". Apparently, this objective was added because of concern some have expressed about the Carlson towers. Staff agrees that the LMCD does have interest in regulating building height for lakeshore properties, but questions the LMCD's objectives in reviewing all height variance requests in the City, for example, in the Opus area. This management objective contradicts the stated intent of commenting only on requests that could be seen from the Lake and is beyond the appropriate area of concern for the LMCD. Interjecting the LMCD in reviewing height variances also adds one more level of review that may result in time delays not commensurate with the value obtained, especially for properties not visible from the Lake. It would also seem reasonable to consider different standards for the urbanized, eastern, end of the lake than those utilized for the more rural and residential western end. Staff does not have an issue with the LMCD reviewing and commenting on variances for any lakeshore parcel but takes exception to such involvement for all other variances. In any event the authority to grant the variances rests with the City. \\A Management Plan Page Seven Environmental Protection One of the major objectives of the environmental protection section of the Management Program is to encourage cities to minimize the impacts of pollution on Lake Minnetonka water quality by controlling stormwater run-off. The LMCD will require that cities adopt stormwater management plan provisions which include the 509 Plan. This objective should not be detrimental to Minnetonka since the 1982 Stormwater Management Plan contains many of the points raised in the section of the Program. Additionally, as the Council is aware, staff is preparing amendments to the Storm Water Ma lagement Plan to include the water quality standards that are now required by the 509 Plan. However, the LMCD plan also suggests that lakeshore communities adopt fertilizer and pesticide ordinances for all properties around the lakes. In reviewing water quality issues for the golf course project, staff found that the adoption of a fertilizer or pesticide ordinance in only a limited area of the City is not only difficult but seems unfair. Additionally, this type of ordinance is extremely difficult to enforce and may not obtain the intended objectives. The reason is that there has been little long term research done on the effects of run-off from lawns into water bodies. To date, it is unknown if water quality is degraded by fertilizers, pesticides, acid rain or other types of run-off that enter the Lake. If the Council is interested in adopting such an ordinance, it is suggested that it be adopted city-wide rather than just along the Minnetonka lakeshore. Staff also believes that the environmental protection portion of the Program is somewhat misfocused. While communities should be required to reduce the impacts of untreated run-off into the Lake, a complete water quality study is needed on Lake Minnetonka to determine the problems before an implementation program is developed. The environmental protection implementation plan should be based upon the proposed uses of the lake and should be viewed from a regional standpoint rather than just a local one. Summary Staff has met with LMCD representatives to discuss the issues that are raised in this report. Many of the responses to the issues imply that further work is needed. The proposed Long Term Management Program is a draft and the LMCD Board proposes to review all comments from the cities before a final draft >v ^ N Management Plan Page Eight prepared. It is anticipated that the Board will refer the comments to the Long Term Management Program Advisory Committee at their June 18th meeting. A revised draft will be presented to the UiCD Board at their August 22nd meeting. The LMCD representatives have stated that there may be subsequent meetings and hearings with various groups dependent upon the comments that are received at the public hearings. Staff attended the June 6th LMCD public hearing to listen to comments received from other cities and groups. Attached to this report are the responses from the City of Wayzata and the City of Orono. The major reservation arising from staff's analysis is that the Program needs considerably more review and probably revision before it can be adopted. Since the LMCD is intending to prepare proposed legislation for introduction in the next legislative session, it appears that the first priority should be to encourage the LMCD to revise this timetable while it carefully reviews these and other comments received. At the June 11, 1990 Work Session, staff recommends that the City Council direct staff to prepare written comments to the LMCD requesting it to amend its current plans to introduce legislation in the next session and to address the issues and concerns identified herein. f CITIZENS LEAGUE REPORT LOSING LAKES: ENJOYMENT OF A UNIQUE METROPOLITAN RESOURCE IS THREATENED Prepared by Metropolitan Lakes Management Committee John S. Adams, chair Approved by the Citizens League Board of Directors November 8,1989 CITIZENS LEAGUE 708 South Third Street Suite 500 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 (612) 338-0791 TABLE OF CONTENTS Ejiecutive Summaiy Introduction 1. Surface Use of Metropolitan Lakes 2. Boadng Access 3. Shoitland Access and Development 4. Water Quality 5. Governance Appendix: Major Laws Affecting Management of Lakes Woik of the Committee 1 3 9 13 17 21 25 29 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Up to now, metropolitan residents have been able to take for granted their ability to find a lake to use and enjoy. About 100 large lakes, hundreds of smaller ones, and three rivets piuvide tremendous opportunities for water-based recreation in the Twin Cities area. But the situation on metropolitan lakes seems to be deteriorating in several important ways: • surface use of the lakes continues to increase, and the conflicts that have resulted lead some people to feel the lakes are becoming overcrowded ana unsafe; • the water quality of many lakes has degraded and is threatened at other lakes; and • continuing shoneland development and redevelopment has caused concern about limits on public access to the lakes and their shoneland. Unfortunately, lake management has been fragmented and mainly oriented towards current issues and interests rather than long-term concerns. Metropolitan lakes are managed in varying degrees by three federal and four state agencies, seven counties, seven soil and water conservation districts, 46 watershed districts, two conservation districts and 138 municipalities. These governmental bodies sometimes have conflicting goals and activities. Conflicts between their short-term and long-term goals are also common. In this report, we emphasize the importance of comprehensive, long-range planning for the lakes and stress recognition of metropolitan lakes as an interconnected, regiori^ system. Such an approach is needed to ensure that future generations can enjoy the lakes and other surface water. We recommend: □ Lakes in the metropolitan area should be viewed as a regional system, with regional coordination of planning and management activities. G Local governments should develop plans for the surface waters before lakes deteriorate further. Lakes in the metropolitan area arc a unique regional resource, and improved regional governance and long-term plarming are needed. We recommend: G The Legislature should charge the Metropolitan Council with the responsibility for planning and coordinating management of metropolitan surface waters. In partnership with local governments, the Metropolitan Council should develop a compteiicnsive policy framework and metropolitan guidelines for shorcland and surface water management Local governments should be required by a fixed date to develop local surface water plans subject to approval by the Metropolitan Council. The Council should provide grants to cover part of the cost EXECUTIVE SUMMARY of developing local surface water plaiis. It should also coordinate the plans and activities of the various agencies involved in metropolitan lake management Good data are essential for good planning, but there is a frustrating lack of information on the use and quality of metropolitan lakes. For example, none of the agencies involved in lake management is collecting information on the extent of conflia between different types of surface uses and different groups of users. Furthermore, while several different agencies test certain measuies of water quality in certain lakes, no one is momioring regularly the presence of pesticides. We recommend: □The Metropolitan Council and Department of Natural Resources should conduct more complete studies of surface use on metropolitan lakes. G Water quality monitoring of metropolitan lakes should be more extensive and better coordinated. In the report, we also make recommendations on specific lake management issues. User Conflicts and Safety Problems Without changes in the current system of surface use management, conflicts and safety problems on lakes in the metro area will increase along with user density. Surface use should be managed to minimize user conflicts, ensure safe enjoyment of the lakes, ensure a diversity of uses, and preserve the natural environment. We recommend: G Counties and municipalities should regulate surface use to reduce conflicts among lake users. As often as possible, lakes should accommodate all compatible uses, but a few uses should be excluded from certain types of lakes. For example, activities like pow '‘rboating and waterskiing can disturb lake seUunents and waterlife, and are inappropriate for natural environment and shallow lakes. G Furthermore, the state should require operators of larger motorboats to be trained in boating safety and should establish a minimum age for operation of Jet-skis. Funding should be increased for enforcement of watercraft regulations. Boating Access Public boating access to metropolitan lakes meets neither the present nor anticipated demand. However, development of new public access sites leads to conflict between local residents and government agencies. We recommend: The Legislature should continue to fund efforts to develop public boat launch facilities in the metro area. Furthermore, the Department of Natural Resources should begin planning and acquiring access sites before a lake's shoreland is fully developed LOSING LAKES: Enjoyment of a Unique Metropolitan Resource is Threatened vii and should work more with local residents ano other lake users in the process. □ Local governments should be compensated for the removal of land from their tax bases and the costs of maintaining access facilities. G The Department of Natural Resources should develop better planning guidelines for evaluating access to lakes. These guidelines should account for all sources of access to thf* IaK ?s development levels, and restrictions on individual lakes. Shoreland Access and Development Prcsstire to intensify development around lakes continues in many parts of the metro area causing concerns about limited public access to shoreland and degradation of the lakes and their shores. We found that only 30 of 138 metropolitan area municipalities have adopted shoreland management plans and regulations 14 years ^er they were required to do so by state law. We recommend: G By a fixed date, municipalities should comply with the requiren w.ii to adopt shoreland ordinances that meet state standards. G The Metropolitan Council should work with local governments and the Department of Natural Resources to explore ways, such as tax incentives and land dedication, to appropriately control shoreland development and encourage municipalities to reserve shoreland for public use. Water Quality Non-point source pollution now poses the most serious threat to the water quality of metropolitan lakes. Water quality is difficult and expensive to improve once a lake has been allowed to degrade. We recommend: G Agencies with control over whole-lake watersheds should plan for and manage lake water quality. G Water quality goals should be based on proposed recreational uses of the lakes. INTRODUCTION In the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area. 100 large lalces and hundreds of smaller ones provide tremendous opportunities for water-based recreation.i In addition, over 21,000 acres of the Mississippi, Minnesota, and Sl Croix rivers in the metropolitan area offer more opportunities for recreation. Up to now, metropolitan residents have been able to take for granted tl%ir ability to find a lake to use and enjoy. But the situation on metropolitan lakes seems to be deteriorating. Surface use of the lakes continues to grow, leading some people to feel the lakes are becoming overcrowded and unsafe. The water quality of many lakes h^ degraded and others are threatened. Continuing lakeshore development has caukd concern about public access to the lakes and their shoreland. Unfortunately, lake managemeru has been fragmented and mainly oriented towards present issues and interests rather than long-term concerns. Out of the multitude of lake management agencies, none has been charged with overall planning and management responsibility for metropolitan lakes. The map on page 2 shows how waters in the region are organized into 46 watershed management organizations. The committee's charge was to: • recommerKl policies for management of metropolitan lakes that balance lake access, safety, user convenience, and environmental protection. Over a period of eight months, this committee examined current lake issues in the seven-county area and looked ahead to the future of our lakes. We have emphasized the importaiKe of comprehensive, long-range planning for the lakes and stress recogmdon of metropolitan lakes as an interconnected, regional system. While we have focused c lakes in the seven-county area, other regions of the state face similar pressures on their lakes. Somw of our recommendations may apply to these regions as well The first chapter of this report examines surface use issues, such as crowding and safety problems. Chapter 2 looks at questions of boat access to the lakes, while Chapter 3 discusses shoreland access anu development. Chapter 4 examines water quality issues. The final chapter discusses governance of the lakes. There are about IQO lakes of 100 acres or more in size in the seven-county region. The largest is Lake Minnetonka, which is the state's tenth largest inland lake with more than 14,000 acres. Counts vary, but there are about 1,400 more lakes of between 10 and 100 acres in the region. INTRODUCTION WMO BOUNDARY MNBWSP? 12/89 SOURCE: Miimesou Board of Water & Soil Resources. 1989 CHAPTER 1 SURFACE USE OF METROPOLITAN LAKES The increasing use of metropolitan lakes has led to concerns about safety problems m\ user conflicts. This chapter examines patterns and trends in recreational use of metropolitan lakes, suiiacc use conflicts and their consequences, and controls on surface use. LAKE SURFACE USE Patterns of lake use A few metropolitan lakes are heavily used at particular times. According to a survey by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR). boating densities on metropolitan lakes are. on average, four times those in other popular recreational regions of the state. Densities are greatest on weekends and holidays.^ By number of users. Lake Minnetonka is the ;nost heavily used lake in the seven-county area. On busy weekends, the user density exceeds one boat per 10 acres (an average of about 1.400 boats).^. Similar densities are sometimes reached on portions of the St. Croix River, White Bear Lake, and Prior Lake. On the other hand, many lakes do not approach this level of use. Planners expect lake use will continue to increase. The Department of Natural Resources has projeaed significant increases in fishing and boating in the metropolitan area ^tween 1980 and 1995.3 por example, average surface use of Lake Minnetonka is currently growing at a rate of about 45 boatt ^r year Purchases of boats are expected to incrca.se in the 1990s and early ^OOOs as members of the baby- boom generation reach middle-age and spend their additional earnings cn creational equipment and artivities. Powerboating is the most popular activity on metropolitan lakes. A DNR survey of boating use fomd that powerboating accounts for about half of all boating activity on metro lakes between Memonal Day and Labor Day.^ Other uses include fishing (the most popular use on a three-season basis), swimming, canoeing, scuba-diving, sailing, and water-siding. Some metro area lakes are prt.ferred for particular activities. Scuba-divers prefer clear lakes, such as Square Lake in Washington County and Christmas Lake in Shorewood, and use these lakes for teaching diving classes. Large coats need expanses of open water and have few desirable altemauves to 1 Wayne Barstad and Deborah Karasov, Lake Development: How Much is Too Muck? Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 1987, p. 4. . r u 2 However, if lakes are compared by density of users per acre, many lakes Oncludmg some of the Minneapolis city lakes) are even more heavily used than Lake Minnetonka. 3 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, "Minnesota Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan 1984-1989." 1985. 4 Barstad and Karasov. p. 7. CHAPTER 1: Surface Use of Metropolitan Lakes large bodies of water such as Lake Minnetonka, White Bear Lake, and the Sl Croix and Mississippi Rivers. Anglers prefer lakes that support large gamefish populations. Perceptions of crowding People’s perception of crowding on lakes largely depends on personal expectations and tolerances. A canoeist in the Boundary Waters expects a solitary experience and might feel crowded by seeing just one other boat. On the other hand, boaters in the metro area generally expect to share the lakes with others but tolerate different levels and types of use. Some activities, such as powerboating or waterskiing, take up large areas of lake surface and make a lake seem more crowded than uses such as still-fishing. Since crowding is largely a matter of personal perception, setting standards for acceptable boating densities is difficult Most management agencies have based boating capacity standards on safety concerns rather than perceptions of crowding. These standards vary widely among agencies ^ often do not consider factors like the shape of the lake or the way it is used. When developing public access sites, the Minnesota DNR plans for a maximum density of one boat per 10 acres, regardless of the type of boat or use. The Wisconsin DNR uses a standard of one boat per 20 acres. On the Allegheny Reservoir in New York, different uses are considered to require different amounts of lake surface, ranging from one acre for anchored fishing boats to 20 acres for water-skiers.^ A significant percentage of boaters in the metro area feel the lake they use is crowded. From 1984 to 1986, the DNR surveyed boaters on 23 metropolitan lakes about their perception of crowding on the lakes. On weekends and holidays, about 30 percent of metropolitan boaters surveyed rated the lake they used as "crowded" or "loo crowded."^ By comparison, fewer than 10 percent of boaters in other regions of the state judged their lake to be crowded. The DNR conducted its metro area boater survey at pubUc and private access points and only included people who were actuaUy using metropolitan lakes. DNR researchers did not interview any boaters who had given up trying to use these lakes. Conflicts and accidents Certain combinations of activities on lakes can lead to confiicL Powerboater^ and water-skiers are most frequently involved in conflicts with other lake users. Powerboat noise disturbs people, and smaU boat users and people fishing feel frustrated or scared when their activities arc disrupted by ^e speed and wake size of passing powerboats. Fast-moving boats frighi i swimmers and scuba-divers. In winter, high-speed snowmobiles alarm cross-country skiers on the ice. Personal watercraft, such as jet-skis, are becoming a source of conflict as they increase in popularity. According to DNR Boating Safety Coordinator, Kim Elvenim, jet-skiers often behave discourteously or even dangerously, by jumping wakes and coming too close to swimmers, people fishing, and the shoreline. Conflicting uses also come out of the sky. Seaplanes are allowed to land on some metropolitan lakes, and they can annoy, frighten, arid sometimes endanger boaters. Larger motorboats are involved in most reported boating accidents in the metro area. These accidents are usually coUisions between boats or with other objects. Fatal accidents usually are caused by canoes, small motorboats capsizing, or people falling overboard. A few metropolitan lakes are "hot spots" for boating accidents. In 1988, more th^ hitif of ^ 70 non- fatal boating accidents reported in the metro area occurred on Lake Minnetonka. Excelsior Bay Spring Park Bay have been identified as particularly dangerous parts of the lake. Wheri surveyed about their last trip on Lake Minnetonka, a large majority of lake users reported seeing potenually dangerous Ibid. Ibid. LOSING LAKES: Enjoyment of a Unique Metropolitan Resource is Threatened 5 situations, such as failures to yield the right-of-way, high wakes, excessive speeds, and alcohol misuse. White Bear Lake and Lake St. Croix have also been mentioned as accident "hot spots" in the metro area, although fewer repotted accidents occur on them than on Lake Minnetonka. These three lakes are all heavily used, especially by the larger motorboats that are most often involved in accidents. The frequency of boating accidents is connected to many factors. Although accident frequency is commonly believed to be correlated with user density, the actual relationship between these factors is unclear. While boating use has increased, boating fatalities have decreased in Minnesota and across the country as a result of better watercraft enforcement, boating safety education, more stable boats, and more extensive use of flotation devices. While the relationship between user density and accidents is uiK:ertain, some behavioral factors are connected to accident frequency. The Lake Minnetonka Conserve'on Distria (LMCD) has found that accidents there often result from ignorance of the lake or its surface use rules.^ The DNR has found that lack of training in boating safety and alcohol use arc also linked to accidents. In 1986, the Minnesota Legislature passed a Boating While Intoxicated law to try to deter alcohol misuse by boaters. Consequences of user conflicts People who feel too crowded or unsafe on a lake move elsewhere or change the timing of their activities. Lake managers sometimes describe this phenomenon as self-regulation in a positive sense; however, owners of small boats arc believed to be displaced from lakes more frequently than those with large boats. Lake users in small, especially non-motorized, boats are likely to be disturbed by wakes and noise from larger boats and to feel their safety is threatened. Riparians (lakeslwrc property owners) arxl others who cannot easily move their boats to avoid conflicts often change the time of day they go out on the lakes No agency has systematically studied the extent of displacement from metropolitan lakes or its effects on lake use patterns; therefore, the consequences of user conflicts are largely unknown. Although some level of displacement is assumed to occur on metro lakes, little is known about which lake users are displaced or where they go. Surveys of lake use and user satisfaction have been conducted in a way that precludes the involvement of any metropolitan residents who now entirely avoid the lakes because of crowding. By only interviewing riparians and boaters who stiU go to the lakes, the DNR's research method includes only people who still go to the lakes and may tend to overstate public satisfaction with them. Comments from people who arc displaced and frustrated have not been obtained. Controls on surface use Both local governments and the DNR influence lake surface use by exercising direct and indirect conuols.* Surface use resuictions directly control lake use. Counties and mi *iicipalitiM rnay pass ordinances, in accordance with DNR rules, regulating surface use of lakes within their jurisdiction. Ordinances can include restrictions on the types and sizes of watercraft, ihe typ«s and horsepower of motors, the sp^ of watercraft and the times and areas of use. Winter regulations may include restrictions on snowmobile use close to shore. The DNR does not request local governments to adopt surface use ordinances, but it has some control over their content when they are developed. Counties and municipalities must choose the restrictions included in ordinances from those listed in the DNR mles, and all surface use ordinances must be approved by the Commissioner of Natural Resources. The DNR requirrs that surface use ordinances 7 Ibid. 8 By local governments, we include counties, municipalities, and special purpose units such as watershed and lake conservation districts. CHAPTER 1: Surface Use of Metropolitan Lakes accommodate all compatible uses when feasible, minimize adverse effects on the lake, minimize user conflicts, and conform to state statutes and niles. When assessing an ordinance, the DNR considers factors such as a lake's physical characteristics, existing management plans and development, accident history, and the control preferences of lake users. Several factors can indirectly control lake surface use. User density can be indirectly regulated by the number of mooring buoys, docks, public and private boat ramps, marinas, and available parking"spaces for boat trailers. Types of use can also be regulated by these facilities. For example, boat ramps can be designed so they cannot be used by larger boais.^-' Both the DNR and local governments have some authority over these indirect controls on surface use (see Table 5.1 in (Thapter 5). Counties and municipalities often do not restrict surface use on lakes in their jurisdictions. Only about 1(X) lakes in the seven-county area have surface use ordinances. Half of these are located in Hennepin County. Surface use ordinances arc least common in the outer suburbs. Restrictions in the ordinances vary in degree from relatively small zones regulating speed to entire lakes where motors are prohibited. Many boaters in the metropolitan area favor increased surface use regulations. In 1984, a survey commissioned by the DNR asked boaters on 23 metropolitan lakes what, if any, special boating restrictions they felt were needed on the lake they used. Fifty-two percent of boaters favored use restrictions on their lake.^® By comparison. 38 percent of boaters in nonh central Minnesota and 10 percent of boaters in west central Minnesota requested surface use restrictions. Boaters who considered their lake to be crowded most frequently asked for restrictions. However, about half of those who felt their lake was uncrowded still requested surface use restrictions. Riparians (persons owning land on the banks of the water body) and marina users asked for restrictions more frequently than did public access users. Metropolitan boaters who requested surface use restrictions asked for wake or speed regulations most frequently. Restrictions on boat type, size, and horscjx»wer were also commonly mentioned, as was greater enforcement of existing rules. Enforcement agencies lightly patrol most lakes. By stanite, counties and the DNR are responsible for enforcement of watercraft reflations in Minnesota. The U.S. Park Service also patrols the Lower St. Croix Riverway. Municipalities, with the exception of Minneapolis and its Park and Recreation Board, generally play a minor role in patrolling lakes. As a result of limited funds and staffing, counties concentrate on patrolling the most heavily used lakes in their jurisdictions. Enforcement is greatest on Lake Minnetonka, White Bear Lake. Pr^'r Lake, Lake Waconia, and the Mississippi and St. Croix Rivers. .Many other lakes are patrolled only two or three times each summer. Some lakes in outlying areas arc never patrolled by county officers because they arc so lightly used. The 13 Department of Natural Resources conservation officers assigned to the metropolitan area also have responsibilities for overseeing the lakes, and may be more likely tc visit the smaller lakes during the year.m Effectiveness of surface use restrictions Surface use restrictions can be effective lake management tools. Surface use restrictions fall into three general categories: type of use. time zoning, and area zoning. Certain types of restrictions are most effective on certain types of lakes. Area zoning, for example, works best for small bays that can be marked off by buoys. The Dcpanmeni of Natural Resources does not favor such indirect approaches to regulating surface use because they may effectively discriminate against some persons. Instead, the department favors direct neasurcs, such as surface use zoning. Barstad and Karasov. LOSING LAKES: Enjoyment of a Unique Metropolitan Resource is Threatened 7 Surface use ordinances are believed to help reduce user conflicts on many lakes in the seven-county area. The restrictions on motorized boats on Minneapolis and St. Paul lakes (Calhoun, Como, etc.) arc frequently praised as examples of good management practices appropriate to their urban settings. Outside of the central cities. Lake Johanna has been cited as an example of a lake where zoning by time of day and common direction of travel nilcs have been used cffcctivdy. Effectiveness of surface use restrictions is limited because lake users are often unaware of the regulations. In a 1984 DNR survey, only about half of the boaters interviewed on metropolitan lakes with surface use restrictions knew about them.'' Boaters entering from public, private, and riparian accesses were equally unaware of the restrictions. Ignorance of surface use restrictions has been found to be a contributing factor to boating accidents on Lake Minnetonka. CONCLUSIONS Without changes in the present system of surface use management, conflicts and safety problems on metro lakes will increase along with user density. While severe crowding and safety problems are relatively rare at present, we strongly believe that pressures on the lakes will increase. More and more people have the time for recreation and the income to indulge themselves in expensive watercraft. Boating densities on many area lakes continues to increase. Planning agencies, such as the Metropolitan Council, stress the need for more recreational facilities to accommodate members of the "baby-boom" generation and their families. In particular, the popularity of boating and fishing is expected to grow as the baby-boomers age. A few user groups are increasingly being pushed onto less preferred lakes. While little information is available on the phenomenon of user displacement, managers seem to depend heavily on displacement to regulate levels of lake use. This leads to a pecking order of lake user groups. Left unrestricted, powerboaters and water-skiers effectively control the surface of a lake because other user groups can be displaced by them. Some uses are intq)propriate for certain lakes. Activities like powerboating and water-skiing can disturb lake sediments and wildlife. They are obviously inappropriate for natural environment and shallow lakes. They may also be undesirable in densely-populated areas where they can bother other lake users and riparians. Regulation of surface use must be consistent with the planning and management of lake use. Regulations aimed at maintaining natural conditions would be difficult to enforce if access, shoreland facilities, and channel dredging favor large, fast powerboats Likewise, intensive fish-stocking on a lake managed for water-skiing and jet skis will tend to increase conflict ^2 RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend; □Surface use on metropolitan lakes should be managed and regulated with the following goals in mind: minimizing conflicts among lake users; ensuring safe enjoyment of the lakes; 11 12 Baistad and Karasov. Noic that it would be possible and perhaps desirable to stock a wa*er-skiing lake with fish even if fishing was limited to the spring and fall months when few peopL water skL CHAPTER 1: Surface Use of Metropolitan Lakes • ensuring a diversity of uses; and • preserving natural environment lakes. We recx)gnize that these goals are occasionally incompatible on some lakes. For example, allowing diverse uses would be inappropriate on a lake designated as a natural area. In such cases, good management might mean setting priorities among the goals, it should be noted, however, that all four goals can be met if lakes are considered on a regional scale. Regional lake management is discu^ed in the recommendations section of Chapter 5. □ Counties and municipalities should regulate surface use to reduce conflicts among lake users. Surface use ordinances should be developed with the above goals as guiding principles. While we do not recommend regulation for regulation's sake on ail lakes, it is important that local governments take a view that is comprehensive in both its geographic scope and in looking toward the future. □ As often as possible, lakes should accommodate all compatible uses. Allowing all uses is especially important on lakes, such as Lake Minnetonka and White Bear Lake, that draw users from the entire region. Time and area zoning can allow all groups to use a lake while separating conflicting uses. □ A few uses should be excluded from certain types of lakes. Water-skiing and powerboating use large areas of lake surface and conflict with most other uses. These two activities should be excluded from some lakes for safety, aesthetic, and preservation purposes. For exam(^e, powerboats should not be allowed on almost all natural environment lakes because they disturb wildlife.In densely-populated areas, their exclusion would allow the lakes to be used more by everyone else. □ The state should require operators of larger motorboats to be trained In boating safety. At the present time, only teenage boaters are required to have any fornial education in boating safety. Operator licenses, while politically unpopular, would be one means of improving boater education and reducing boater accidents. A minimum age should also be established for operation of jet-skis. □ Funding should be increased for enforcement of watercraft regulations. □ The Metropolitan Council or DNR should conduct more complete studies of surface use on metropolitan lakes. During the course of this study, we were often frustrated by the lack of good data on surface use. More information on surface use is essential for successful planning and management in the future. In particular, the phenomenon of user displacement deserves study. Future studies should be designed so they do not merely survey those who are actually on the lakes at a particular time. To our knowledge, the Department of Natural Resources does not classify boats in any useful way based on our their "power," only on their length. It would be useful for the department to develop such a definition for use in regulating surface use. The department has pointed out that large boats are permitted to use some natural environment lakes with small eiccuic motors. CHAPTER 2 BOATING ACCESS As more people buy boats, the demand for access to the lakes will continue to increase. Yet the development of new public access facilities is often impeded by conflicts between local residents and goverranent agencies. (The sidebar below discusses some of the legal issues involved in developing new sites.) This chapter examines the supply of access to metropolitan lakes and the process of developing new boat launch sites. PROVIDING PUBLIC BOAT ACCESS Many metropolitan lakes are inaccessible to the public. There are about 1,500 lakes of more than 10 acres in the metro area. Many of these lakes are unsuitable for much recreational use. PubUc boat ramps are provided on about 110 of ihem.^ However, more than 20 prime recreational lakes identified by the Metropolitan Water Access Committee (see below) are inaccessible to the public. Surface use of metropolitan lakes increases dramatically when public boat launch sites are provided. According to a 1984 DNR survey, about 80 percent of the parking spaces at public boat lauiKh facilities in the metro area are occupied on weekends and holidays; 40 percent are occupied on weekdays.^ When public boat ramps are built at a lake in the urbanized parts of the metro area, boating density increases by an average of 100 percent^ In rural areas of the region, the provision of public access leads to increases of about 50 percent Until late 1989, no information was available on who these new access users are, why they chose that site, or WHOSE LAKE IS IT, ANYWAY? A difficult question. According to a 1981 ruling by the Minnesota Supreme Court, "Water in its natural state is not capable of being owned (emphasis added) Minnesota lakes classified as "public waters" are subject to control by the state for the public good. So, who has the right to use the lakes and their shores? Riparian property owners have rights to the use and enjoyment of the body of water adjoining their land. (Riparian refers to the bank of a natural course of water and to owners of property on the bank.) If any land adjoining a lake is publicly owned, then the public has the right to use the lake. The public has no right to trespass on private land to obtain access to public waters. If the bed of a lake is publicly owned, the public has the right to walk along the lakeshore below the normal and ordinary high water level of the lake. Pratt V. State. Department of Natural Resources. 309 NW2d 767 (1981). The Supreme Court ’s ruling was in a case about mechanicial harvesting of wild rice. Metropolitan Water Access Committee. "Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Public Boat Launch Guide." 1988. Wayne Barstad and Deborah Karasov, Lake Development: How Much is Too Much? Department of Natural Resources. 1987, p. 7. The survey dealt with the period between Memorial Day and Labor Day. Ibid. CHAPTER 2: Boating Access which lakes they used before. Private access facilities arc also available to metropolitan boaters. About one-third of the boats on metropolitan lakes arc launched from private marinas or resorts.^ Many marinas permit the public to launch boats for a fee. The DNR is mandated by the Legislature to acquire, develop, and manage public access sites. Access facilities arc '>rovided if a lake is suitable for recreation, both the lake and the surrounding lands can withstand xidiiional recreational use, and public access to the lake is inadequate or nonexistent The DNT: can only acquire land for access sites from willing sellers unless the Slate Executive Council (mace up of the six constitutional officers) agrees to let the DNR use the power of eminent domain to condemn land. In many cases, local governments or conservation districts enter into cooperative agreements to maintain public access facilities once the DNR develops them. In 1979, based on a recommendation by the Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources, the Metropolitan Water Access Committee was formed to coordinate, plan, finance, and promote public boat launch facilities in the seven-county area. The committee consists of members from the DNR, Metropolitan Council, and Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development By the end of 1988, the committee had helped the DNR arul local governments acquiie, develop, and upgrade 95 access sites.® The committee had also produced a map showing all 160 access sites now open on metropolitan lakes and rivers.^ The Metropolitan Water Access Committee identified 95 prime recreational lakes that arc 100 acres or larger where access sites could be developed. These lakes have been ranked by their size, shape, types of fish, and clarity. In 1987,43 of these lakes were judged to have adequate access based on DNR plarming assumptions.^ However, more than 20 of these lakes had no public access facilities at all. In developing public accesses, the DNR plans for a total boating density of one boat per 10 acres of lake surface. Non-riparians and riparians are each assumed to contribute half of the total lake use; therefore, a lake is considered to have adequate public access facilities if one parking space is provided per 20 acres of lake surface. The number of parking spaces for boat trailers at access points theoretically limits the number of boats that can be launched. The DNR's planning assumption of one boat per 10 acres does not consider the arying piounts of lake surface needed for different uses. DNR staif say that it assumes an "unregulated mix" of uses, such as water skiing, fishing, and canoeing. Planning by the DNR also does not consider the amount of development around a lake or the presence of private launch sites. Conilicts can occur when government agencies try to develop new public access sites. Local residents often object when government agencies develop access sites nearby. Public accesses remove lartd from a municipality's tax rolls, increase lake use, and often require municipal maintenance. It should be noted that the department arid the local and regional agencies it works with have assigned priority to identifying arid using lands that are already in public hands. The DNR's current process for planning access facilities contributes to tensions with local ^denis because the public is not involved in the siting process until potential sites are already identified. When the DNR makes public these potential sites, it often runs into problems. Many new public access proposals have resulted in lengthy battles. For example, the DNR has worked for nirie years to get an access site on Turtle Lake in Shoieview. In another case, a boat ramp on Long Ibid. Metropolitan Water Access Committee, "Public Water Access on Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Lakes Rivers, 1988 Annual Report," p. 3. .Metropolitan Water Access Committee, "Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Public Boat Launch Guide." Metropolitan Water Access Committee. "A Cooperative Program for Providing Public-Access Sites on Metropolitan Area Lakes," 1988, pp. 18-20. LOSING LAKES: Enjoyment of a Unique Metropolitan Resource is Threatened 11 Lake in New Brighton finally opened this year after a 2(>*year struggle involving the DNR, the city, and local homeowners.^ Conflicts can occur when local governments try to restrict access to lakes from public boai year, the DNR filed suit against the city of Maple Grove because the city restricted the numbci .. : its launched at a public access site on Weaver Lake. Boaters who do not have a parking space that meets city regulations must wait until a space opens up to launch their boat. When a boater leaves the lake, the next person in line may launch a boat The DNR says the city is violating its agreement to keep the boat ramp open to the public without restriction. Maple Grove objects that without a monitor to control launchings, the lake becomes overcrowded, with densities exceeding the one boat per 10 acres planiung assumption. Although the DNR stated policy is to ensure equal access for riparian boaters and the public, it has, on occasion, allowed some limitations on boat launchings at other public access sites. For example, the DNR-sponsored public access at Christmas Lake in Hennepin County does not allow launching of boats whose engines arc larger than 25 horsepower. That restriction is one result of the extensive negotiations that proceeded opening of the public access site: it will sunset in 1991. CONCLUSIONS The supply of public access to metropolitan lakes meets neither the present nor anticipated demand. Several of the best recreational lakes in the area have no public boat ramps, possibly contributing to conflicts and safety problems on those that are more accessible. When new public access facilities arc built, they arc used. The DNR's planning process for new public access sites is flawed. When planning for public access facilities, the DNR assumes that riparians and public access users each have the right to half of the lake surface without considering the amount of lakeshore developrnent, including marinas and private launch sites. The planning assumption also fails to consider the varying amounts of lake surface needed for different uses and could contribute to unsafe, crowded conditions on the lakes. Furthermore, by not including local residents in the early stages of planning for new public access sites, the DNR sets itself up for conflicts. Local residents feel the DNR is imposing new access sues on them without concern for their interests. RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend: □The Legislature should continue to fund efforts to develop public boat launch facilities in the metro area. We strongly believe more access facilities arc needed and commend the DNR's goal of increasing public access. □ The DNR should begin planning and acquiring access sites before a lake's shoreland Is fully developed and should work more with local residents and other lake users in the process. The boating arrfS5 al Long Lake in New Brighton was funded through the Metropolitan Council, not the DNR. Al Long Lake, the number of boats with motors over 25 horsepower has beui restricted. Five of these boats from the public access arc allowed on the lake at any time. After five of these boats have launched, owners of simil' xwits must wail in line until one of the five boats leaves ihr lake. CHAPTER 2: Boating Access Local go' lents should be compensated for the removal of land flrom their tax oa ics and the costs of maintaining access facilities. User fees are an obvious way to address local economic concerns about access sites. However, other region- or statewide methods of collecting funds (such as a surcharge on boat licenses) and redistributing them to compensate local governments should also be explored. The Department of Natural Resources should make strong, Immediate efforts to develop better planning guidelines for access to the lakes. These new standards should account for all sources of access to the lakes, development levels, and the predominant surface uses and restrictions on individual lakes. . I L CHAPTER 3 SHORELAND ACCESS AND DEVELOPMENT Shoreland is being developed and redeveloped throughout the metropolitan area, causing concerns about public access to the lakeshores and degradation of the lakes and their shores. This chapter discusses the availability of shoreland access, trends in recreational use and development of the shoreland, and current shoreland management. FINDINGS Shoreland access People use shoreland for many recreational activities. Swimming, shore-fishing, and walking are enjoyed by many people, including those who are older, younger, handicapped, or unable to afford a boat. In winter, shoreland is used for cross-country skiing, snowmobiling, and snowshocing. The DNR aixi the Metropolitan C outk U anticipate changes in overall participation for many recreational activities as the baby-boom generation ages.^ Significant increases in participation are expected for fishing, hiking, boating, cross-country skiing, and snowshoeing. Local governments generally are responsible for providing access to shoreland in the metro area. Counties and municipalities can purchase shoreland for parks, but many do not because they lack funds or favor development of valuable lakefront property to generate tax revenues. In 1974, the Legislature mandated a regional recreation open space system for the rnetropolii.in area. The Metropolitan Council plans for the regional park system and obtains state funding. Counties, cities, or park disuicts plan, own, and operate individual regional parks. Of the 54 existing and proposed regional parks and park reserves, all but three provide access to the shores of lakes or rivers.^ Some counties and cities have purchased large areas of lakeshore. For example, Minneapolis acquired most of the shoreland of the Chain of Lakes in the late 1800s and has preser/ed these areas as public parks. The Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board is now studying the possibility of acquiring more property on the north shore of Cedar Lake. Other citie.s. such as Woodbury, arc also trying to purcha** shoreland for parks or have it set aside as a condition of development projects. Regional parks arc heavily used. The Metropolitan Council estimated the parks were vi.sitcd over 13 million times in 1988.^ Use of the regional parks has increased about seven percent annually from ^ Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, "Minnesota Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan 1984-1989," 1985. 2 Metropolitan Council, "Regional Recreation Open Space Needs in the Twin Cities Metrpolitan Aixa," 1988. 3 Grant Scholen and Arne Slefferud, "Regional Recreation Open Space System: 1988 Facility Inventory. Capacity Estimate, and System Infrastructure," Metropolitan Council, 1989. CHAPTER 3: Shorcland Access and Development 1974 to 1987. The Minneapolis Chain of Lakes arc the most heavily used parks, with 1.8 million visits in 1988. Eleven regional parks were used at or above their esumat' ^ capacity on summer weekends and holidays in 1988. Shoreland Development Pressures to intensify development around lakes continues in many parts of the metroi area, including those that are already heavily developed. Because people like to live by ’''kes, shoreland throughout the metro area is now being developed and redeveloped to meet the increasing ocmand for lakefront property. In the outer suburbs. i ;eAv homes being built on undeveloped shorcland, while in develops areas, small famj! / cabif *' >re being replaced by larger, more expensive homes. High-rise apartment buildings have beci. proposed several limes for the already fully-developed shoreland of Lake Calhoun in Minneapolis. In 1969, the Minnesota Legislature adopted the Shoreland Management Act :.o protect shoreland. The DNR promulgated rules setting minimum standards for setback size, height of building, and amount of impervious surface allowed within 1,000 feet of a lakeshorc. The shoreland rules originally were directed to counties and applied only to land outside incorporated areas. The statute was amended in 1974 to extend the requirement to shorcland within municipalities so citiv^ could not attract developers by having less stringent sr^rdards than neighboring communities. Municipalities were required to adopt shoreland ordinances by 1975 in compliance with the DNR's shoreland rules. Most have not done so. and the DNR has avoided forcing municipalities to comply. If municipalities did not adopt shoreland ordinances, the DNR was empowered to adopt ordinances for them. This has never been done in the metro area, although it has been done for Pine County. Today, only 30 of 138 municipalities in the metro are** have shoreland ordinances consistent with DNR standards. The DNR believes about 100 cities in the area need ordinances, and in 50 of these the need is great Political and economic constraints have limited shoreland plartning and zoning in the metro area 'The original DNR shoreland rules were entirely regulatory a"* ‘ j not require municipali?’>.s to compreb sively plan for their shoreland. ">e munici . have hesitated k> impose restrictive centroL. r.i development of shoreland \y " pru .ax value. Other cities have been concerned about the effects of new she dices v^ri existing plans and dcveiupmeni. Representatives of the DNR say it has I k s and staffing for implementation of the shoreland rules. Two DNR staff members have worK,. pa-t-time on shoreland ordinances for the metro area. The agency set priorities among metropolitan cities, because it did not have the money or staff to get all the ordinances reviewed. Priorities were assigned based on miles of shoreland, density of development, projected use and development, and existing ordinances in neighborin«» cities. At least once, the DNR apparently approved a shoreland ordinance that did not ccmpiy with its own niles. In 1984, Minneapolis adopted a shoreland ordinance that dealt only with budding height in certain parts of the city. The ordinance said no maximum height limit existed for buildings on subsjjitial portions of the city’s shoreland, although the DNR shoreland rules set a maximum height of 35 feet Three years after the Minneapolis ordinance was submitted to the DNR, it was approved. kecenuy, the DNR received an appropriation of SI .5 million to assist local govemm* throughout the state in developing shoreland ordinances. The DNR will give S5.000 in matching g\,*.- municipalities for comprehensive planning for shorclands and adoption of shorcland ' ■. .ai ces. The DNR recently adopted new shoreland rules; opinions differ on their implicatio;: . . metropolitan lakes. TTie DNR believes the new rules give greater flexibility for developing and approving shoreland ordinances. Standards can be based on a lake's existing development and cities' comprehensive planning. Local governments can establish standards that are more strict than the state's bu, must get ! : LOS. no LAKES: Enjoyment of a Unique Metropolitan Resource is Threatened 15 DNR approval for less strict standards. The new rules also require planning for sensitive and critical shoreland habitats, which most cities did not do in their comprehensive plans. An attorney representing a Minneapolis citizens group has criticized the new rules. Because of vague language, exemptions, and lack of a deadline for compliance, the new mles might provide opportunities for local governments to avoid state standards. CONCLUSIONS Additional shoreland in the metro area needs to be reserved for public use and enjoyment now and in the future. The demand for public shoreland open spaces is expected to increase steadily into the future. Shoreland must be purchased or reserved for public use now, before further development proceeds. Otherwise, prohibitive costs and other obstacles will make shoreland acquisition next to impossible. Long-range plans and controls on shoreland development are essenual to protect metropolitan lakes and shoreland now and in the future. Development that degrades a lake, the view from it, or adjacent land areas must be prevented. The DNR has failed to implement and enforce its existing shoreland rules effectively in the metro area. We were unable to reach a conclusion on the implications of the new shoreland niles because of a lack of time and information. RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend: □ Local governments should make long-range plans for shoreland development and redevelopment. The Metropolitan Council and DNR should assist in this planning. Planning should be based on the folIowir>g principles: • balancing he present interests of riparians, developers, and the public with future concerns; • presc»’ving a reasonable amount of shoreland for public use; and • preserving the nanrral terrain and vegetation of the «»''^reland. □ By a fixed date, municipalities should be required to adopt shoreland ordinances in compliance with state rules. Although the requirement to enact shoreland ordinances has been ineffective in the past, we ^ieve regulations are absolutely necessary to ensure appropriate shoreland development and must be made to work. We are pleased that the Legislature lias appropriated money to the DNR to help local government*: plan for their shoreland and develop ordinances. The DNR must also assign ac; ^uate funds and .taff to oversee enactment and enforcement of shoreland ordinances. □ The Metropolitan Council should work with local governments and the DNR to explore ways, such as tax incentives and land dedication, to appropriately control shoreland development and encourage niunicipalities to reserve shoreland for public use. CHAPTER 4 WATER QUALITY Non-point source pollution and Eurasian water mUfoU pose serious threats to the water quality of metropolitan lakes. This chapter examines these threats, their effects on recreational use of tlv: lakes, and their prevention. FINDINGS Overall, recTeanonal use of metropolitan lakes generally has not been affected by declining water quality, '“^le Mu.bar on the t^xt page describes Eurasian water mafoU, an important threat to Minnesota la>.f s.; The Metropolitan Council monitors lakes for water quality measures that influence recreational use, including water clarity, abundance of ?Ugac, dissolved oxygen content, and water tcmpciarj^. V»Tier. water clarity decreases, re creational use sometimes declines. Lakes with poor clarity often have a build-up of algae which leads to green water and unpleasant odors. According to Dick Osgood, limnologist for the Metropolitan Council, boating on lakes in the rcpon gene: »Uy has not been af^l cted by changes in water quality. While the water quality of many lakes m the region has degraded as a result of urban development, the variety and sheer number of lakes in the area usually allow people to find a lake that suits their expectations and recreational needs. Most recreational activities on lakes do not affea water quality. Minor gasoline leaks from toats generaUy are not a problem except in confined areas of lakes. Boat travel can more greatly aff^ the water quality of shadow lakes by disturbing the sediments. This causes nutrients to be released from the sediments into the water and reduces water clarity. Development of lake watersheds inevitably leads to degradation of lake water quality. Since sewage has largely been diverted away from the lakes, non-point source poUution now poses the most Mnous threat to lake water quality. Construction and development activities mcrease runoff and nutrient inputs to the lakes, leading to more algae and decreased water clarity. Various warjrshed treatments, such as stonnwater detention ponds, are used to control runoff and nutrient loading. However, a recent report by the Metropolitan Councu suggests that these treatments cannot completely offset the effects of development near the lakes.^ Nutrient export from a developed watershed, even with appropriate treatment, will probably be greater than from an undeveloped watershed. The MetropoUtan CouncU strongly advocates the continued use of watershed treatment, but suggests that m- lake treatments may be needed in the future to manage nuisances, such as algal growth, associated with nutr.ent loading ^m runoff. 1 Richard A. Osgood. An Evaluation of the Effects of Watershed Treatment Systems on the Summertime Phosphorus Concentration in Metropolitan Area Lakes. Metropolitan Council. 1989. pp. ii-iii. CHAPTER 4: Water Quality In-Iake resioraiion techniques arc largely experimental; their success in restoring degraded lakes is limited and uncertain. Several in-lake treatment methods have been tried in the metro area. The DNR has reponed some success with efforts to restore degraded lakes by removing rough fish and restocking with other species. It reports improved clarity and better fishing in those cases. Although limnologisis are learning more from each experiment, in-lake management techniques arc simply too poorly understood to be relied on for improving water quality at piesent. For example, calcium nitrate was injeaed into the sediments of Long Lake in New Brighton to prevent the release of pho^horous (the nutrient most closely associated with algal growth) from the sediments to the water. While the rate of phosphorous release from the sediments seemed to be reduced, lake water quality was unaffected by the treatment because the lake is so deep and phosphorus inputs from runoff greatly exceeded inputs from the sediments. The DNR, Metropolitan Council, watershed districts, water management organizations, and local governments all manage water quality to varying degrees (see Table 5.1 in Chapter 5). For example, the watershed districts. Metropolitan Council, and DNR all sample metropolitan lakes for various water quality parameters, but their sampling programs are r»ot coordinated. The Metropolitan Council focuses on factors that relate to recreational use. It tests about 120 lakes for nutrient levels, abundance of algae, water clarity, temperature, and oxygen content The watershed management organizations also snidy these factors. The DNR primarily samples lakes for factors related to fish habitat. EURASIAN WATER MILFOIL Eurasian water milfoil is a new and severe threat to Minnesota lakes. Eurasian water milfoil is a rapidly-growing, non-native aquatic weed that has recently been introduced to Minnesota lakes. The weed spreads when fragments break off and eventually take root in the sediments. Boat propellers often au up the weed and facilitate its spread. Because it is not native to this country, Eurasian water milfoil has no natural enemies to control its spread and can form dense mats on the water surface, restricting boating, swimming, and fishing. Eurasian water milfoil now infests portions of several lakes in the metro area and has reached the critical stage on Lake Minnetonka. In its early stages, the weed can be controlled or eradicated by aquatic herbicides. At advanced stages of irifestation, as in Lake Minnetonka, the weed can only be controlled by harvesting and cannot be eradicated. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) began harvesting the weed this year. The spread of Eurasian water milfoil can only be prevented if people wash off their boats to keep fragments of the —ced from entenng new lakes. The DNR and some lake associations have bej n to post signs about the weed at lake access facilities, and volunteers now monitor boats leaving access sites on Lake Minnetonka. The Legislature has appropriated $250,000 to the DNR over the next two years for identification, monitoring, research, education, and control of Eurasian water milfoil. The Department of Natural Resources, Pollution Control Agency, and Department of Health work together to test fish caught in metro area lakes for the presence of PCBs and mercury. Where levels are high, a fish consuinption advisory is issued. No agency samples for chemicals sfleh as pesticides. Both the Metropolitan Council and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency maintain data centers with information on the water quality of metropolitan lakes. CONCLUSIONS Far less is knovm than is needed about the water quality of metropolitan lakes. Programs to monitor water quality in the metro area are limited ard uncoordinated. While several agencies monitor various aspects of water quality, they do not coordinate their activities very extensively. Some aspects of water quality arc not monitored at all. LOSING LAKES: Enjoyment of a Unique Metropolitan Resource is Threatened Water quality is difficult and expensive to improve once a lake has been allowed to degrade. In-lake restoration techniques are costly and often ineffective. While degradation of the lakes might be impossible to stop, it can be minimized by treatments that control ninoff and nutrient loading. RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend: □ Water quality goals should be based on proposed recreational uses of the lakes. While it may go without saying, local governments must actively develop recreation goals for lakes. After determining how a lake will be used, its water quality can be managed for that use. A lake used primarily for swimming, for example, must be managed very differently from one used for fishing. At present, different agencies manage for recreational use and water quality (see Qiapter 5). We urge these agencies to cooperate more in planning and management activities. □ Agencies with control over whole lake watersheds should plan for and manage lake water quality. Watershed districts and water management organizations are the best agencies to protect water quah^ by managing the effects of development in the watersheds. We believe management should turn to in lake restoration techniques only as a last resort to treat problems after watershed treatments have been installed. □ Monitoring of metropolitan lakes should be better coordinated and more extensive at the level of watersheds. CHAPTER 5 GOVERNANCE Metropolitan lakes are managed by a myriad of governmental bodies which often have narrow goals and responsibilities. This chapter discusses the effectiveness of the current method of metropolitan lake management FINDINGS Responsibility for management of metropolitan lakes is fragmented, with all levels of government involved. As illustrated in Table S. 1, metropolitan lakes are managed to some deg^ by three federal boides, four state agencies, seven counties, seven Soil and Water Conservation Districts, 46 watershed districts and water management organizations, two lake conservation districts, and 138 municipalities. Agencies' responsibilities overlap considerably for some functions, especially those related to water quality. The existing governance system has the advantage of allowing management to be customized to a particular lake and those who live around it. Local issues, like the placement of dorks, can be dealt with at a local level. On the other hand, the present system can be cumbersome and short-sighted when agencies concentrate only on their narrow responsibilities. Many public forums are available for citizens to express their views on specific lake issues. All of the agencies listed above hold public meetings or hearings on management issues. Depending on the agency, these issues can range in scope from permits for riparian docks to new shoreland rules for the entire state. Citizens often do not attend or participate in the numerous public meetings concerning lake management unless there is a severe problem that affects them. This lack of participation has several causes. First, few local residents read official notices of public meetings. Second, lake management decisions are often made by local governments, but lake users often live outside the county or niunicipality of their preferred lake. People who live outside the affected municipal or county boundaries are less likely to be informed about pending management decisions than those who live near a lake. Third, the fragmentation of management responsibilities confuses people, making it difficult for them to know where to voice their opinions. However, citizens have few opportunities to become involved in the planning and development of long term lake management policy. Some lake management agencies have citizen advisory committees, but often the public is asked to react to policy decisions made by management agencies rather than to assist in the plarming behind these decisions. As noted in Chapter 2, the DNR often makes decisions about sites for new public boat ramps without help from local citizens. Local residents are offered opportunities for input after a site has been chosen. When lake users' concerns are ix)t considered in planning, managers frequently encounter opposition, leading to frustration and expense by both management agencies and the public. CHAPTER 5: Governance LOSING LAKES: Enjoyment of a Unique Metropoiitan Resource is Threatened Although the situation on one lake affects other lakes, planning and management decisions often are made for individual lakes ratlwr than for the metropolitan area as a whole. Because decisions about one lake can lead to user displacement, they directly influence use of other lakes. For example, restrictions on motorized boats in Minneapolis and St. Paul caused boaters to move to suburban lakes. Boaters displaced from some lakes moved to the St Croix and Mississippi Rivers. The lack of decisions and restrictions on recreational use on some lakes also leads to user displace.nent, as discussed in Chapter 1. Small boat users move to lakes where they feel safer and less crowded. Decisions about development and water quality management can also lead to user displacement, if lake users dislike the water quality or view from a lake. No comprehensive forum exists for lake managers in different oi^ganizations to coordinate their goals, policies, and aaivities. The sheer number of management agencies makes communication among them difficult, and the narrow goals of some agencies can impede overall management of lakes. No agency is responsible for facilitating communication and coordination of lake management Interests in lake management frequently conflict Conflicts between long-term arxl short-term concerns are common. For example, local governments sometimes have short-term economic interests in development that conflict with long-term interests of proteaing the lakes. As discussed above, there may also be conflicts between local and regional interests. Different agencies managing a single lake can even have conflicting goals. There is a long tradition in Minnesota of viewing the seven county area as an interconnected region, and of seeking metropolitan solutions to its problems. The Metropolitan Council was created in 1967 to guide "orderly and ecorromic" development of the metropolitan Twin Cities area. The Metropolitan Land Planning Act, enacted in 1976, required the Council to oversee a process of comprehensive planning by all local units of government.* The Metropolitan Council has organized its regional policy guidelines around "metropolitan system plans" for airports, transportation, waste control, and recreational open space. In turn, local units of governments prepared comprehensive plans that were reviewed by the Council to ensure that they were consistent with those guidelines. CONCLUSIONS While many issues are regional in scope, management authority over surface waters is localized. We believe that metropolitan surface waters, both lakes and rivers, truly function as a regional system, y- are largely managed by local governments that may have concerns and interests in conflict with effective long-term management of a regional resource. The current method of metropolitan surface water management is more oriented towards the demands of the present than the concerns of the future. Currently, management tends to react more to short term problems than to plan for the future of our lakes and rivers. Municipalities frequenfly lack the financial resources and expertise necessary to effcaively carry out all of their surface water management responsibilities. Surface water management agencies in the mcTO area tend to focus narrowly on their own jurisdictions rather than viewing surface waters as ecological and recreational systems. Each governmental body has a small piece of the total surface water management responsibility. While agencies may manage lakes and rivers well within their own n^w goals, no agency takes an overall view of the surface waters. Better regionwide coordination of the goals, policies, and activities of management agencies is essential to improving metropolitan lake management Minn. Stat. §§473.851-.872. CHAPTER 5: Governance RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend: □ The Legislature should charge the Metropolitan Council with responsibility for planning and coordinating shoreland, surface use, and water quality management of metropolitan surface waters. We believe the Council's extensive experience in planning and coordination makes it the best choice for these responsibilities for metropolitan lakes. The Council also is one of the few agencies which has worked on both recreational use and water quality issues. The Legislature could extend the Council's authority over regional open space to include surface waters or could designate the surface waters as a separate metropolitan system. It should ensure adequate funding for these new responsibilities. □ In partnership with local governments, the Metropolitan Council should develop a metropolitan policy framework and system plan for regional shoreland and surface water management. The Council should work with local governments to set goals aixl guidelines for recreational use, shoreland development, and water quality, and should develop mechanisms to fund implementation of these policies. As with the regional parks system, local governments should be re^nsible for implementing the plans. The Council should aid local governments that need technical expertise or increased enforcement capability. □ Local governments should be required by a fixed date to develop local surface water plans subject to approval by the Metropolitan Council. Municipalities should be responsible for amending their comprehensive plans to include surface use and long-term shoreland development for surface waters within their borders. Counties should have this responsibility for surface waters that overlap municipal boundaries or are located in unincorporated areas. Local pluming for water quality has already been started by watershed districts and water management organizations. While Lake Minnetorika and White Bear Lake should be recognized as regional resources, their respective conservation districts .should continue to be in charge of planning for those lakes. The Metropolitan Council should review and approve all local plans to ensure they are compatible with the regional plaa □ The Metropolitan Council should make planning grants available to help local governments in the development of their shoreland and surface water plans The Council, from its existing property ta’f levy, sho id also provide shoreland acquisition grants to mimicipalities to meet regional management goals. G The Metropolitan Council should coordinate the plans and activities of the various agencies involved in metropolitan lake management. Local governments and management agencies within watersheds in the metropolitan area should meet periodically to share their management concerns and issues and to explore ways of working together toward common goals. The Metropolitan Council should oversee management so that local policies and activities fit in with regional management goals. APPENDIX MAJOR LAWS AFFECTING LAKE MANAGEMENT The following arc brief descriptions of the major laws regarding management of lakes and other bodies of water. GENERAL POLICIES Mi,m. Chapter 105: Division of Waters. Soils, and Minerals (first enacted 1969) To conserve and use the state's water resources and to promote the public herdth, safety, and welfare ~ (a) subject to existing rights, the public waters and wetlands arc subject to the control of the state; (b) the state shall control the appropriation and use of surface and groundwaters: and (c) the state shall control any activity that changes the course, current, or cross-section of public waters or wetlands. Minn. Slot.. Chapter 86: "Outdoor Recreational Act of 1975" Establishes that the state should make its abundant opportunities for outdoor recreation and education available to all citizens of Minnesota. Finds that the outdoor recreational needs of the people of Minnesota will be best served by an outdoor recreational system that preserves Minnesota's natural and historical heritage and provides an adequate supply of scenic, accessible, and usable lands and waters. Includes authorization to establish several units of the system, including water access sites, natural state parks, recreational state parks, wild, scenic, and recreational rivers and wilderness areas. Minn. Sta*. §97A. 141: Public Water Access Sites Allows the commisshner to acquire access sites to public waters by gift, lease, purchase, easement or conder.mation, with approval of the Executive Council. Also addresses au^uisiuon of right-of-way for access roads to the access site. Afr/in. Sror. §378.321: PublK Access Restrictions (enacted 1986) w n ^ Provides that the same types and sizes of watercraft and horsepower of motors must be allowed to access and enter water bodies as arc generally allowed to be operated on the water body. Special use exceptions that are not dependent on lakeshore or property ownership may be granted by permiL SURFACE USE M/nn. Ru/es. Parts 6110.3(X)0-3800 , r i ^ r Provides procedures for the development and approval of niles and ordinances for rcsolvirig water surface use conflict Governmental units developing surface use ordinances rnust select standards from lists provided and must submit proposed ordinances to the commissioner of natural resources for approval or disapproval prior to adoption. APPENDIX Minn. Sta^ §378.32 Provides that a county board may, by ordinance, reflate the surface use of ar.y bodies of water situated wholly or partly within the county boundaries. If the water lies in more than one county, the ordinance must be adopted by all the affected county boards or placed into eifect by the commissioner of natural resources. The county board may exercise the powers below with respect to bodies of water lying wholly within a city or lake conservation district only with the authorization of that city or conservation distria. The county board may; (1) (2) (3) (4^ (5) (6) regulate public facilities for access to the body of water, except when state access or when preempted by municipal ordinance; regulate the construction and maintenance of commercial marinas and docks and moorings; regulate mechanical and chemical means of dc'cing the water and removing weeds and algae from the water, reg^ate the type and size of watercraft and motors; limit use of water at various times and on various parts; regulate the speed of watercraft and other activities to secure the public safety and the most general public use; and contract with other law enforcement agencies to police the body of water and its shore. Minn.S:at. §459.20 (enacted 1973) Provides that the governing body of any home mlc charter or statutory city or town in the state has all the powers to improve and regulate the use of any body of water situated wholly within its boundaries. The local unit of government has the same powers given to county boards (above) and to establish and administer lake improvement districts (§§378.401-56). When a body of water is situated within the boundaries of two or more contiguous local units of government, the city councils and town boards may jointly exercise these same powers to improve and regulate the use of the water. The joint board may not, however, establish a lake improvement district or exercise any of its powers if the county board has already done so. Minn. Stat. §^78.401-57: "Lake Improvement District Act" Provides that county boards may establish lake improvement districts (by resolution of one county when the district is situated solely within that county or by joint county authority when the district extends into more than one county). If one or more county boards disapprove of the creation of the lake improvement distria, the commisioner of natural resources may be petitioned for the creation. County boards, joint county authorities, statutory, and home rule cities and towns may delegate their powers to the lake improvement distria. Any programs and services to be undenaken must be consistent with the statewide water plan. Among the district's powers are acquiring, constructing, and operating water control works; changing the course of current or cross- section; improving navigation; undertaking research lo daermine the dition and development of the water, implementing a plan to eliminate -/cUntion; conducting i nm of improvement and conservation; constructing a water and/o :.twer sysicm, maintaii. 'lie beaches, docks, aiKl other public facilities for access; ,uid regulating water surfa*. SHORELAND MANAGEMENT §105.485 Requires the commissioner of natural resources to adop ./Jel standards and criteria for subdivision, use, and development of shorelands in municipalities and unincorporated areas. Shorelands are defined as land located within the follow bg distances from the ord nary high water elevation of public waters; (1) land located within 1.000 feet of the normal high water I LOSING LAKES: Enjoyment of A Unique Metropolitan Resource is Threatened 27 mark of a lake, pond, or flowage; and (2) land within 300 feet of a river or stream or the landward side of flood plain delineai J by ordinance on a river or stream, whichever is greater. Model standards and criteria must include, but are not limited to, the loUowing: (1) the area of a lot and length of water frontage suitable for a building site (2) the placement of structures in relation to shorelines and roads (3) the placement and construction of sanitary and waste disposal facilities (4) designation of types of land uses; (5) changes in bottom contours of adjacent public waters; (6) preservation of natural shonelands through the restriction of land uses; (7) variances from the minimum standards and criteria The commissioner is also required to adopt a model ordinance lor unincorporated ar^. If a county failed to adopt an ordinance by July 1.1972 in compliance with the state standards, the commissioner was ordered to adapt the model to the county. Municipalities having shoreland within their corporate limits were required to adopt ordinances in compliance with state standards by July 1.1975. The comissioner was given authority to adopt ordinances for municipalities that failed to adopt ordinances by that date. Minn. Rules, Parts 6120.2500-3900 r u iGives statewide standards for management of shoreland areas. A new version of the rules was adopted in 1989. WATERSHEDS AND/OR GROUNDWATER SYSTEMS Minn Sro/..Chapter 1 lOB: "Comprehensive Local Water Management Act" (enacted 1985) Erteourages counties to develop comprehensive water plans that would address water problems in watershed units and groundwaier systems. The plans must be consist^ with other plans developed by county organizations or water management organizations. The plara must incorporate any existing plans and mles adopted by water management organizauons or intercouniy joint powers boards. The plan would include a description of the existing physical environment, land use. and development, as well as any expected changes; information about the grouridwater. sunace water ^d related land resources; objectives for future use development and conservauon of water and related land resources; and descriptions of the possible conflicts betweeri the plan and the plans of other local units of government, counties, or water management org?nizaaons. Minn. Stca . 112: "Minnesota Watershed Act” (enacted 1953) __ Esu -d to conserve the natural resources of the state through land use. flooo control, and otivjr nc-^ds. Gives the Board of Water and Soil Reosurces the r,;'tnority to establish a watched district (situated whoUy within one county or partly within an outside county), "nie Distnct s ^thonty includes regulating the supplv. quality, and use of waters by controlling flooding. controU.ng ir^tion aS hydroelectric power, and prov. . water supply for public and pnvaie uses. Minn Sfot. §§473.875-883: "Metropolitan Surface Water Management" , „ Esublishcd to protect, preserve, and use natural surface and groundwater stoiuge and retention systems. APPENDIX development of land in the watershed when the local government with zoning and planning authority does not have a water management plan. Gives counties the authority' to prepare and adopt groundwater plans or to delegate the preparation and adoption of plans to the local soil and wsier conservation distiio. The plan must be reviewed by the Metropolitan Council, the Commissioner of Natural Resources, the Commissioner of the Pollution Control Agency, and the Board of Water and Soil Resources. * WORK OF THE COMMITTEE Charge to the Committee The Citizens League Board of Directors adopted the following charge to the research committee. MANAGEMENT OF METROPOLITAN LA aES Because ail types of water recreation and watercraft are allowed on most lakes in the metropolitan area, many are experiencing serious crowding problems. This has led some persons to question whether uiuestricted use of lakes should continue. Proposals for lake zoning are concentrated within each lake. But the state Department of Natural Resources is considering a system of metropolitan lakes, with zoning among area lakes. The committee should recommend policies for management of metropolitan lakes that balance lake access, safety, user convenience, and environmental protection. The committee's examination should include: current uses of and access to Iskes in the metropolitan area; current restrictions on metropolitan area lakes; crowding and safety on metropolitan area lakes; costs of maintaining current uses of metro area lakes, and governance of lakes, including wnether metro lakes (which are water parks) should become the responsibility of the Metropolitan Parks and Open Space commission. Committee Membership Under the leadership of John Adams, chair. 22 Citizens League members participated actively in the deliberations of the committee. They are: Sally Anson Doug Barr Ralph Brauer Nicholas Duff Hugh Faville Kathryn Harding Patricia Hart Ruth Hass Rudolph Hoagberg Curt Hubbard Frank Jewett Gary Joselyn Larry Kelley Janet Kramer Georganne Krause Patricia Leary Frederick Markwardt JohnMullan Nels Nelson Dick Nowlin David Unmacht Jane Vanderpoel WORK OF THE COMMITTEE Commitc^x Meetings The commiiiec .aet fc the first time on January 26,1988 and concluded its woric on October 5,1989. A total of 30 meetings were held. During the first stage of the committee's work, it heard presentations frotn the resource speakers listed below. Resource Speakers: The Citizens League and the committee members would like to thank these resource people for the assistance they provided. (Titles reflect the position held by the speaker at the time of the presentation): Dave Arndorfer, consultant. Lake Minnetonka Const rvadon District Bill Becker, Office of Planning, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Don Benson, staff coordinator. Prior Lake Spnng Lake Watershed District Ann Burkhart, professor. University of Minnesota Law School, attorney for ELECT Kim Eiverum, boat and water safety coordinator. Minnesou Department of Natural Resources Horst eraser, director of planning. City of Prior Lake Jo Ellen Hurr, chair. Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Martin Jessen, president and CEO, Freshwater Foundation Kent Lokkesmoe, Assistant Director, Division of Waters. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Mark Nelson, staff representative, for meuopolitan area Board of Water and Soil Resources Bob Nethercut, former staff. Metropolitan Council and Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission Terry Noonan, lakes management specialist. Ramsey County Department of Public Works Senator Gen Olson, IR-Minnetrista George Oming, Minnesota Future Resources Commission Dick Osgood, limnologist and environmental planner. Metropolitan Council Jack Perkovich, director, Washington County Parks James Robinette, director of community development, Lakeville, and chair. Board of Credit River Watershed Maintenaiice Organization James Spensley, president. Board of Managers, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Arne Stefferud, staff. Metropolitan Council and Metropolitan Parks and Open Spaces Commission John Stine, Division of Waters, Department of Natural Resources Richard Wedell, mayor. City of Shoreview Franz Westermeier, member. Washington County Parks and Open Spaces Commission A1 Wittman, director of planning. Board of Parks and Recreation Assistance to the Committee Margaret Rader, a contract researcher, prepared this report. Staff assistance for the committee's work was provided by Allan Baumgarten, Philip Jermi, Joarui Latulippe, Meredith Poppcle, and Dawn Westerman. Deborah Loon provided staff support to the committee in its first two months. RECENT CITIZENS LEAGUE REPORTS Losing Lakes: Enjoyment of a Unique Metropolitan Resource is Threatened Access, Not More Mandates: A New Focus for Minnesota Health Policy Community: A Resource for the '90s The Metropolitan Council: Strengthening Its Leadership Role Building Tomorrow by Helping Today's Kids Charter^ Schools = Choices for Educators + Quality for All Students Cut Tax Exemptions, Boost Equity and Accountability Stopping AIDS: An Individual Responsibility The Public’s Courts: Making the Governor's Nominating Process Statutory Make the Present Airport Better-Make A New Airport Possible Cooperatively-Managed Schools: Teachers as Parmers The New Weigh to Recycle First Qass Property Tax System Start Right with "Right Start": A Health Plan for MN's Uninsured New Destinations for Transit Commitment to Focus: More of Both State Civil Service: People Make the Difference It's Only a Game: A Lottery in Minnesota Adaptability - The New Mission for Vocational Education A Strategy for the Waterbelt Power to the Process: Making Minnesota's Legislature Work Better Accountability for the Development Dollar Building on Strength: A Competitive Minnesota Economic Strategy A Larger Vision for Small Scale Agriculture The Metro Council: Narrowing the Agenda and Raising the Stakes The Region’s Infrastructure: The Problem Isn't What You Think It Is Meeting the Crisis in Institutional Care: Toward Better Choices, Fmancing and Results A Farewell to Welfare Homegrown Services: The Neighborhood Opportunity Use Road Revenue for the Roads That Are Used Workers ’ Compensation Reform: Get the Employees Back on the Job Thought Before Action: Understanding and Refomiing Minnesota’s Fiscal System The CL in the Mid-80s Making Better Use of Existing Housing: A Rental Housing Strategy for the 1980s Rebuilding Education to Make It Work A Positive Alternative: Redesigning Public Service Delivery Paying Attention to the Difference in Prices: A Health Care Cost Strategy for the 1980s A Subregional Solution to the East Metro Park Question Taxis: Solutions in the City; a New Future in the Suburbs Keeping the Waste Out of Waste Changing Communications: Will the Twin Cities Lead or Follow? Siting of Major Controversial Facilities Enlarging Our Capacity to Adapt: Issues of the '80s Next Steps in the Evolution of Chemical Dependency Care in Minnesota Linking a Commitment to Desegregation with Choices for Quality Schools Initiative and Referendum..."NO" for Minnesota 11-8-89 9-21-89 7- 25-89 3- 23-89 12-16-88 11- 17-88 10-20-88 5-09-88 1-28-88 12- 17-87 8- 05-87 5- 22-87 4- 27-87 2-24-87 10-28-86 8- 27-86 6- 12-86 2-11-86 1-08-86 11-22-85 9- 19-85 6-20-85 11- 28-84 9-25-84 6- 07-84 5- 30-84 4- 24-84 2- 07-84 U-03-83 3- 02-83 12- 15-82 10-26-82 9-22-82 5- 19-82 5- 04-82 3-24-82 9-29-81 7- 15-81 6- 03-81 5- 27-81 12-17-80 10-22-80 8- 27-80 6- 13-80 12-12-79 2-28-79 For titles ana availability of earlier reports contact the Citizens League office, 338-0791 RECENT CITIZENS LEAGUE STATEMENTS Letter to Legislature from CC re: Fmancing at the U of M Statement on Changing the Fiscal Disparities Law Statement to the Governor &. Legislature on Transportion Financing in 1988 Statement to Legislative Commission re: Road Finarxnng Statement to U of M Regents re: Commitment to Focus Statement to Governor and Legislature on Innovation and Cost Control (Governor's Budget) Selection of a New State Commissioner of Transportation Letter to RTB re: Metro Mobility Price Competition Ideas Testimony to Legislature on Bloomington Stadiun. Site Bill Letter to RTB re: Policy Committee's Study of Metro Mobility from GC Statement to House Tax Subcommittee on Fiscal Disparities Statement to Legislature on Preserving Metropolitan Tax-Base Sharing Statement to Legislature & Metro Council on Bloomington Development Proposal Statement to Metropolitan Council on Organized Collection of Solid Waste Statement to Metropolitan Council on Long-Term Care Statement on Transit Alternatives Statement on Solid Waste Disposal Statement to Tax Study Commission Statement on Light RaU Transit Statement to Legislative Study Committee on Metropolitan Transit Statement to Governor's Tax Study Commission Statement to Minnesota's Highway Study Commission Statement on the Metropolitan Council's Proposed Interim Economic Policies Statement to Mpls. Chaner Commission: Proposal to have Mayor as non-voting member of Courxnl Statement to Metroiwlitan Council & Richard P. Braun. Commission of Transportation on Preferential Treatment in I-35W Expansion Statement to Members. Steering Committee on Southwest-University Averue Corridor Study Statement to Commission on the Future of Post-Secondary Education in Minnesota Statement to the Metropolitan Health Board Appeal to the Legislature and the Governor Citizens League Opposes Unfunded Shifts to Balance Budget Longer-Term Spending Issues Which the Governor and Legislature Should Face in 1982 Statement Concerning Alternatives to Solid Waste Flow Control Amicus Curiae Brief in Fiscal Disparities Case filed Statement to the Minnesota State Le^slature Regarding the Reconstruction Project Letter to the Joiru Legislative Commission on Metropolitan Governance Statement to Metropolitan Health Board on Phase IV Report Statement to Metropolitan Council on I-35E Statement to Minneapolis Chaner Commission Letter to Metropolitan Council re CL Recommendations on 1-394 Statement to the Governor and Legislature as They Prepare for a Special Sesion Statement to the Minnesota State Legislature Regarding the University of Minnesota Hospitals Reconstruction Bill, as amended For list of earlier statements, contact the Citizens League office. 338-0791 1 6-20-83 4-26-83 12-1-82 1-18-82 1-12-82 12-17-81 12-14-81 11-13-81 11-4-81 9-24-81 7-6-81 6-23-81 5-26-81 5-8-81 REPORTS 1st copy 2nd - lOlh 11th and mote CL PUBLICATIONS ORDER FORM MEMBER PRICE NON-MEMBER PRICE FREE $5.00 S4.00 $10.00 $9.00 $8.00 PUBLIC AFFAIRS DIRECTORY 1st copy $5.00 2nd - 10th $3.00 11th and more $2.00 $10.00 $6.00 $4.00 MINNESOTA JOURNAL SUBSCRIPTION 22 Issues per year FREE Corporate discount for Additional Subscriptions - $20.00 Back issues - $2.00 $40.00 CL PUBLICATIONS ORDER COUPON Quantity Publication TOTAL AMOUNT OF ORDER Name Address City. State, Zip. Make checks payable to Gtizens League and mail this form to: 708 South 3rd Street, Suite 500, Minneapolis, MN 55415 Cost $___ WHAT THE CITIZENS LEAGUE IS The Citizens League has been an active and effective public affairs research and education organization in the Twin Cities metropolitan area since 1952. Volunteer research committees of League members study policy issues in depth and develop informational reports that propose specific workable solutions to public issues. Recommendations in these reports often become law. Over the years. League reports have been a reliable source of information for governmental officials, community leaders, and citizens concerned with public policy issues of our area. The League depends upon the support of individual members and contributions from businesses, foundations, arid other organizations throughout the metropolitan area. OFFICERS 1989-90 PRESIDENT Ronnie Brooks VICE PRESIDENTS Judith £. Alnes A. Edward Hunter Peter Vanderpoel Mary Lou Williams SECRETARY Bill Johnstone TREASURER Robert Erickson STAFF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Curtis Johnson ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR Allan Baumgarten RESEARCH ASSOCIATES Jody Hauer Marina Lyon Margaret Rader HNANCE DIRECTOR Philip Jenni ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF Donna Keller Joann Latulippe Meredith Poppele Dawn Westerman EDITOR, MINNESOTA JOURNAL Stephen Alnes DIRECTORS 1989-90 Ellen Brown John Cairns Caii "Buzz” Cummins Andrew Czajkowski MildaHedblom Karen L. Himle Janet Hively Herbert C. Johnson Steve Kelley BiU KeUy Carol Kemer Jean King A. Scheffer Lang Barbara Lukermann Richard Moberg Joe Nathan Charles Neerland Ruth Anne Olson Daniel K. Peterson Wayne Pop^am Beverly Propes Dana Schroeder Michael Snitzer Thomas H. Swain Paul A. Taylor James Terwedo Carol L. Thacher T. Williams Nancy Zingale PAST PRESIDENTS Charles S. Bellows * Francis M. Boddy Alan R. Boyce Charles H. Gay Eleanor Colbom Rollin H. Crawford Waite D. Durfee John F. Finn Richard J. FitzGerald David L. Graven * Walter S. Harris, Jr. Peter A. Heegaard James L. Hetland, Jr. Terry Hoffman B. Kristine Johnson Verne C. Johnson Jean King Stuan W. Leek, Sr. Greer E. Lockhart John W. Mooty Arthur Nahalin Charles Neeiiarxl Norman L. Newhall, Jr. Wayne H. Olson * LesUe C. Park Malcolm G. Pfimder Wayne Popham James R. Pratt * Leonard F. Ramberg John A. RoUwagen Charles T. Silverson Archibald Spencer Thomas H. Swain Peter Vanderpoel Frank Walters * John W. Windhorst • Deceased Citizens League dr 708 South 3rd Street, Suite 500 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 612/3384)791 MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION Name Home Phone Address City State Zip Employer Work Phone Position FAX# Employer's Address Send Mail to: □ Home □ Office •Spouse Information Name Employer Position Work phone I will join at this level: DONOR $1,000 or more □ SUSTAINING $500 - 999 □ CONTRIBUTING $75 - 199 □ •FAMILY $40 □ INDIVIDUAL $30 □ FULL-TIME STUDENT $20 □ BUSINESS $150 □ Referred by:______________ Membership is tax-deductible and includes a one-year subscription to the Minnesota Journal •Family membership cniiUcs you to a second Minnesota Journal. Please indicate the name and address of the recipient. Work Address IMPACT PUBLICATIONS MEETINGS Join the Citizens League and help make things happen • Being a member of the Citizens League means you care about what happens in Minnesota and believe that good public policy depends upon an informed citizenry. League member ship gives you an opportunity to participate in shaping public policy. Membership also offers these additional benefits: • Minnesota Journal — 22 issues a year of timely public affairs news, analysis and commen tary, including the League's annual property tax survey. • Public Affairs Directory — a handy listing of agencies, organizations and officials involved in making public policy. • The School Book — a comprehensive guide to elementary schools in the Twin Cities. • Citizens League reports — full reports and statements on topics studied — available upon request • Mind-Opener breakfast meetings — every Tuesday from Labor Day to Memorial Day. Public officials, community and business leaders meet with League audiences to discuss and debate timely issues. • The DeSantis Series: Neighborhood Issues in Focus — Speakers explore issues of neigh borhood economic development Seminars - occasional, in-depth discussion of issues. 3 § S llll si?- llll h iliilu K « s: s 11 % 5III I u crn w.- '»»' K'U I ^IK‘ I !. \s \' ‘M N ' •! clr^ toi Ncn. Rof><f: D Major Robert P Ambro'e Ricbard C. Hainton F. Peter Herturth Gregory D R'e Mian Or«n y'.rv Marjesr 6 June 1990 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District c/o Gene Strommen 405 East Lake Street Wayzata, Minnesota 5j391 RE: Wayzata - LMCD Plan (Program) Review FILE NO: 103.10 - 88.45 Lear Mr. Stronuuen: Pursuant to tlie review process which has been established by the LMCD, the City of Wayzata has analyzed and evaluated the draft Lake Minnetonka Long-Term Management Program. As part of the public hearing, we are herewith submitting a formal position paper which is attached and which was approved by the Planning Commission on 4 June 1990 and by the City Council at a workshop session held on 5 June 1990. In summary the City of Wayzata's position is that there is agreement with the objectives to improve the lake and its adjacent shorelands. There is, however, great concern with the program's lack of attention to detail and specifics as it addresses land use in the shoreland areas. If this "program" is to be of benefit and an effective tool, it must specifically address the "exceptions" which are lightly recognized as needed for established, high intensity urban centers such as the Wayzata downtown. In this regard, if the present draft document is intended to be representative of a nearly completed effort, it falls far short of requirements and is not viewed by the City of Wayzata as acceptable. On the other hand, if the present draft document is to serve as a means to stimulate discussion and thus to direct extensive, continuing work towards a precise resolution of issues in a plan as contracted to an ordinance or regulatory format, the City of Wayzata does not have as strong a concern. If this latter situation is in fact the case, our community expects that we will be consulted on a much more direct basis to resolve issues and coordinate acceptable approaches. Lake Minnetonka Conservation District 6 June 1990 Page Two Another matter to be stressed is the Wayzata City Council's very strong position is that a new layer of government and bureaucracy is to be avoided. There is no desire to see major increases in LMCD staff and related responsibilities. In this regard, if a plan is properly done and detailed, there should be minimal need for increased LMCD staff and review responsibilities. There is frankly a concern that presently suggested advisory roles will eventually progress to "approval" responsibilities. This is yet another noted concern of the Wayzata City Council and focuses upon their position of maintaining individual community autonomy and control. We emphasize the Wayzata community's willingness to work with the LMCD in the pursuit of a management program and especially a "plan" for Lake Minnetonka. Through such cooperative efforts we are hopeful that an acceptable, final plan can be eventually realized. Respectfully submitted, CITY OF WAYZATA, MINNESOTA Allan Orsen City Manager Mayor and City Council Planning Commission Wayzata Chamber of Commerce f^r.Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. PLANNING ‘DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCHURBAN PLANNING REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: RE: FILE NO: Allan Orsen Curtis Gutoske/David Licht 1 June 1990 Wayzata - LMCD Plan Review 103.10 - 90.05 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The LMCD Long-Term Management Program provides a 25 year guide for maintaining and enhancing where possible, the environmental quality, recreational experience and the aesthetic qualify of Lake Minnetonka. All of the fundamental goals presented within the LMCD Plan are shared by the City of Wayzata in the interest of the lake's protection and the shoreland properties surrounding it. A detailed review of the policies, programs, and regulations of the LMCD Plan has been conducted with emphasis given to the Plan's application to Wayzata. Once again, the majority of the provisions within the Plan were found to be consistent with current City plans and regulations. There were found, however, to be certain elements of the LMCD Plan that may present significant problems for Wayzata. These concerns primarily revolve around regulating multiple family ana commercial development or redevelopment within the Shoreland Zoning District. The LMCD Plan fails to recognize and provide practical regulations for the Central Business District and surrounding urban core of Wayzata. A summary of the.concerns with the LMCD Plan are provided below; o Maximum allowed density for multiple family and residential planned unit developments is 2.9 - 4.8 units per acre. o Commercial uses not in need of riparian parcels must maintain double the required OHWL setback of 50 feet and be substantially screened from view of the lake by either topography or vegetation. 4601 Excelsior Blvd.*Suite 410 ‘Minneapolis. MN 55416*(612) 925-9420*Fax 925-2721 o A "flexibility provision" established in the DNR regulations has been deleted from the LMCD Plan. This provision allows communities flexibility from the strict DNR guidelines in establishing local shoreland regulations when unique circumstances exist such as central business districts within the shoreland district or long established land uses that do not conform to the DNR regulations. o The lack of recognition of development at urban densities (both residential and commercial) leads to unapplicabie regulations within the LMCD Plan regarding lot size, setbacks, lot coverage, open space and density. o The public acquisition of wetlands through grants or other financial means. o Proposed increases in LMCD staff to review and comment upon zoning variances is a duplication of governmental review. Individual cities are required to perform variance If the cities adopt regulations in conformance with the LMCD Plan, there would appear to be little need for the LMCD review. Such an additional review could cause time delays in the processing of such requests and would require an increase in LMCD funds to facilitate the extra staff. The apparent problems and concerns with the LMCD Plan raises questioL regarding the thoroughness of the plan preparation, particularly in regards to shoreland regulations. It is hoped that the final draft of the LMCD Plan further recognizes the diverse development patterns surrounding Lake Minnetonka, and provides policies and regulations that may adequately and appropriately respond to these differing circumstances. INTRODUCTION The LMCD Long-Term Management Program (the LMCD 25 year guide for maintaining and enhancing where P°“ible, the environmental quality, recreational experience, snd aesthetic quality of Lake Minnetonka. The basic and fundamental goals of the LMCD Plan are: o Protect the lake from pollution. o Preserve and protect the natural environment of the lake and its communities. ^o Provide for open public access and use of the lake. o Protect the local tax base. lakeo Enhance aesthetics, both from the shore and from the lake surface. o Protect public health. o Protect public safety. o Assure protection of the lake from detrimental effects of human activities and certain natural processes. While these are the specific goals of the LMCD Plan, the City of Wayzata also shares these same goals for Lake Minnetonka and the City itself. The City has exercised actions to achieve these goals through the recent development of its Storm Water Management Plan and its strict enforcement of its shoreland and wetlands oL’inances. The LMCD Plan consists of six basic chapters: Recreation Management, User Experience and Satisfaction, Shoreland Protection, Environmental Protection, Management Structure, and Implementation. In our review of this detailed text, it has been found the majority of regulatory, assistance, .lanagement, and implementation techniques and controls are in the best interest of the various Lake Minnetonka communities including Wayzata. There are, however, certain elements of the LMCD Plan that may present problems for Wayzata due to the City's unique existing djjvelopment pattern and established construction within the Shoreland District and throughout the community as a whole. In general, the LMCD P.lan fails to give proper recognition to the long standing and historic Wayzata Central Business District. Being situated directly along the shoreline, it is feJt the Wayzata CBD (and other existing urban centers) deserves separate treatment from areas of the shoreland that have been developed at much lower densities or haven't been developed at all. In the following sections of this report, the six chapters of the LMCD Plan are individually reviewed. A brief sununary of the chapter content is given along with specific provisions that are found to be in question with regards to their application to Wayzata. RECREATION MANAGEMENT The first chapter of the LMCD Plan is to guide and regulate the use of and access to Lake Minnetonka. The LMCD Plan presents a basic conceptual framework of progressively more restrictive lake access and use controls as boat density on the lake increases. Within this framework, the LMCD Plan proposes the following recreation management strategies: 1. Continue present regulatory practices. 2. Impose increasingly restrictive regulations as boat density increases on the lake. 3. Improve regulatory tools 4. Tighten existing practices. 5. Establish a program to assure 700 car/trailer spaces in formal lots on the lake. 6. Optimize winter access. Review of the detailed provisions of the above strategies have found them to be generally acceptable and not*pose any adverse impacts upon Wayzata. Provisions such as the further sales of condominium docks and the prohibition of additional outlots for non-riparian landowner access are consistent with current City policy and ordinances. It should be noted, however, that the Recreation Management Program requires licensed marinas to be available to all citizens of the state. The W.n-zata Marina should be verified for this conformance. An additional note is that the potential Wayzata "boardwalk” will be subject to the LMCD review. The LMCD is to use its operative, maintenance, and policy authority to ensure recreational facilities of potential regional impact respond to such needs. This would indicate, however, that a future boardwalk may be available for regional funding. 2. 3. USER EXPERIENCE AND SATISFACTION This chapter of the LMCD Plan addresses personal safety and law enforcement of the lake use. Three major goals are identified in this chapter. They are: 1, Continue and enhance basic public safety. Improve and expand activities in the public comfort and enjoyment through time. Facilitate coordination and cooperation between law enforcement departments active on the lake and the lakeshore. The achievement of these goals is to be accomplished through an increase in patrol hours as use of the lake increases. In addition, it is felt that through an increased presence and visibility of the water patrol, potential violators will be deterred from "breaking the law", thereby increasing the safety and enjoyment of the lake. Since enforcement of the lake is conducted by the County Sheriff's Office, this aspect of the LMCD Plan has little impact upon the services provided by the city of Wayzata. The goals specified in this chapter appear to be one's that would be in the best interest of Wayzata as well as the Therefore, this chapter of the LMCD acceptable. other lake communities. Plan is found to be SHORELAND PROTECTION The overall strategy of the Shoreland Protection chapter of the LMCD Plan is to utilize a two-pronged approach to minimize the adverse effects of development. The first prong >s to use the new DNR shoreland regulations (July 1989) as the basis for developing a consistent model ordinance to be adopted and enforced by the 14 municipalities. The second part is to use the 509 Plan being developed by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The LMCD is to provide an oversight review to assure the individual communities enforce the shoreland standards and the requirements contained in the 509 Plan. This approach does not alter the traditional jurisdiction and powers of the local governments, rather it requires the greater commitment of the LMCD in order to assure that all involved organizations consistently act in the greater public good and transcend more limited local interest. This also means, nowever, increased staffing for the LMCD as well as increased funding. Appendix C - Lake Minnetonka Shoreland Standards and Criteria: The LMCD encourages local governments to adopt shoreland regulations that meet the standards and criteria containedin Appendix C of the LMCD Plan. In the immediately following paragraphs, provisions of the LMCD Plan questioned for their practical applicability to the urban development character of Wayzata are identified. The text with the bold heading indicates an LMCD regulation, while the "comment" text details potential impacts upon Wayzata. Section C. Minimum lot size shall not decrease on the lakeshore^ - - - - - - - The standards and criteria below (not shown) are designed to pressure cities to increase, not decrease lot sizes wherever the present neighborhood standards falls below 15,000 square feet. Individual local governments may be more restrictive; all must manage to these values with deviations no lower than 60 percent of the values shown. The single family minimum lot standards is 15,000 square Excelsior, Mound and Spring Park may have 10,090 square feet. The exception for those three lakeshore communities is provided in recognition of the extensive development that has already occurred there. However, those three communities are expected to move toward the 15,000 square foot standard as redevelopment occurs. Conunent: It is not clear from the above provision if the ”60% rule” applies to new subdivisions, resubdivisions, or only previously recorded lots. Ihe statement "the standards and criteria are designed to pressure cities to increase, not decrease lot sizes wherever the present neighbor standards falls below 15,000 square feet” would seem to imply that new subdivisions or resubdivisions should meet the more restrictive lot standards. However, in the wording of the ”60% rule”, it is not specifically stated which parcels or subdivisions this may be applied to. In Wayzata, there are two residential neighborhoods within the Shoreland District that have been developed on less than 10,000 square foot lots. The residential area east of Wayzata Bay Center and north of County Road 15, and the residential neighborhood along Grove Lane. Typical single family lots in these areas rang from 6,000 - 10,000 square feet in size and 50- 70 feet in width. It should also be noted, though, that the base lot standards for single family lots in the LMCD Plan are the same as those within the current Wayzata Shoreland Ordinance. Section C., Subp. 1 _ _ _ _ _Use_ _ _ _ _ _ M.F. 6-12 Units Residential PUD Minimum Area 15,000/unit 15,000/unit Minimum Width 250* 250’ Comment: Even with width are 9,000 square the ”60% rule”, the minimum area and lot _ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ feet per unit and 150 feet respectively for a multiple family and a residential PUD. This corresponds to a density of only 4.8 units per acre. Given this is the same density allowed within the City's R-3 District, it represents an extremely low maximum density for planned unit developments or multiple family dwellings. If this density limit (9,000 square feet/unit) would have been applied to recent PUD developments within Wayzata, the following number of units would have been allowed; Widsten-Harrington, 41 units; Howell Condominiums, 3 units. Tnis is unrealistically low given the character of those sites and the intensity of the development around them. This provision of the LMCD Plan would virtually eliminate any new multiple family housing from ever being developed in the Shoreland District again. The LMCD Plan does not use the DNR's method of calculating PUD density. Rather, it leaves this section of the DNR regulations optional for inclusion into the local ordinances. The recent DNR density calculations of the Widsten project allows approximately twice the number of units as the LMCD Plan. The Howell project is allowed over three times the number of units via the DNR regulations. While the DNR regulations allow for greater density than the LMCD Plan, it is still short of what would be considered reasonable given the circumstances of downtown Wayzata. Section 0, Subp. 3. The design criteria for residential and commercial PUDs shall be established by local ordinance... Conunent: This provision allows the City to establish its own design standards such as interior setbacks, landscaping, signage, architectural design, etc. However, it again becomes unclear if the City can establish standards not consistent with the provisions of the LMCD Plan or the DNR regulations (i.e., preserving vegetation, building into a bluff, color of buildings, etc.). The possible adverse implication this may have would be if the City were to develop a set of guidelines that would later be found unacceptable by the DNR. Section P.All variances to structure height and all variances appl/.t^fd for riparian parcels on Lake Minnetonka shall be flubmiMed to the LMCD for review and comment. Comment! While Wayzata most likely will not be granting height variances for future development, other variances may be justified due to the any lots of odd configuration existing along the shoreline. The required review by the LMCD will duplicate the review already provided by the City. In addition, procedures and criteria must be established by the LMCD for which they will conduct their review and judge the acceptability of variance requests. Furthermore, it will be important to coordinate the LMCD’s review with that of the City's to ensure due process of the request. Section 0. Subp, 2. Vegetation removal shall be governed by the - - - - -- - - -- - - shoreland ordinance. The provisions of 6120.3300, Subp. 4 (of the DNR Regulations) must be included in the ordinance, but modified to reflect the following: Removal of living trees larger than six inches in diameter may be by permit only. Comment: Is this permit to be issued by the LMCD or the City? If the City were to issue the permit, specific guidelines would need to be established to determine when a tree could be removed and when one could not. In addition, local standards might vary from community to community. SArtlon U. SubD. 2. Impervious surface coverage of ^^- - - should not exceed 25 percent of the lot area without an approved storm water management plan. Storm water management plan to be used for residential and commercial properties. The current Wayzata Ordinance only allows a storm water management plan to be usea for commercial properties exceeding 30% lot coverage. Section Y. Implicit in the Standards and Criteria: All other sub-parts and subdivisions not specifically mentioned (in the LMCD Plan) are implicit to the standard and criteria contained in Appendix C. These include, but are not limited to: 6120.3300 Subp. 2. Residential lot size . , , . , 6120.3300 Subp. 2a. Lot area and width standards for single, duplex, triplex, and quad residential development, lake classes 6120.3300 Subp. 3&4 Other parts not listed in LMCD Plan 6120-3300 Subp. 10. Commercial, industrial, public and semi-public standards Comment! Section 6120-3300, Subp. 10 of the DNR regulations states that commercial development with water^oriented needs may be located on riparian lots provided certain criteria are However, commercial uses not in need of lake access may not be located on a riparian parcel unless the setback requirements are doubled and the use is substantially screened from view of the lake either by topography or vegetation. This would present substantial obstacles if any of the riparian oarcels in the CBD were to experience redevelopment. in virtually every case from the Minnetonka Boat Works Village Shops, doubling the 50 foot OHWL setback would not be possible due to the narrow depths of these lots. This would require the City and the LMCD to either issue a host of variances or prohibit further redevelopment of the downtown. Neither one of these are viable solutions and the setback ^nd screening requirements stated above are not reasonable standards for downtown Wayzata. Deleted Provision. A final concern with regardsto the appendix - - - - - - - - - - - - -C rea»»lations of the LMCD Plan is that the Plan intentionally omits a provision within the new DNR regulations. This is Section 6120.2800, Subp. 3., Flexibility. This provision of the DNR regulations is to alio local governments, under special thatCommission’s approval, adopt shoreland management controls that 8 are not in strict DNR regulations. conformity with the minimum standards of the The special circumstances may include the following situations: 1. 2. Where shorelands have been developed with an assortment of urban land uses for many years and much of the development does not meet the standards in parts 6120.2500 to 6120.3900; Cities with Central Business shorelands; Districts ■ located within Conunent: It would appear Wayzata is a prime candidate for such a provision under the DNR regulations. However, without the LMCD recognizing this provision, a Wayzata Ordinance attempting to use this flexibility would be inconsistent with the LMCD Plan. Where other communities would also benefit from the flexibility provision (Excelsior, Mound, and Spring Park), the LMCD should reconsider its omittance and the potential resultant hardship from the proposed regulations. 509 Plan - Minnehaha Creek Watershed District: The 509 Plan is presently being prepared by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. This Plan is to establish controls to shoreland area and includes all of Wayzata. As part of the 509 Plan implementation, local governments will be required to prepare wetland and stormwater management plans and ordinances consistent with the plan's provisions. The Wayzata Stormwater Management Plan is presently being reviewed against the preliminary draft of the 509 Plan and a response from the Watershed District is expected in the next several weeks. The general consensus between Bob Obermeyer of Barr Engineering and Ron Quanbech of the Watershed District is ^hat the Wayzata Stormwater Management Plan is consistent with the 509 Plan and may in fact be more restrictive. Slight changes, however, may be required due to recent State statute amendments although th»'y are n^t expected to be major. environmental protection Like the 509 Plan, the coverage of the Environmental Protection Program of the LMCD Plan goes beyond the 1,000 foot shoreland district to include the entire upper drainage district. The intent of the Environmental Protection Program is to implement development controls that will inhibit the inevitable decline in water quality and the functional values of wetlands. This program reiterates many of the objectives as the 509 Plan. The Environmental Protection Program, however, is divided into three areas: water quality, wetlands and fisheries. The majority of water quality and wetland provisions appear to be consistent with the City's stormwater Management Plan and existing Shoreland Ordinance. Specific items of note that are not covered or are somewhat different than the City's current plans and ordinances, but are stated within the LMCD Plan, include the following: o On site or regional detention of stormwater runoff shall be required for developments in any land use category, regardless of impervious surface area, if its stormwater runoff would be discharged directly into a lake or to a stream discharging to the lake. Comment: The City's Stormwater Management Plan encourages the maximum use of stormwater storage potential within the City, however, this statement in conjunction with the Stormwater Plan's detention areas should be reviewed for the consistency with the LMCD Plan. o The LMCD shall work with lakeshore communities to adopt comprehensive lawn fertilizer and pesticide ordinances. o The LMCD shall encourage lakeshore communities to use grant programs or other means to ensure the perpetual protection of wetlands through acquisition. Comment: This could be a substantial undertaking for wayzata as many of the wetlands within the City are on private property. If wetland acquisition is to be pursued, wetlands of most significance and the greatest potential of being disturbed should be identified and a priority list should be developed. The fisheries aspect of the LMCD Plan is to be out by the DNR and the LMCD. Its provisions do not pose direct concern to the City of Wayzata. management structure The primary objective of the Management Plan is to determine the framework for implementation of the LMCD Plan. It is identified within the plan, however, that without a change in the way the LMCD is funded, the plan cannot be implemented. The balance of this chapter details the methods which the LMCD proposes to increase its funding. Of these methods, the provision to tax all of Hennepin County (to a limited extent) presents the most obvious change. Lakeshore communities, however, would retain the burden of providing the majority of tax revalue for the LMCD. The fourteen shoreland cities could be subject to tax increases of up to 1 mil. One reason for increased funding is the proposal to increase LMCD staff to review zoning variances. This issue is raised as this is a process already handled at the local level. Without the LMCD having direct authority over such matters, its review becomes an advisory recommendation which may not be needed in all circumstances. In general, the Management Structure does not pose any unique impacts to the City of Wayzata although it does raise isolated q;estions with regards to the amount of funding required in .'delation to the need of services provided. IMPLEMENTATION Development of the Implementation Program assumes that significant new funds will not be available until at least the third year after adoption. Therefore, activities by the LMCD are planned to increase through time, reaching a peak after the first three years following adoption. The timing of the activities to be undertaken by the LMCD is divided into six categories. General Activities Year One Activities Year Two Activities Year Three Activities Periodic Activities Density-Based Activities The following text identifies the implementation activities that have the most potential impact upon Wayzata. Year One Activities: Encourage and enhance local government efforts to adopt shoreland regulations that meet the standards and criteria contained in Appendix C of the LMCD Plan. Encourage communities to use restraint in approving variances or conditional use permits for buildings that will be visible from the lake when they are located outside of the Shoreland District. Assure licensed the State. marinas remain available to all citizens of Year Three Activities: The LMCD shall develop the staff and procedures to review and comment on the following variance applications in all fourteen lakeshore communities: a) building height variances anywhere in lakeshore communities, and b) all variances for riparian parcels on Lake Minnetonka. Comment: Once again, the realistic need for additional LMCD staff is questioned when variances are already to be reviewed against LMCD and DNR provisions at the local level. This proposed LMCD activity appears to be a duplication of government services. CONCLUSION With the recognition of these concerns, it is hoped the noted elements of the LMCD Plan can be revised into a more workable management program. This statement is made in recognition of the City of Wayzata and the LMCD attempting to realize the same basic goals of protecting Lake Minnetonka, its shorelands and its use and recreational qualities. It is felt the LMCD Plan can be revised to meet the special needs of the fourteen shoreland communities, while also maintaining and accomplishing these most critical goals and objectives. t TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat' DATE: June 14, 1990 SUBJECT: Highway 12 Safety Improvement U J. V ^ J KETm 2 ■ j j Attachment: A. Highway 12 Safety Improvement Memo Dated ;5//3“l/f^iO B. Draft Final Plans (Reduced full size plans'ViLr' UfiOtW be available upon request) C. Draft Resolution for Adoption D. Summary of Traffic Analysis Study Dated 6/90 ISSUE - 1. Presentation to Council of the final draft plans for the Highway 12 safety improvement. 2. Presentation to Council of summary of the traffic study. 3. Determination by Council as to action it desires to take. 4. Draft resolution for Council's consideration. INTRODUCTION - As noted in Attachment A Council had outlined its concerns regarding the safety improvement which related to a traffic light. Attachment D outlines the traffic analysis that was done which indicates that a traffic signal would be warranted provided development that the traffic analysis is predicated does in fact take place. The full size plan will be available at the Council meeting 6/25/90. The only significant change in the plan since reviewed last time is the addition of the traffic light at Willow in the plans. ALTERNATIVES 1. Accept the information. 2. Request additional information. 3. Table for further discussion. 4. Adopt resolution. 5. Amend and adopt. RECOMMENDATION - Is is recommended that Council adopt the final plans as presented contingent upon traffic light going in as part of the safety improvement. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by _, that Council adopt Resolution # indicating its approval contingent upon the traffic light being placed on Willow in conjunction with this project. Ayes _, Nays _. cc: City of Long Lake Mark Benson, MnDOT Department Heads 53190.5 irp0^‘'£vr A TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Adrainistrato May 31, 1990 SUBJECT: Highway 12 Safety Improvement ISSUE - 1. Presentation to the Council of the final draft plans for the Highway 12 safety improvement. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's July 24, 1989 Council meeting Council reviewed the plans for the Highway 12 safety improvement. Concerns expressed at that meeting related primarily to the left turns at Willow Drive if a light were not to go in. DISCUSSION - Subsequent to that consideration the Minnesota Department of Transportation directed that a traffic warrant analysis be conducted at that site. That evaluation commenced the forepart of May and was concluded the end of May. The preliminary results of that analysis are that the light will be warranted at the time that the safety improvement will be done based on the Otten project and an expected project in the southwest quadrant of Willow and Highway 12. The final designs incorporate a traffic signal in that construction. This design was done in anticipation of the traffic anaylsis being warranted. A copy of the analysis hopefully will be available the later part of June at which time a synoposis of the analysis, the final plans and a draft resolution will be presented for Council approval. As you may have also noted the City of Long Lake has approved the final plans for the construction. It is anticipated that construction will commence in 1992 with completion in 1993. RECOMMENDATION -• It is recommended the Council accept the Tnformation presented. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by that the Council accept the information presented regarding the Highway 12 safety improvement. Ayes _, Nays _. cc: City of Long Lake Department Heads A RESOLDTION APPROVING PINAL PRELIMINARY PLAN #2A S.P. 2713-61 (12=10) HIGHWAY 12 SAFETY IMPROVEMENT WHEREASr the City of Orono is a municipal corporation existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS/ the City of Orono has by previous resolutions requested the Minnesota Department of Transportation, hereafter MnDOT, to correct a safety hazard existing on State Highway 12 from just east of Brown Road North westerly to Old Crystal Bay Road; and WHEREAS, the Commissioner of Transportation has prepared final preliminary plans #2A S.P. 2713-61 (12=10) for the safety improvement from just east of Brown Road North westerly to Old Crystal Bay Road; and WHEREAS, the final preliminary plans to include the installation of a semaphore at the intersection of Willow Drive and Highway 12. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono does hereby approve the final preliminary plan #2A S.P. 2713-61 (12=10) safety improvement from just east of Brown Road North westerly to Old Crystal Bay Road contingent upon the installation of a semiphore at the intersection of Willow Drive and State Highway 12. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono at a regular Counci: meeting June 25, 1990. ATTEST: Edward J. Callchan, Jr., Acting Mayor Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk for- cv n '^vovao .^i-ejM,: >\ark. ‘Beiaso'v- ~ Ma /C oT SIGNAL JUSTIFICATION REPORT A.777^Q/4^ex7"h Wayzata Blvd. (T.H. 12) at Willow Drive S.P. 2713-61 (T.H. 12) Long Lake, Hennepin County, Minnesota Prepared for: Minnesota Department of Transportation Prepared by: EDWARDS AND KELCEY = June 1990 SIGNAL JUSTIFICATION REPORT Wayzata Blvd. (T.H. 12) at Willow Drive S.P. No. 2713-61 (T.H. 12) Long La)<e. Hennepin County, Minnesota Minnesota Depart.Tient of Transportation I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under .my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Reg. No. Date 'Name APPROVED: District Engineer Date I CONCUR with your determination that a traffic signal is justified at this location based on this Signal Justification Report. Director. Office of Traffic Engineering Date TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGES Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ^“2 Project C'tcx^otion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-4 Intersection ^ : Map (Figure 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Proposed Intersection Geometry (Figure 2) . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Signal Justification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *^“10 Warrant Summary - For Existing Traffic Volumes (April 1989) . . . . . . 11-15 Traffic Signal Warrant Investigation Summary - For Existing Traffic Volumes (April 1989) . . . . . . 12 Warrant Summary - With Traffic Volumes which reflect Planned Development through 1991 . . . . . . . . . . . 16-19 Traffic Signal Warrant Investigation Summary - With Traffic Volumes which reflect Planned Development through 1991 . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Appendix - Expected 1991 Traffic Volume Calculations (for the northbound Willow Drive approach only) - Existing Traffic Counts (April 1989) - Traffic Forecast Letters from ETCO Properties, Inc. to Art Kunze, Mayor of Long Lake li The intersection of Wayzata Blvd (T.H. 12) and Willow Drive is located 3/4 miles west of the cp' 1 business district of the city of Long Lake, approximately 15 miles we-c of downtown Minneapolis. A flashing beacon system is currently inplace at the intersection. Wayzata Blvd is a two-lane highway (one lane in each direction) with dedicated right turn lanes and Willow Drive is a two-lane local street. Under the proposed project, the Minnesota Department of Transportation plans to reconstruct Wayzata Blvd and add dedicated left and right turn lanes and a barrier median from a point just east of Old Crystal Bay Road to a point in dow-ntown Long Lake just west of Lake Street. The intersection of Wayzata Blvd and Willow Drive is included in the project. In conjunction with t.hat work. Mn/DOT plans to signalize the intersection and the traffic engineering studies reported herein justify that action. West of the intersection, Wayzata Blvd will be posted at 50 mph. East of the intersection, Wayzata Blvd will be posted at 40 mph. Therefore, travel speeds through the intersection on Wayzata "iivd generally will be greater than 40 mph and as is stated in each of the volume-based warrants (Warrants 1, 2, and 8), the traffic volume requirements for warrant satisfaction will thus be lower than the standard volumes listed in the MMUTCD manual. Likewise, lower volume requirements of Figures 4-8 and 4-6 will apply for Warrant 9 "Four Hour Volumes" and Warrant 11 -- "Peak Hour Volume", respectively. 1 Although existing traffic volumes on the major street are very heavy (1740 vph during the P.M. peak hour), existing volumes on Willow Drive are currently not quite heavy enough to meet any of the volume-based warrants. Five new buildings are planned for construction in the intersection area south of Wayzata Blvd during 1990 and 1991, prior to completion of the roadway project. With allowance for the associated traffic increases on the northbound Willow Drive approach, signalization of the intersection is justified under the following three MMUTCD signal warrants: Warrant 2 -- Interruption of Continuous Traffic (met for 13 hours) Warrant 9 — Four Hour Volumes (met for 7 hours) Warrant 11 -- Peak Hour Volume (met for 4 hours) PROJECT DESCRIPTION Location T.H. 12 is a major east-west two lane (one lane in each direction) highway which extends between the east and west edges of the state passing through Minneapolis/St. Paul, Litchfield, Willmar, Benson, and Ortonville along the route. The City of Long Lake is located on T.H. 12 approximately 15 miles west of downtown Minneapolis. Willow Drive is a two lane north-south local street which extends between C.R. 146 approximately 2.25 miles south of the intersection and Hamel Road, approximately 3.5 miles north. The intersection is located approximately 3/4 miles west of the central business district of Long Lake. A section of the Hennepin County map which includes the project area is shown in Figure 1 (page 5). Characteristics Wayzata Blvd (T.H. 12) is a two lane highway (through the project region) which is classified as a principal arterial and services east and west-bound semi-local and regional traffic. Wayzata Blvd currently has a single through lane and a dedicated right turn lane on each approach. Under the proposed project, semi-opposed left turn lanes and raised concrete medians will be added. T.H. 12 is straight through the intersection area and has a gentle downgrade to the west. Willow Drive is a two lane uncurbed local street which in this region services north and south-bound local traffic operating in an area bounded by Old Crystal Bay Road one-half mile to the west and C.R. 146 or Brown Road approximately one-half mile to the east. The northbound and southbound intersection approaches each currently have a single approach lane. Under the proposed project a second lane will be added to each approach. Willow Drive is straight through the intersection area and crosses T.H. 12 at essentially a right angle. The southbound aporoach is essentially level, but the northbound approach rises sharply (3 or 4 feet) to meet Wayzata Blvd. The Willow Drive approaches are currently stop sign controlled and a flashing beacon system was recently installed to improve int«rsection visibility and control. The proposed intersection geometry and area layout are shown in Figure 2 (page 7). Visibility to the west is unrestricted on both Willow Drive approaches. To the east, however, the combination of a 3*30' southerly curve (looking east) and a crest vertical curve significantly restricts sight distance. Sight lines are open on all but the southeast corner of the intersection where a business sign structure presents a slight obstruction. Proposed Work The Minnesota Department of Transportation plans to reconstruct Wayzata Blvd and add dedicated turn lanes from a point just east of Old Crystal Bay Road to a point in downtown Long Lake just west of Lake Street. The work will be done under S.P. 2713-61 (T.H. 12). In conjunction with that work, Mn/DOT is also planning to signalize the intersection in anticipation that traffic increases due to planned development will make the signal fully warranted by the time of construction. Project funding for the roadway portion of the project will be 100 percent State funds. Funding for the signal portion of the project will be 50 percent State funds, 25 percent City of Long Lake funds, and 25 percent City of Orono funds. PROJECT LOCATION • *. \ \\ :>i:vm S:^ I ^,’rVo/s^e/d I: * 5t>?* >;j-;v..av.- I§: >■-— SagTHirr'^: . yisNiNcfiZ^Z' . »' La a ; "=^U BROWys^ ~ T ARM ^—':r.1^CRYSTAL^3AY^, , BEACH L'/j LAKE minneto :vkaMF''- ^ fi^SDEE.PHA ii'j^^^COOKS^ f^M. §f;;v;*M-Vxii&jir. "feOREENWOOD^: TONKA=^^!?f BAY- 'or 133/= ^;-WEoy BA kj OREWOOD POP. 4644. ,OWN %.;:^v^'..... Pf!^;^^ewasK i=:EA » SOURCE FOR BASE MAP:St. Paul - Mpis. Metro Area Minnesota Dept, of Transportation Technical Services Division PROJECT NO.! S.P. 2713-61 (TH 12) LOCATION! Long Lake, MN MAJOR STREET! Wayzata Blvd aH12) MINOR STREET! Willow Drive FIGURE 1 INTERSECTION LOCATION EDWARDS AND KELCEY SICaiAL JUSTIFICATION An engineering study including a signal warrant analysis was conducted for this intersection for traffic conditions as they currently exist and with the addition of expected traffic due to planned development in the short term. Data consisted of an 8-hour traffic volume survey conducted in April of 1989 and a copies of two letters from a developer (ETCO Properties. Inc.) to Art Kunze. Mayor of Long Lake, which contain site-specific trip forecasts tor their planned development in the intersection area during 1990 and 1991. Copies of the original survey data, the two traffic forecast letters, and the calculations which estimate the associated increases in traffic on the northbound Willow Drive approach are included in the appendix of this report. A detailed summary of the traffic survey data and signal warrant analysis is given on pages 11-19. Since the posted speed limits on Wayzata Blvd will be 50 raph west of the intersection and 40 mph east of the intersection, the 85th percentile speed will be greater than 40 mph and thus the vehicular volume requirements of Warrants 1. 2. and 8 are reduced from those listed in the .MMUTCD manual by a factor of 30 percent, as is stated in the warrants. Additionally, again due to the higher speeds on Wayzata Blvd, the lower volume requirements of Figures 4-8 and 4-6 apply for Warrant 9 - "Four Hour Volumes" and Warrant 11 — "Peak Hour Volume", respectively. The results of the warrant analysis for existing traffic conditions (as surveyed in April of 1989) are shown in the Traffic Signal Warrant investigation Summary on page 12 and on the graphs for Warrants 9 and 11 on pages 14 and 15. Although traffic volumes on the major street are very heavy (1740 vph during the P.M. peak hour), the current minor street traffic volumes are not sufficient to meet any of the volume based warrants. However, since a significant cjnount of development is scheduled for construction during the 1990 and 1991 construction seasons in the vicinity of the intersection, it is appropriate to consider the effects that the planned development will have on the amount of traffic using the intersection, or more specifically the northbound Willow Drive intersection approach. Five buildings are planned for construction by the end of 1991 in the vicinity of the intersection. The building types, locations, and anticipated traffic as follows: Business Tvoe Location Vehicles ner Dav Convenience Store w/Gas SW Quadrant 1000 Fast Food Restaurant SW Quadrant 220 Financial Service Center SW Quadrant 200 Golf Dome and Recreational W. Industrial Blvd. 145 Facility Office/Warehouse Building W. Industrial Blvd. 115 TOTAL = 1680 vpd The above volumes were compared with estimates from the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip Generation Manual and found to be reasonable. The developer's estimates were used in the warrant an^.^sis, however, since they are site-specific. To estimate the resulting increases in the amount of traffic using the northbound Willow Drive approach, two factors were applied. First of all, a conservative factor of 75 % was applied to the 1680 vpd to account for the fact that the study period covers only 16 hours of the day and also to account for the fact that sometimes a single vehicle will use more than one of the facilities during a given trip. The application of this factor yields a volume of 1260 individual vehicles using the proposed facilities during the study period. Secondly, a conservative factor of 60 % was applied to the 1260 vehicles to account for the fact that not all vehicles utilizing the facilities will exit the area via the northbound Willow Drive approach. The application of this factor yields a volume of 756 additional vehicles using the northbound Willow Drive approach during the study period. To obtain the final predicted hourly traffic volumes with the planned development, the additional 756 vehicles were distributed over the hours in the study period in proportion to the existing traffic volumes. Copies of the calculations are included in the appendix of this report. The results of the calculations are shown in the Traffic Signal Warrant Investigation Summary on page 17 and on the graphs for Warrants 9 and 11 on pages 18 and 19. As can be seen in the summary, the predicted traffic volumes with development at the end of 1991 are sufficient to warrant signalization of the intersection under the following three MMUTCD signal warrants: Warrant 2 -- Interruption of Continuous Traffic (met for 13 hours) Warrant 9 -- Four Hour Volumes (met for 7 hours) Warrant 11 -- Peak Hour Volume (met for 4 hours) It should also be noted that although the accident history at the intersection is not sufficiently strong to warrant signalization under Wacrant 6 — "Accident Experience" there have been'several right-angle acc-Jents at the intersection in the past few years, some of which involved fatalities. With the anticipated traffic levels at the time of construction (1991) being sufficient to warrant signalization of the intersection under three different MMUTCD signal warrants, it is the conclusion of this report that the signalization of the intersection of Wayzata Boulevard (T.H. 12) and Willow Drive in Long La)ce, Hennepin County, Minnesota is justified. _ _J WARRANT SUMMARY (with April 1989 traffic volumes) MAJOR STREET: Way z aioL (T.H. IZ) MINOR STREET: Willoui^ Dr,v^ This Traffic Control Signal Meets the relieving MMUTCD Warrants: Warrant No. 1 Warrant No. 2 Warrant No. 3 Warrant No. 4 Warrant No. 5 Warrant No. 6 Warrant No. 7 Warrant No. 8 Warrant No. 9 Warrant No. 10 Warrant No. 11 Warrant No. 12 - Minimum Vehicular - Interuption of Continuous Traffic - Minimum Pedestrian Volume “ School Crossing - Progressive Movement - Accident Experience - Systems Warrant - Combination of Warrants - Four Hour Volumes - Peak Hour Delay - Peak Hour Volume - Senior Citizen and Handicapped Pedestrian Crossing (Minnesota Approved Warrant) met for met for met for hours. hours. hours (met} (me t < does not meet)\ Joes not meet)| (does not meet) (does not meet) hours hours met for met for _ _ _ (met) (does not meet) met for 0 hours (does not meet) This Flashing Beacon Meets the Following MN/DOT Warrants: Warrant No.1 - Limited Visibility (met)(does not meet) Warrant No.2 - Accident Rate (met)(does not aet) Warrant No.3 - School Crossing (met)(does not meet) Warrant No.4 - Rural Trunk Highway Juncti^.ns (met)(does not meet) 61490.9 TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Administrator Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat^S^*^ June 21, 1990 *tE£7MB JUN 2 5 1990 OF ORONO SUBJECT: Consultant Transportation Engineer Attachment:A. Draft Request for Services - Transportation Consultant B. Bonestroo Letter Dated 6/21/90 C. Trunk Highway 12 1 EIS Corridor Development Project Memo Dated 4/4/90 D. Trunk Highway 12 Memo Dated 6/19/90 ISSUE 1. Presentation of scope and potential funding for such an undertaking. 2. Determination by Council as to whether they desire to solicite such a service. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's May 14, 1990 Council meeting Mayor Grabek indicated a strong desire to obtain the se ’ices of a consultant on behalf of the City during the process of the corridor selection. Attachment A is a result of initial explorations in the area regarding the services of a consultant transportation engineer both generally for the Citv specifically as they relate to the Highway 12 corridor selection. In addition to the City's Engineer, two outside firms were requested to comment because of their familiarity of the process and the ramifications of such a process. DISCUSSION - During corridor selections done by the Minnesota Department of Transportation individual cities have on occasion engaged transportation consultants to assist them in both the corridor selection and development process together with the intergration of that facility with their own transporat ion system. The earlier that person is engaged in that process for the City the more cooperative the venture is in relationship to MnDOT. This individual can provide technical expertise to participating City representatives on these Boards, before the process goes to the point that input by the City becomes a challenge to the process rather than an assist. Additionally this individual can provide technical expertise when discussions are held by the City Council and/or City representatives with interested citizen groups in the community. Following initial discussions with Mr. Larry Dallam the consultant from Howard Needles and Associates who has been engaged by Minnesota Department of Tr ansr:or ta t ion he has indicated that roughly the process will be to spend the first meetings: - Determining the role of the Policy and Technical Committees. - Outlining the process to be used. - Developing goals, objectives, guidelines and issues for the process. It is presently his intent to undertake a process by Ian McHard who has developed a method in the 70*s based on the initial environmental impact studies. It is composed of a series of overlays which attempt to address the issues of concern that have been identified and as each of these are colored and overlayed the areas of greatest concern become darkest and the areas that are lightest represent potential corridors being ones that were "natural or ones of least resistance" based on the issues developed. It is anticipated based on the amount of work that MnDOT may have done to date it is probably at least three to months before such overlaying work could be done. From this preliminary corridors would be identified and probably reduced to about 3 for further study. CONSULTANT SERVICES - The services that a cons iltant could provide in this process and on an ongoing basis o outlined in Attachment A. Attachment B are the co.nments from the City Engineer on that request for services draft. Potential Service Providers - In reviewing this issue Engineers and consultant planner the following firms in addition to the City's current engineering firm were listed as ones wno have a significant experience in the area. The include: Howard Needles and Associates BRW Strgar-Roscoe (SRF) Barton Aschman Of these Howard Needles is engaged as a consultant on the project and BRW as a firm has been representing Sid Rebers, not only his development but also In selected transportation issues and may pose a conflict of interest. It is anticipated that the City would seek Request for Services from its engineer together with SRF and Barton Aschman. Funding - The City in the 1990 Budget had al case the City was requited to contribute to MnDOT s study. (The City had also allocated the same amount in 1989 together with some of its funding for community development. anticipated, based on advice from some of the outside persons that the City initially contract with a firm for 5,000 and that it be billed on an hourly basis.) It would probably be designed so that at the point the contract had Reached the initial amount established in could then consider what additional funding if they would add to the contract based on further needs at that point. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Direct staff to solicite consultants. 2. Table. 3. Amend and seek services. 4. Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that Council after making any initial comments or questions table further discussion of this item to its July 9, 1990 meeting. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by that the Council table this itme for further discussion to its July 9, 1^90 meeting. Ayes , Nays uu M 52190.4 RBQDBST FOR SERVICES TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANT ENGINEER The Minnesota Department of Transportation has initiated a Corridor Selection Study for Highway 12 between the eastern border of Orono to the City of Delano. This proposed facility will have a very significant consequence, not only in the City's transportation planning and community access, but also on its land use and make-up for the longterm future. Regardless of its location, the proposed four lane facility will have an impact on substantial numbers of residents in the community. In order to approach the planning of such a facility and the transporation issues related to it, such as interchanges, feeder routes and flow through the community it is felt appropriate that the City solicite the services of a firm experienced in the area of transportation planning, community access, impart issues, and urban highway design. EXPECTED/POSSIBLE USAGE - Community transportation planning Intregration of the City's current transportation layout with the proposed 'acility. At City request develop selected transportation layouts in the balance of the community. Review of proposed facility layouts as they relate to land development. Highway 12 corridor selection Apprise the City of process and options it has in relation to the work being done by the consultant. Assist the City in providing information for alternative corridor designation for study. Assist the City in identifying issues related to the alternatives. Assist the City in comparing and challenging related technical aspects of the procedure. As requested depending on the agenda, attend the appropriate corridor selection meetings. - Technical Committee - Policy Committee - Citizens Task Force Provide technical expertise and facilitation for discussion of corridor process and related transportation between the City of Orono and its citizens. Have appropriate knowledge of and access to the MnDOT/Legislative decision making processes as it relates to route selection and recommendations. Inhouse computer aided design capabilities compatible with MnDOT mapping process. Familiarity with the community and potential locations of the Highway 12 facility in the area. CRITERIA FOR SELECTION In addition to general familiarity in the field and one is to perform tasks listed above, the following represent criteria to be considered in the review process: GENERAL COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION EXPERIENCE Transportation planning MSA budgeting design and administration Road design and bidding Traffic analysis and forecasting B) STATE TRUNK HIGHWAY DESIGIT/FREEWAY DESIGN Knowledge and experience related to work either with L. Ir MnDOT and/or as a consultant to conducting such studies. Prior working relationship with MnDOT staff and process. Engaged as a consultant to conduct such studies. Environmental Impact Statement for Trunk Highways and Freeways Knowledge and experience in the following; Corridor selection process Environmental impact process Interchange location Alternative design Creative solutions to difficult problems MnDOT approval process and legislative processes Knowledge and experience COMPENSATION - It is requested that the consultant indicate an hourly rate of the individuals that would be involved in such a process and generally what they would expe<^t for a number of hours participation in such a project initally the corridor selection eventually with the environmental impact statement as appropriate. I|l Bonestroo Rosene «|^n Anderlilc & Associates Engineers & Architects CeoQ aenctooa M «o6e« '*/ tec.*w Pf ^icpnC A/»a«** »| t PC I V"W P| ;«*'« C C w P8 CJcnn • CCW. PS Tuamai I (woyfv »P •oOCfT 0 SrwnKPt PI kun M Saean. C 'A Ke*m A Gown. PI Ptnm NV Penn PC OoAM C Smgjiei PE i*«y A BOiMOA P| M*m A HJAm P| ^ea K Pieo. PC wicwi r ligenarA P.C laben » PfWTttte. p| Ojvid O 10(1(9’^ PC TftOffUi W PCtPMfV PI Mctm) r t^n pf Jlffltl« Ml KC'W'Clft P A I Ion caotnC TAOmM f HowjfS a. ! 0>n<ei jL So Man A Sev P"»i0 J Cll ivnw MaTi Mar* 0 VM Mj Junt 21, 1990 City of Ocono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn< Hark Btmhardson Re I 13901 TH 12 Corridor Planning Consultant Engineer Dear Markt Ve have reviewed the "Draft Request for Proposal" for transportation planning and developaent relative to the TH 12 corridor location. The outline is excellent in listing qualifications necessary for selecting someone to complete a corridor study. Mn/DOT will be doing the study and has selected a consultant that meets the criteria established. The "coinmuni:y transportation planning" section is appropriate. The City has great concerns as to the manner in which the selected corridor affects local transportation. This would be relative to access to the corridor and the traffic impact on the existing street network. The "Highway 12 corridor selection" process is outlined adequately. The location of this corridor is the major issue because of its pote.-jial impacts on Orono residents. The local community has to balance the transportation need with land use and minimize the impact on its citizens. The criteria for selection of the consultant is identified in two parts. Part •A" deals with the needs of the City and seems appropriate for the selection. Pert "B" is generally related to experience on previous corridor studies and should not carry as much weight in the selection process. The most important qualifications of the consultant should be fimllarity with the community and local transportation planning. An understanding of the Mn/DOT study process is all that is required to ensure that the City's interests will be represented. BRA would be able to meet the selection critera for Part "A". Ve have not been employed by Mn/DOT to conduct a corridor study so we would not. for the most part, meet all of the criteria outlined in Part "8". But Cary Rylandcr and I have a great deal of expedrience working with M&.'DOT and ve are very well acquanted with the process. In fact, we have wc»rf.tj4 • .osely with Chaska officials on representing their interests regarding new T.M. 212. City of Orono Juno 21, 1990 The biggest strength ve would bring to the process is our femiliarity with the City end understanding of coousunity objectives. There do not seem to be many options for the corridor location based on City of Orono development. Our objective would be to direct the study in a manner that would benefit the citizens of Orono.. Project cost Is not a hardship aa ve have discussed many times on planning issues. We would be pleased to wo-k with the City to review and track the corridor development process and appreciate your consideration. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:lk r Gary F. Rylander, RE. Chief Transportation Engineer Education Unhersity of Wisconsin-Madison: ♦ Master of Science, Civil Engineering-1977 - Major Transportation Engineering • Bachelor of Science, Civil Engineering—1975 Experience 1989 to Present: Bonestroo, Rosene, Andcrlik and Associates, Inc. 1986 to 1989: Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc. Senior Transportation Engineer 1984 to 1986; Hennepin County, Minnesota TrafGc Operations and Safety Engineer 1981 to 1984: City of Kenosha, Wisconsin City TralHc Engineer 1977 to 1981; City of Madison, Wisconsin TrafDc Engineer Mr. Ryiander heads BRA’s Transportation Group. He is responsible for directing, managing, and providing technical support for a wide variety of transportation, traffic, and roadway study and design projects. Gary's expertise covers a wide range of city, county, and state transportation needs in the areas of: * Geometric street/highway design * Traffic signal design and operation * Traffic operations/safety analyses Work zone traffic control ^ Roadway lighting design * Site impact traffic evaluation * Transportation planning While employed by a previous firm, projects he worked on included: * Dakota County Road 42 traffic forecasts and roadway design; Burnsville * Shepard Road corridor study; St Paul * I-35W corridor study and EIS; Minneapolis-Bums^le * Review or prepare site impact traffic studies for numerous development proposals * Traffic control plans and sign inventories * Traffic signal Justification studies and reports As a public servant, Gary had charge of such activities as: * Traffic planning and operations * Geometric design of streets and highways * Traffic studies of all types * Roadway capacity analyses * Traffic count programs and field investigations * Traffic signal and street lighting planning and design; preparation of plans and specifications * Lighting design for roadways, parking facilities, and parks * Traffic and parking signing; pavement markings * Traffic control plans for construction projects * Computerized and conventional analysis of signal and signal network operation * Accident data analyses and safety improvement programs For his Masters Degree independent study project, Gary applied the TRANSYT computer model to optimize the timing of Madison, Wisconsin's 21-signal Capitol Square traffic signal network. The City implemented the study results and recommendations. Professional Organizations • 1990 District 4 Chairman, 1989 North Central Section President -Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITEO; various other past offices and committees • District 4 Director-ITE Urban Traffic Engineers CouncU a983-1986) • Instructor for transportation engineering seminars and workshops—Mn/DOT, University’ of Wisconsin, and ITE-sponsored Current Registration ♦ Minnesota • Wisconsin 'evT (L TRUNK HIGHWAY 12 TIER 1 EIS CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT •JUN 1 5 1990 city of Maple Plain April 4, 1990 The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MN/DOT) has begun a study to examine the possibility of upgrading Trunk Highway 12 from Wayzata through Delano. In accordance with the Federal National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) this project will be developed as a Two-Tiered Environmental Impact Statement project. This will allow a determination of the highway location as quickly as possible. In addition to MN/DOT, many other federal, state, and local agencies will have input into the project development. This project has the potential for significant impacts to the local communities through which T.H. 12 passes. Community participation in the project development process will be a vital factor in advancing the project. To facilitate this involvement the Trunk Highway 12 Corridor Advisory Board has been formed consisting of three separate committees. Input from all affected agencies and communities as well as availability of funding will serve to select a location and determine design considerations. While MN/DOT has begun the first phase of this project development, it is important to note that this project is not in the MN/DOT program and no funding has been allocated for construction of this facility.In response to questions raised by the City of Maple Plain, a set of questions and answers is attached to this page. However, it is very early in the development of this project and many of the questions are difficult or impossible to answer at this time. ii-i’' General Ql: What will the future Highway 12 look like in terms of number of lanes? Al: Traffic forecasts indicate the need for a four lane facility from the end of the Wayzata bypass to Delano. However, the precise configuration of the roadway is somewhat uncertain at this time. It will depend on what the agencies and communities determine and upon the availability of funding. Q2: Will the Highway be a controlled access road? A2: Yes. Access control will be purchased and access allowed at selected locations. Q3: How much right of way is necessary for this roadway? A3: It will vary depending upon location, a probable range of values is between 200 and 500 feet. Q4: Provide estimates of traffic levels for Highway 12 for the next 20 years. A4: Preliminary year 2010 forecasts indicate an average daily traffic (ADT) volume of 22,500 vehicles in the Maple Plain area, increasing to 30,700 ADT through Orono. Q5: What would the speed limit for the Highway be in the Maple Plain area? Would this be designated as 1-394 or U.S 12? If it is an interstate, where would the 65 MPH speed limit begin? A5: The speed limit would be 55 MPH. as U.S. 12. It would be designated Q6: Discuss Baker Park access provisions. A6: Whatever upgrading occurs on T.H. 12, adequate access to Baker Park would be maintained. Q7; Suggestions have been made regarding the construction of a tollway. Please advise how serious these discussions or comments have been. A7: Any discussions of a tollway have been very preliminary and of an informational nature only. If T.H. 12 goes through Maple Plain Qii Show US on a map which buildings would potentially need to bs razed. Al: This is difficult to say. Based upon input from the City, the alignment could be shifted slightly or moved to a different part of town. Q2: How much additional right of way would need to be acquired? A2: A minimal 4*-lane section through town would retire approximately 200 feet of right of way. Current right of way varies from approximate!'' 100 to 180 feet. Q3: Would we need to build frontage roads? A3: Frontage roads would likely be required to provide local access since access to the highway will be allowed only at selected locations. Q4: Would we be required to close streets? A4: Some street modification may be required. City access to T.H. 12 could be limited to one primary intersection which all other city streets would feed into. Q5: What costs would the City be required to participate in/ A5: The city would likely have responsibility for some costs including drainage costs and any curb/sidewalk sections. Q6: What type of settlement process would businesses or homeowners have to go through in the event of displacement? A6: The eminent domain process in outlined in federal regulations. These regulations ensure fair market value paid for all types of property and relocation assistance available where needed. Q7: Would the roadway be potentially elevated or depressed from present levels? A7: Highway 12 will likely remain at or near it present elevation. If T.H. 12 goes around Maple Plain Ql: Show the potential corridors that would be considered to our east and west. Al: These will be determined tlirouu. Tnvironmental Impact Statement Scoping process wbriv'.v cur rently underway. At this time potential coiiidor locations have not been identified. Q2: Show th« potential exits and entrances for Maple Plain to the potential corridors, A2: Again, these will be determined through the process and have not been defined at this time. Q3: What would be the fate of the prior Highway corridor? A3: It would be turned back to county or local jurisdiction. Q4: Would the City be assured of adequate signage and ease of exit and entrance to the Highway? A4: Yes. 05: Since there is likely to be heated controversy to the east in Orono, how would that affect Maple Plain? Would the entire corridor be placed with input only from those cities that take an official stand? A5: The segment of T.H. 12 in the Iiong Lake/Orono area will be the most difficult to upgrade. The routes which are considered may have some impact in Maple Plain. A mechanism is already in place to allow for input from all of the communities along the Highway 12 corridor. TRUNK HIGH\A/i^rh Tier 1EIS Corridor Deveiopement Mn/DOT Metro District - Goiden Vaiiey UPDATE — JUNE 19, 1990 Finallyl The contract with the consulting firm of Howard Needles Tammen & Bergendoff (HNTL)_has finally been signed and approved. They will begin work on the project immediately. I met recently with Larry Dallam of HNTB to discuss how to begin the full scale scoping process. We decided at that point to delay the advisory committee meetings scheduled for June until we have more time to organize the technical approach. In the meantime, Larry and I will be meeti with each city individually to give everyor- a chan o spell out their desires and concerns. I wil’ ntc. ig each city very shortly to arrange these meet: 0 aerial photography mosaics have been ordered and sh arrive any time now. As soon as they come in I will get a copy to each city for their use. I know that this process has been moving along very slowly and I thank everyone for their patience. If you have any questions, don't hesit^iie to give me a call. Steve Hay Preliminary Design Project Manager • Sieve Hay 593 8535 61490.11 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato^ DATE: June 14, 1990 SUBJECT: Request for Funding - Art Center of Minnesota '<0a MEETING JUN 2 51990 l i f 0F ORONO Attachment:A. Request for Funding - Art Center of Minnesota Dated 6/5/90 ISSUE - Determination by Council as to whether they desire to pursue funding discussions for the Art Center of Minnesota. A. Currently for 1990 B. As part of the budget process for 1991 INTRODUCTION - Attachment A was transmitted to inform Council of the Art Center's request for funding support. The Art Center has not indicated how the City of Wayzata has responded to the request for funding. DISCUSSION - The City may have authority to contribute to the Art Center. However, this may require a certain structuring of how the money is "granted" to the Art Center. Availability for Funding - The 1990 budget contains no specific line item for such funding as this is the initial request that the City has received. Funding for such would probably come from the City contingency for 1990. For 1991, consideration could be included in the general budget process. While the requested $8,C0o for 1990 in the overall budget is not a large amount, the City currently pays only $1,800 for its sum./ .r program through the Orono Community Education for those gc .eral recreational programs. The solicitation by the Art Center of funding from the City in part resvjlts from the reduced availability of Federal and State grants that occurred during the 1980*s and in part because private contributions have focused on the basic human service area needs, again because of the Federal and State shifts. A contribution may assist the ongoing nature of a facility that many consider to be an asset to the community. On the other hand selected other non-profits have indicated their interest in funding from the City and may in fact be a bigger priority for the Council than the Art Center. ALTERNATIVES 1. Recommend a level of funding. 2. Indicate no interest in funding. 3. Take no action. 4. Include the 1991 request in the '91 budget process. Delay decision on the 1990 until after the completion of the b-idqet process. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the 1991 request be presented in the City's budget considerations but that the '90 request be delayed until this fall and that Council indicate issues t ey may have for such funding. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by __, that following Council indication of concerns that they may have that the request be placed as part of the '91 budget process and the '90 consideration be delayed pending that process. Ayes _t Nays _. Ann Larsen, Executive Director Art Center of Minnesota 2240 North Shore Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 6690.9 TO: FROM: DATS: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato June 5, 1990 SUBJECT: Request for Funding - Art Center of Minnesota Attachment: A. Art Center of Minnesota Request Dated 5/23/90 ISSUE - Presentation to Council of a request for funding for both 1990 and also 1991 for the Art Center of Minnesota. INTRODUCTION - As you may be aware the Art Center of Minnesota, which will" be changing its name back to the Minnetonka Center for the Arts, has been reviewing their financial profile and are now soliciting substantial funds in order to continue their operation. As part of thi.® campaign they are approaching both the City of Orono and the City of Wayzata for the amounts outlined. This item is presented for information at this time and will be placed on the June 26, 1990 agenda for discussion of the request for both 1990 and 1991. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by that Council accept the information presented on the Art Center of Minnesota's request for funding. Ayes _, Nays _. iQART CENTER of Minnesota a f 2XS 1 ■^ OAQMO j 2240 North Shore Dnve • Wayzata. MN 55391 • (612) 473-7361 ini May 23, 1990 Mark Bernhardson City of Orono P. 0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55303 MAY 3 1 '1990 Dear Mark, The purpose of this letter is to request funding from the City of Orono for the Art Center c ' Minnesota (soon to be known as the Minnetonka Center for the Arts - we are in the process of changing our name back to what it was 10 years ago). History For over 37 years, the Art Center has provided arts instruction and innovative arts programming to residents of the Western suburban area. Persons of any age, aptitude, or level of experience are welcomed to the Lake Minnetonka campus for year ’round classes and exhibitions in the studio and performing arts. The Art Center has the following objectives: 1. 2. 3. 4. To provide an opportunity for the instruction, knowledge, and appreciation of the arts. To serve the. entire community, from child to senior citizen. To recognize and encourage Minnesota talent through juried exhibitions. To innovate approaches to cultural and artistic community involvertent, including joint programming that unites urban and suburban groups. The Art Center offers three kinds of programming: traditional art instruction through classes: special programs targeted for seniors, children and other audiences; and workshops or special events, such as juried exhibitions. Our facilities include a 22,000 square foot building with studios for sculpture, pottery, fiber, photography, drawing and pa in ting. :* .also .house Crystal Bay Catering who offers rest^rant lunch services on a daily basis. ir.. . .J • - ! • ^ • Vi:?:”-- *'* r * ’ •. • -j, .r • *jssr5.:;r;r;i;srr; k." ■Eh srs:;E!?!.= s.sjnr^di.-KEE;: .K™i anractiveMse/agisting irth^ oJera?ioranrp^omotion°of the Center and its activities. The \rt Center of .'linnesota is proud to provide an opportunity fr area residents to explore the visual arts, music, dance, and language arts in a thriving, creative environment on the north shore of Lake Minnetonka. The Cen*er is committed to continuing its four-decade tradition of innovation in community service through inter-generational and cross-cultural arts programming that extends art into the daily lives of its Lake area neighoors. Financial Information Currently, ISOO families contribute membership fees and tuition aline with special fundraising events, provide 60i of the a00*^re0t0r®s operating budget needs. The .-emaining 405 is raised thOoOeh the generosity of area corporations and foundations and mOn impOrOanUrthe individuals that contribute to the aimual Guaranty Fund drive. However, it is becoming more and more dilftcult tS raise funds that balance our budget par icularly when we have unexpected expenses, such as s 592,j5U sewer assessLnniater reduced to $55,000). Many corporations and significant at that time. A Monthly budget for 1990/91 is attached as Exhibit 1. Funding Request ^ Since we are a community resource providing services that enSancrth^quality of life, we believe «« ^^ould have some support from our local government. In-fact, we - - r' .*: some support from our loual.8°vernment. _ in .lacu, — only local-art center that is ** ‘ ^ >>^^go^mment-(example: Edina .and “d: ■* • r-.* .. wl-a*..* f • .i. . . . . • -Vir^-- --- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- .'dl'.—-- Approximately $66,000 of our annual budget is associated with the physical operation of our facility, not including our mortgage. We are asking for assistance in maintaining this facility through support to our general operating funds. We are requesting $8,000 for the year 1990, and $16,000 for the year 1991. We are also requesting like amounts from the city of Wayzata. Attached, please find the following support information: 1. A 1990/91 budget 2. A current list of Board of Directors 3. A copy of our current by-laws We appreciate your serious consideration of this request, which has been respectfully submitted by: y Arin Larsen Executive Dxrector 7Barbara McBurney President, Board of Directors 3. v *. . .. f • ,r. V. "S ;!.•... .-.L .I • •■V,;■'A...;• r y. «' .* ’.p.• -•' - • .■ •■•'■ .' . : ••• y.T., ’ • I !! .-n^.^^■ i-.. fi'v ' •* i* *'-..Vf^“’ ‘i'V;* •■•■-• ■'= ‘ =;. i ~ k li) S : 2 i i i ^ i g I > i ** i \ - ■ :s| ^ >-1 ~ I s 35 S m II I s s s s s 5“ ■ I : .. _ -V&ii, _-j. A..'. ;.-J-.. .............•- - - 5 - = = .5= Sxji'i- I t = M itm iiuiiiii 5 2 Sssg's* S£‘ = a t e I 5 i g :: I. i- ’ s 3t s i I : ® I i;?: s £535 *“ 2 =if I ■:;S555| §555515 ^ S =il I.* r S S S £ £ , C = £ £ ill si I :55555=B=8»*52S =; £ £ Ul = “si i ?££££££i|i||il si 1 ‘ £££££££li.JSS! £ £ £ i^A2 - IS =• =i • r; £ S £ £ £mm Is!-. = = ilS2 j ililili S = £ = iii ii 1 . ss^.!$«s ■ « ( 1 ■’ 1 f.m ii i..- SS^S££S ||S||ii III ii 1 ■ pljlii III il 1 ■ililili- •jl , ■■•f- ■■ :5J|=2f|r S S;2 I 8 = * I S ■i:. s *.* s s « * s 2 iiliiipi ':;A ^ ■.■: ■ iliiii|li llilli|il VJv: • Mill j^iii S S £ 35 Ci?:gsi S: S S 5 £ £ g « i 5 i SS£:t£ e • I s i i|Pi i^iii S S £ £ £ s s s s « S S s £ s 8 ST *“ s! 5 •. 5 5 ? I I I i i i i £ I I I s i f«'8^5-. 1 r. 1 I. ■ Eo4rd 01 Dire-ctors tUrcli 1990 Oiiicc-rs E»rl»4i'4 ll;EuxT4*y --President 5630 Fraiuce Av«. So. £dir>4 55-ilO 926-4542 Deeltee Hull -7ic« President 459 Feriulale floods tfaysata 55391 473 —4433 Ileuiters lack Bliss 525 SL&dywood Rd. I'<iyz4t4 5539i 475-1499, 473-4606 (ff) ?4t Case 2wo0 Gr«le ivd ‘.’.'•y-at*, 55391 473-4059 &«.il Karris P.O. Bo« 67 Crystal Bay 55322 476-2267 CLarleS BodeiistaL - Treasurer 2637 ^cola Laiie t7ay:ac« 55391 471-7503, 646-2265 i’S) SL*rry Ann Dayton - Secretai*y 2305 FreikCli Creel: Dr ffayzat^ 55391 476-2520 Hary Pavgnucco 1345 FrerucK Creek Dr. ffayzata 55391 476-4170 Marty ictiTueider 1235 Hunter Dr. ffaysata, 55391 475-4312 Mary SinitH 515 K. Ferndale Pd ffayzata 55391 475-1383 Heidi Hoy 500 Uorth. MTiii Dr. Muuiid 55364 472-4956 Ale:e Jacobs 1700 Sliorelix^e Dr. ffaysata 55391 476-1392 John Stander 1720 Crosby Rd 7ayzata 55391 475-3063, 339-1700 (ff) Tim axul Shush. Stoker 465 Spniuj Hill Rd. ffayzata 55391 475-1734 Phil Kobbe 264 E. Wayzata Blvd Ifayzata, MN 55391 476-0281 Susan-Svanson 2630 ircola Lane Vayzata 55391 471-8166 Tin Trow 15531 toldridge Drl“j Vayzata, 55391 • 475-2382, 540-1200 (V) r*. - f <• . . T-. ‘ AMENDED AND RESTATED BYLAWS OF THE ART CENTER CF MINNESOTA ARTICLE I MEMBERSHIP Section 1. Any person Interested In the promotion, encouragement, practice and study, appreciation or enjoyment of arts is eligible for membership. Membership shall be unlimited in number. Section 2. The categories of membership shall be: a. Active Membership: shall include individual or family memberships including husband, wife and children under eighteen years of age. b. Student Membership: persons under eighteen years ot age whose parents are not members. c. Contributor: persons who contribute more than a regular membership fee but less than a sustaining membership. d. Sustaining Member; persons who contribute SIOO.OO or more. e. Business Professional: membership shall be open to any business organization interested in the promotion of the work of the Center. Section 3. All members in good standing shall have the right to vote at any meeting of the membership. A family or corporate membership constitutes.one vote. Section 4. Membership shall be terminated by resignation or by failure to pay dues. ARTICLE II Center. Dues shall be determined by the ^ard of Directors of the ARTICLE III FISCAL YEAR . .^The-f iseal-year.sha each and every year. in on July lst and end on June ,30th of ,. .V.;. V.- li' : - 2 ARTICLE IV OFFICERS •... Section 1. Otilcers shall be a President, President-eUU., Secretary, and Treasurer, and shall be relected from the voting members of the Center. Section 2. Officers shall be elected for a period of two years with the option to re-comrait and be voted on after one year. Section 3. All officers, ex-offIcio, shall be members of the Board of Directors and shall have voice and vote at all meetings. Section 4. The duties of the officers are as follows: a. The President shall be Chief Executive Officer and shall preside at Executive Committee meetings and Board of Directors meetings. The President shall be ex-officio member of all committees and shall perform all other duties pertaining to such office. aa. The Executive Director as a non-voting member of the Board of Directors Is accountable and responsible to the President as authorized and delegated by the Board of Directors foe the overall management of the Center, Including the conduct of its administrative affairs, financial affairs, program development, maintenance and staffing of facilities, community relations and funding. The Executive Director is an ex-officio member of all committees, Including the Executive Committee. The Executive Director is authorized to approve individual expenditures not to exceed S200.00 b. The President-elect shall assist the President in such matters as the President may request and shall perform the duties of the President in the absence of or In the case of the temporary disability of the President. c. The Secretary shall keep all minuses of the meetings of the membership. Board of Directors and Executive Committee. d. The Treasurer shall be responsible for the care and custody of the funds and securities of the Center; shall be responsible for the maintenance of records of assets, Ilaollltles and financial transactions of the Center: shall present a statement the condition of the finances of the Center at all regul. . meetings of the Board of Directors; and shall present a financial report to the members at their annual meeting; -and'shal 1 -perform such other dutlesj^as-assjgnedjby -the President.. . ? . 1 i XL V.A. ^ ARTICLS VBPAPn nF nrPFrTOPS — Section 1. The Board of Directors shall consist of not fewer than 15 nor more than 25 voting members. All Directors shall be members of the Center and shall perform such special duties as the President or Board shall designate. Section 2. Members of the Board of Directors shall be elected for a terra of three years but are limited to serving two terms in succession. Newly elected Board members shall take office upon election. Section 3. Meetings of the Board of Directors may be held at any time designated in the notice thereof. At least one day's notice, either by telephone, in person, or In writing shall be given of each meeting of the Board. Section 4. One-half or more of the members of the Board of Directors shall constitute a quorum at any meeting thereof. Section 5. The President or any three directors may call a meeting of the Board. Section 6. An act of the majority of the Board of Directors present at a meeting at which a quorum is present is the act of the Board. Section 7. The Board of Directors shall be vested with the general management, conduct and control of the business and affairs of the Center ^.nd shall exercise all the powers and do al). the things that mayhe exercisetl and ^:iCne by the Center under the Statutes of Minnesota, the Articles of Incorporation, and the Bylaws. ARTICLE VI AND APPOINTMENTS Section 1. All officers shall be elected by the Board of Directors. All director appointments shall be ratified by the membership at the annual meeting. Section 2. It shall be the duty of the Nominating Committee to nominate one person to fill the position of each officer and director. Add‘*;:pcal nominations may be submitted . writing to the NoraInati\;* CommU^4*<J at least two weeks prior to ti.%. u. n:>al meeting. SesUon 3.-- A majority :of those present > sufficient for election. . . . . . - I ARTICLE VII EXECUTIVE CHMMTTTFP Section 1. The officers of the Center and two appointed representatives from the Board shall constitute the Executive Committee and have full power of management of the business of the Center durino the Interval between meetings of the Board of Directors. Section 2. One-half or more of the members of the Executive Committee shall constitute a quorum. ^^.xecu.ive Section 3. An act ot the majority of the Executive Committee present at a meeting of which a quorum is present is the act of the committee. ARTICLE VIII MEMBERSHIP MEETTNG5^ Section 1. The annual meeting of the membership shall be held on the third Tuesday of August each year at a specific time and place designated by the Board of Directors. Section 2. All other meetings of the membership shall be at the call of the Board of Directors or by six members of the Center in good standing entitled to vote at a meeting of the membership. Section 3. A majority of the membership present shall constitute a quorum of the membership. Section 4. Notice of ail meetings of the membership shall be given by mailing the notice to each member at least seven days in advance of the meeting. ARTICLE IX iMMTTrrr* The Board of Directors shall create such standing committees as are necessary or desirable to carry on the programs of the Center. The chairman of the standing committees shall be appointed by the President. The President and/or the Executive Director, or their designate shall attend all committee meetings. ARTICLE XI VACANCIES . Vacancies on the Board of Directors shall be filled by ‘ appointment by the President. . r;-*-I."! ( ARTICLE XI rules Roberts Rules of Order, revised, shall govern in all matters not covered by the Articles of Incorporation or the By-Laws. ARTICLE XII AMENDMENTS These By-Lav*i. mav be amended at any regular or special meeting of the Board of Directors, provided notice of the meeting has stated the purpose thereof. ARTICLE XIII PERQUISITES Members may take classes, workshops, and other organized groups with or without instructors at reduced fees as established by the Board of Directors. ARTICLE XIV f^nnSING AND PROPERTIES Section 1. The Board of Directors Is authorized to do any and all acts necessary to acquire housing for the activities of the Center including leasing, building or buying such accommodations as they may deem suitable and in keeping with the financial standing of the Center, with full power to select the location and carry on alI business necessary to effect the same, Including, but not without limitations, executing contracts, options, mortgages, leases with respec. thereto, subject however to the following limitations: Section 2. In the event of purchase or construction ^ building, there shall be on hand at least 75 percent of the total budget before any binding commitments are made. ARTICLE XV DIVISIONS There shall be no divisions within the Art Center of Minnesota. i -V- ...i ^mm i f ^ •; ♦♦ ft . : :r nr -ev • -- n.T. ic I-- ■ •_ •. -w i-• -iv. —1- - - -- - --:11 ARTICLE XVI INDEMNIEICATICN Section 1. Definitions. a. For purposes of this Article, the terms defined in this Section have the meanings given them. b. ■Corporation" includes a domestic or foreign corporation that was the predecessor of the corporation in i merger or other transaction in which the predecessor's existence ceased upon consummation of the transaction. c. ■Official capacity* means (1) with respect to a director, the position of director in the corporation, (2) with respect to a person other than a director, the elective or appointive office or position held by an officer, member of a committee of the Board, or the employment or agency relationship undertaken by an employee or agent of the corporation, and v3) with respect to a director, officer, employee or agent of the corporation who, while a director, officer, employee or agent of the corporation, is or was serving at the request of the cerperation or whose duties in that position involve or involved service as a director, officer, partner, trustee, or agent of another organization or employee benefit plan, the position of that person as a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee or agent, as the case may be, of the other organization or employee benefit plan. . N •. ! d. "Proceeding* means a threatened, pending or completed civil, criminal, acininistrative, arbitration or investigative proceeding, .Including a proceeding by or in the right of the corporation. • e. "Special legal counsel" means counsel who has not represented the corporation or a related corporation, or a director, officer, employee or agent whose indemnification is in issue. Section 2. Indemnification Mandatory; Standard. a. Subject to the provisions of Section 4 of this Article, the corporation shall Indemnify a person made or threatened to be made a party to a proceeding by reason of thi former or present official capacity of the person against Judgments, penalties, fines. Including, without limitation, excise taxes assessed against the person with respect to an employee benefit plan,.settlements and reasonable .expenses, u. Including attorneys' fees and disbursements,"Incurred by the ■ person In connection with the proceeding, if, with respect to the acts or omissions of theperson complained of In'“the proceeding, the person: ‘ .t * r.V ' r.i. '(1) has not been indemnified by another organization or employee benefit plan for the same Judgments, penalties, fines, including, without limitation,' excise taxes assessed against the person with respect to an employee benefit plan, settlements, and reasonable • ^ expenses, including attorneys' fees and disbursements, incurred by the person In connection with the proceeding with respect to the same acts or omissions; (2) acted In good faith; (3) received no improper personal benefit; (4) in the case of a criminal proceeding, had no reasonable cause to believe the conduct was unlawful; and (5) in the case of acts or emissions occurring in the official capacity described in Section 1, paragraph (c), clause <1) or (2) of this Artic'e, reasonably believed that the conduct was in the best Interests of the corporation, or in the case of acts of emissions oecurring in the official capacity described in Section 1, paragraph (c), clause (3), reasonably believed that the conduct was not opposed to the best interests of the corporation. If the person's acts or omissions complained of in the proceeding relate to conduct as a director, officer, trustee, employee or agent of an emi loyee benefit plan, the conduct Is not considered to be opposed to the best interests of the corporation if the person reasonably believed that the conduct was in the best interests of the participants or beneficiaries of the employee benefit plan. • b. The termination of a proceeding by judgment, order, settlement, conviction, or upon a plea of nolo contendere cr its equivalent does not, of Itself, establish that the person did not meet the criteria set forth in this Section 2. Section 3. Advances. Subject to the provisions of Section 4 of this Article, If a person Is made or threatened to be made a party to a proceeding, the person is entitled, upon written request to the corporation, to payment or reimbursement by the corporation of reasonable expenses, including attorneys' fees and disbursements,Incurred by the person in advance of the final disposition of the proceeding,'(a) upon receipt by the corporation of a written affirmation by the person of a good faith belief that'thecriterla for Indemnification :set .'forth In Section 2 of this 'Article, have;been satisfied and:a'written undertaking by the person to^repay^al Hamounts so paid or reimbursed by the'corporation. If it 'I®. that the criteria-for indemnification have not been sati3fied,uand.._£^J _ .^ ,t_,_...__ after a detennlnatlon that the if acts-then* known-to'those-making Ithe .u ' Jeterralnatlon would not preclude indemnification under this-Article. •T-- ■: : ■:. : .-r. --i; ; “-r. •••■!- 8 The written undertaking required by clause <a) Is an unlimited general obligation of the person making It, but need not be secured and shall be accepted without reference to financial ability to make the repayment. Section 4. Reimbursement to Witnesses. The corporation shall reimburse expenses. Including attorneys' fees and disbursements. Incurred by a person In connection with an appearance as a witness in a proceeding at a time when the person has not been made or threatened to be made a party to a proceeding. Section 5. Determination of Eligibility. a. All determinations whether indemnification of a person is required because the criteria set forth in Section 2 of this Article have been satisfied and whether a person is entitled to payment or reimbursement of expenses in advance of the final disposition of a proceeding as provided in Seccion 3 of this Article shal1 be made: (1) by the Beard by a majority of a quorum. Directors who are at the time parties to the proceeding shall not be counted for determining either a majority or the presence of a quorum; (2) if a quorum order clause (1) cannot be obtained, by a majority of a committee of the Board, consisting solely of two or more directors not at the time parties to the proceeding, duly designated to act In the matter by a majority of the full Board includin-3 directors who are parties; (3) -If a determination is not made under clause (1) or (2), by special legal counsel, selected either by a majority of the Board or a committee by vote pursuant to clause (1) or (2) or. If the requisite quorum of the full Board cannot be obtained and the committee cannot be established, by a majority of the full Board including directors who are parties; .V- »- . .. . C4) if a determination is not made under clauses (i) to (3), by the members, excluding the votes of members who are held by parties to the proceeding; or (5) If an adverse determination Is made under clauses <1) to (4) or under paragraph (b), or If no determination .. is made under clauses (i) to <4) or under .paragraph j : .liz wlthin_60.days after the termination of a proceeding.ori:* _c.;:ucafterra request for aa advance.of expenses, Vas'the^case celcsi'iiss*! . , .-.may be, by .a court in Minnesota, which may,be .the same T- yi.' court *:In which the proceeding Involving-the person's jInc on:, ' liability took place, .upon appl Ication of .the-person :and.|.i, , :any-notice the court requires. --. .i.:. . .rrsb* —l. ... i .. --..T.. I . .. ...... . . ! 1 b. With respect to a person who Is not, and was not at the time of the acts or omissions complained of in the proceedings, a director, officer or person possessing, directly or Indirectly, the power to direct or cause the direction of the management or policies of the corporation, the determination whether Indemnification of this P/ftson Is required because the criteria set forth In Sect,on 2 o, this Article have been satisfied and whether this pe-son is entitled to payment or reimbursement of expenses in ^clv. • ice of the final disposition of a proceeding as provided In S^:;-’.on 3 o^ this Article, may be made by an annually appolntc^^;-• the Board, having at least one member who is a c- ; -tor. The committee shall report at least annually to...Joard concerning Its actions. Section 6. Insurance. The corporation may purchase and maintain Insurance on behalf of a person who is or was a director, officer employee or agent of the corporation, or who, while a director, office/ emp o^ee or agent of the corporation, is or was serving at the ?!qiesror?hrccrporatlOh as a director, officer, partner rus ee. employee or agent of another organization or employee acains- any liability asserted against the incurred by the person in or trlslng frL that capacity, whether cr not been required to indemnify the person against liability unde, the provis.ons of this Article. Section 7. Disclosure. If the corporation indemnified or advances expenses to a person in accordance with this Ar^cle in connection with a proceeding by or on behalf of the corporation, the corporation shall report the amount of the indemnificatlon or advan .. ^nd ?o wicm !nd on whose behaif It was paid to the me.mbers in an annual report covering the period when the Indemnification or advanc. was paid or accrued under the accounting methods of the corporation. Section 8. Discretionary Inde.mnification. Nothing in this Article shall te construed to limit the ability of the B°ard mreclor^ to tL extent permitted by appllc^le law. Jo Indemn. y any person or entity not described In this extend extent described In this Article pursuant to, and to the , j described In, an agreement authorized In accordance with provisions of Section '^Ca) above, or as otherwise determined by the Board of mre*torrin Its d?sc«tlon. Furthermore, the Board of Directors may authorize written agreements between the iactu!?’ whether or not described In this Article, to SJJjJ Indemnification rights to such persons as permitted by la . C.-J*: .T..V •Dated: _ _i_198_Secretary 9/16/86 Revised 8/14/89 62190.1 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat DATE: June 21, 1990 SUBJECT: 1989 Financial Report /9COilitCIL MEEilUi: JUN 2 01990 0!TY OF OROKO Attachment:A. 1989 Financial Report B. Pannell Kerr Forster Letter Dated ISSUE - Providing the Council with the 1989 Financial Report. INTRODUCTION - Attachment A is the financial report for 1989 with Attachment B being the annual management letter from the Auditors to the Council. DISCUSSION - As has been done in previous years, the report is presented at one meeting and placed on the agenda for discussion at the next meeting. It is requested that after indicating any questions or comments you may initially have on the report that if you would like to have the Auditors in attendance at the July 9th meeting, just let staff know by Tuesday, July 3rd. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, the Council acknowledges receipt of the report and tables further discussion of this matter to its July 9th meeting. Ayes _, Nays _. r r r r I r City of Orono, Minnesota Hennepin County Comprehensive Annual I .nancial Report Year Ended December 31, 1989 1 CITY OF ORONO On the North Shore o f l ake Minnetonka CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1989 Prepared by Department of Finance Thomas M. Kuehn Finance Director CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31. 1989 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTORY SECTION; Transmittal Letter Organizational Chart City Council and Other Officials Certificate of Achie-’ement Award Exhibit Page 1 - 11 12 13 14 — FINANCIAL SECTION: “* Independent Auditor’s Report General Purpose Financial Statements - Overview (Combined): 15 - 16 *4 Combined Balance Sheet - All Fund Types and Account Groups Combined Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in A-1 17 - Fund Balance - All Governmental Fund Types Combined Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget (GAAP Basis) and Actual - A-2 21 - General and Special Revenue Funds Combined Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in A-3 23 - Retained Earnings - Proprietary Fund Type Combined Statement of Changes in Financial Position - A-4 25 Proprietary Fund Type A-5 26 Notes to Financial Statements Combining and Individual Fund and Account Group Statements and Schedules: General Fund - 27 - 50 ■ n Comparative Balance Sheet Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in B-1 51 Fund Balance - Budget (GAAP Basis) and Actual Special Revenue Funds - B-2 52 - 57 Combining Balance Sheet Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and C-1 58 Changes i . Fund Balance Park Fund - Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in C-2 59 Fund Balance - Budget (GAAP Basis) and Actual Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund - Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in C-3 60 Fund Balance - Budget (GAAP Basis) and Actual Building Capital Outlay Fund - Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in C-4 61 Fund Balance - Budget (GAAP Basis) and Actual ii C-5 62 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) Combining and Individual Fund and Account Group Statements and Schedules (Continued): Debt Service Funds - Combining Balance Sheet Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Capital Project Funds - Combining Balance Sheet Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Enterprise Funds - Combining Balance Sheet Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Retained Earnings Combining Statement of Changes in Financial Position Water Operating Fund - Comparative Balance Sheet Comparative Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings Comparative Statement of Changes in Financial Position Sewer Operating Fund - Comparative Balance Sheet Comparative Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings Comparative Statement of Changes in Financial Position Golf Course Operating Fund - Comparative Balance Sheet Comparative Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings Comparative Statement of Changes ir Financial Position Agency Funds - Combining Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities Financial Schedules - Comparative Schedule of General Fixed Assets by Source Schedule of General Fixed Assets by Function and Activity Schedule of Changes in General Fixed Assets by Function and Activity Future Property Tax Levies to Retire Bonds STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED): General Revenue by Source General Expenditures by Function Property Tax Levies and Collections Assessed Value or Tax Capacity and Estimated Market Value of Taxable Property Property Tax Rates - All Overlapping Governments Special Assessments Levies and Collections Ratio of Net General Bonded Debt to Assessed Value or Tax Capacity and Net Bonded Debt Per Capita Exhibit Page 63 D-1 6A D-2 65 66 E-1 67 E-2 68 69 F-1 70 - 71 F-2 72 - 73 F-3 7A F-A 75 - 76 F-5 77 F-6 78 F-7 79 - 80 F-8 81 F-9 82 F-10 83 F-11 8A F-12 85 86 G-1 87 - 88 Schedule 1 89 2 90 3 91 A 92 Table 1 93 - 9A 2 95 - 96 3 97 - 98 A 99 - 100 5 101 - 102 6 103 - lOA 7 105 - 106 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) Table — STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) (continued); Page Computation of Legal Debt Margin Computation of Direct and Overlapping Debt Revenue Bond Coverage - Enterprise Funds Ratio of Annual Debt Service Expenditures for General Bonded Debt to Total General Expenditures Demographic Statistics Property Value, Construction, and Bank Deposits Principal Taxpayers Miscellaneous Statistics Assessed Valuations, Tax Levies, and Mill Rates, or Tax Capacity, Tax Levies, and Tax Extension Rates 8 9 10 107 108 109 11 12 13 14 15 110 111 112 113 114 INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL STRUCTURE AND OTHER REQUIRED REPORTS: Independent Auditor’s Report on Internal Control Structure Based Solely on a Study and Evaluation Made as a Part of an Audit of the General Purpose Financial Statements Independent Auditor's Compliance Report Based on an Audit of the General Purpose Financial Statements Performed in Accordance With Government Auditing Standards Independent Auditor's Report on Compliance With Minnesota State Laws and Regulations 116 - 117 118 119 .sStr... L n iJ n I INTRODUCTORY SECTION CITY OF ORONO May 18, 1990 CITY of ORONO Post OfTice Box 66•Crystal Bay. Minnesota 55323 • MunidpaJ Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka Citizens of the City of Orono The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report of the City of Orono for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1989, is hereby submitted. Responsibility for both the accuracy of the data, and the completeness and fairness of the presentation, including all disclosures, rests with the City. To the best of our knowledge and belief, the enclosed data is accurate in all material respect.^ and is reported in a manner designed to present fairly the financial position and results of operations of the various funds and account groups of the City. All disclosures necessary to enable the reader to gain an understanding ot the City's financial activities have been included. The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report is presented in four sections: intro ductory, financial, statistical, and Internal control structure and other required reports. The Introductory Section includes this transmittal letter, the City organizational chart, and a list of principal officials. The Financial Section includes the general purpose financial statements and the combining and individual fund statements, as well as the Independent Auditor's Report on the general purpose financial statements. The Statistical Section includes selected financial and demographic information, generally presented on a multi-year basis. The Internal Control Structure and Other Required Reports Section con tains various Independent Auditor's report letters on Internal control and legal compliance. All City funds and account groups, departments, commissions, and other organiza tions over which the Mayor and City Council of the City of Orono exercise over sight responsibility are presented in the City of Orono's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. There are no other organizations that when considered would be included in the general purpose financial statements. The City provides a variety of municipal services. These include police protection, street maintenance, building inspection, planning and zoning, public improvements, general administrative services, public water and sewer utilities, and a municipal golf course. The City contracts for fire protection from the neighboring Cities of Long Lake, Wayzata, Mound, and Maple Plain. The City also contracts for engineering, legal, and assessing professional services and provides police protection and/or building inspection services and/or animal control services to the Cities of Long Lake, Spring Park, and Minnetonka Beach. Bl IU)iM;& /.OM\(, 47.V7J57 assussim ; ADMIMM RAI ION A HN \N( K 47.V7.V;« KAX - 473-0510 -1- Pl BIJC MOKKS - 473-7359 citizens of the City of Orono May 18, 1990 ECONOMIC CONDITION AND OUTLOOK The City of Orono was incorporated effective January 1, 1955. The City is located on the northern shore of Lake Minnetonka about 15 miles west of Minneapolis. Of the City's 24.5 square miles of area, 50% is open water or marshland (with a total of 15.1 square miles of land area). Of Lake Minnetonka, 40% of the shoreline and 33% of the lake area is in Orono. The City of Orono is a third ring suburb in the seven-county metropolitan Twin Cities area of Minneapolis/St. Paul and is located on Lake Minnetonka, the tenth largest lake in Minnesota. Orono developed primarily because of this aesthetic amenity, which is the most heavily used recreational lake in the Stace. This heavy use is a result of the quality of its aesthetic appeal, together with its proximity to the metropolitan urban core. The City is primarily a residential community with a mixture of several types of housing together with a small commercial district. The City totally surrounds two communities, which are part of the original township, and substantially surrounds a third community. Orono is home to many of the metropolitan area's top executives who appreciate the community's natural amenities. The metropolitan area remains the economic engine of the State of Minnesota and continues, together with the nation, to grow economically. The unemployment rate for Hennepin County, of which Orono is part, is 3.6%, well below both the State and national averages. It is anticipated that the positive appeal of the community, together with the extent of available land, will see the community experiencing continued devel opment for the next ten years. The City is in a strong financial position and because of its strong residential tax base, Orono has a tax capacity rate that is the lowest in the County for communities over 1,000 in population. While the City received local government aids and homestead credit monies for 1989, a special legislative session removed all but $2,900 of the total of $334,720 for the 1990 budget year, but allowed the City to raise the equivalent amount in property taxes. Despite this, Orono's 1990 tax capacity rate was still the lowest in Hennepin County for com munities over 1,000 in population. This loss for Orono was fortuitous in its timing as the State Legislature in the regular 199C session, which concluded the end of April, reduced aids to cities by the equivalent of 1.5% of their total tax and aid revenues. For Orono this would have been an additional $25,000 aid loss, but since there was only $2,900 left, it was all the State could remove. This may also mean the City effectively may no longer be penalized by any levy over its levy limit. The strength of the City's financial condition is reflected in the upgrading of its bond rating from Aa to an Aal. This was in conjunction with the sale of $2.3 million in sewer and water revenue bonds used for financing improvements in the City's Highway 12 corridor. These improvements facilitated approvals for the Initial commercial and residential development that were made possible by the City's Highway 12 Corridor Comprehensive Plan Amendment. -2- c r L L t t E citizens of the City of Orono May 18, 1990 For Highway 12, 1989 represented a further step to realizing a safety improve ment in 1992 by review of the plans which included the possibility of the long sought-after signallzation at Willow Drive. The hallmark for Highway 12 was the announcement in November by the Commissioner of Transportation, Len Levine, that the Minnesota Department of Transportation ;ould fund the corridor selection study for an upgraded four-lane Highway 12 from the Wayzata/Orono border to Delano. This announcement was the result of two years of local efforts on a highway for which upgrade discussions began in the 1950s. This comes at a time when many cities seeking such improvements must pay substantial portions of such studies themselves. Once a corridor is selected, it is anticipated that it would take a minimum of seven to ten years to go through the necessary review, design, and construction processes. The continued drought in the area has resulted in continued lower water levels on Lake Minnetonka. This, however, has had little impact on lowering lakeshore property values. During 1989, the City reviewed drafts that the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District are proposing as their 25-year Comprehensive Management Plan. New housing construction continued apace with 53 new dwellings being constructed at an average value of single family houses being over $280,000. The City's first year recycling program resulted in an 18% diversion of >nnage from landfills, well ahead of the 10% County mandate with a particlpat on rate well above 50%. The Public Works Department reorganized its structure to make it more flexible for personnel usage in the areas of streets, parks, and sewer and water utili ties with an upgrading of skills for several of the departmental members. A study of the City's facilities continued with the consultant architect beginning the design phase of the project. FINANCIAL INFORMATION The management of the Cit'- is responsible for establishing and maintaining a system of internal accounting control. Internal accounting controls are designed to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance regarding the safe guarding of assets against loss from unauthorized use or disposition, and the reliability of financial records for preparing financial statements in confor mity with generally accepted accounting principles and maintaining accountabil ity for assets. The concept of benefits likely to be derived, and the eval uation of costs and benefits requires estimates and judgements by management. A’l internal control evaluations occur within this framework for the purpose of adequately safeguarding assets and providing reasonable assurance in the proper recording of financial transactions. -3- ! » L Citizens of the City of Orono May 18, 1990 The City melntalns budgetary controls to aid In compliance with the annual budget as adopted by the City Council. Formal budgetary integration is employed as a management control device during the year for the General Fund and Special Revenue Funds. Budgetary control for Debt Service Funds Is achieved through pneral obllptlon bond provisions. Budgetary control for Capital Project Funds Is accomplished through the use of project controls. Budgetary control Is maintained at the fund level through the Issuance of purchase orders. Expenditures are monitored during the year, and any recom mended adjustments to the budget are presented to the Council for approval. Unused appropriations lapse at year-end; however, the Council may approve carryover of specific items. ^ The financial statements and schedules Included in the Financial Section of this report reflect the City's continued adherence to sound financial management. General Government Functions pe following schedule presents a summary of General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, and Debt Service Funds revenue for the year ended December 31, 1989, and the amount and percentage of increases or decreases in relation to the prior year revenue. ^ Increase Percent of Percent (Decrease)Increase —Revenue Amount of Total From 1988 (Decrease) Taxes $1,211,541 36.26%$ 41,130 3.51 %Licenses and permits 148,564 4.45 24,230 19.49Intergovernmental493,385 14.76 4,066 .83Charges for services 685,952 20.53 42,801 6.65Fines125,357 3.75 (15,300)(10.88) ftm Special assessments 214,752 6.43 (85,530)(28.48)Interest 396,427 11.86 37,911 10.57Miscellaneous65,659 1.96 18,210 38.38 $3,341,637 100.00%$ 67,518 Taxes are the single largest source of revenuo and accounted for 60.92% of the $67 518 revenue increase from the prior year. The tax revenue increase was derived primarily from an Increase in the current levy of $89,264, before applying State paid credits. The licenses and permits revenue increase was due to a rise in building and general permit revenue, while the increase in charges for services was due to Increased fees for land use related to items such as plan check and site exam fees, conditional use, variance and subdivision appli cation fees, and the institution of an annual $9.00 fee per residence for the recycling program. The fines revenue decreased for the first time in at least -4- ri. Citizens of the City of Orono May 18, 1990 I ! I « i • ten years and may be leveling off temporarily. The decrease in special assessments revenue is a natural progression. The balance of assessments is declining as collections are made each year while the City has not levied any substantial new assessments. The Interest revenue is due to an increase in the earning rates from 1988 to 1989. The following schedule presents a summary of General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, and Debt Service Funds expenditures for the year ended December 31, 1989, and the amount and percentage of increases or decreases in relation to the prior year expenditures. For purposes of this analysis, current and capital outlay are combined by function. . -4 Expenditures Amount Percent of Total Increase (Decrease) From 1988 Percent of Increase (Decrease) u Current and Capital Outlay: General government $ 670,577 20.56%$ 42,675 6.80 % Public safety 1,425,115 43.69 151,287 11.88 Streets 550,953 16.89 184,608 50.39 Parks and recreation 32,961 1.01 (28,621)(46.48) Miscellaneous 107,008 3.28 34,558 47.70 r* u Debt Service: Principal 325,000 9.96 (35,000)(9.72) Interest and fiscal charges 145,257 4.45 (22,338)(13.33)r L.Other 5,263 .16 (2.018)(27.72) kiM fm $3,262,134 100.00%$325,151 The increase in the general government area is comprised of the following items: 1) the Mayor and Council Increased expenditures by $15,000 to support increased activity in the Eurasian Milfold Weed Control Program on Lake Minnetonka; 2) the Assessing Department incurred $18,944 of additional expenditures for extending the current assessor's contract from September 1 through December 31 while in the process of contracting for a new assessor to start January 1, 1990; 3) the Administration Department changed the status of the City Recorder from part-time to full-time which, along with scheduled pay step adjustments, increased per sonal service expenditures by $12,484; and 4) the Finance Department also had scheduled pay step adjustments for a personal service increase of $6,751 and purchased computer equipment for $4,481. Public Safety expenditures increased primarily due to police personal service cost increases of $64,867, police capital outlay Increases of $22,223, fire ser vice contract cost increases of $15,517, and protective inspection and zoning personal service cost increases of $12,508. The Street expenditures Increased $27,940 for personal services due to the addi tion of one supervisory position. The Street Maintenance and Paving Program increased $104,171 because the prior year uncompleted program was added to the current year program. Capital outlay costs increased $34,273. -5- citizens of the City of Orono May 18, 1990 « > r The decrease in the Parks and Recreation expenditures is due to reduced personal services costs as the result of one position left unfilled and less than normal grass cutting because of the continuing drought conditions in 1989. The decrease in debt service principal and interest expenditures reflects the scheduled payments for debt. The new bonds issued during 1989 were water and sewer revenue bonds, reflected in the respective Enterprise Funds. FUND BALANCES General Fund The undesignated fund balance of the General Fund decreased from $2,731,519 at December 31, 1988, to $729,219 at December 31, 1989, or 73.3%. The decrease was due to an operating transfer in December of $2,025,000 to the Building Capital Outlay Fund as activity toward the construction phase of new City facilities anticipated in 1990. The 1989 ending undesignated fund balance provides 25% coverage of the 1990 adopted budget of $2,924,010. In December 1989, the fund balance designated for emergency contingencies was transferred to the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund to be continued as an emergency source of funds. Special Revenue Funds Special Revenue Funds are used to account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources that are legally restricted to expenditures for specific purposes, including current operating expenses and capital outlay. Park Fund The Park Fund was created by Ordinance of the City Council to receive contributions from subdivisions in lieu of conveyance or dedication of land for parks, playgrounds, and other public purposes. Such contribu tions, termed park dedication fees, are to be used for the acquisition, development, or maintenance of public parks, playgrounds, surface water holding areas (ponding >;^eas), and debt retirement in connection with land previously acquired t- such public purposes. The fund balance as of December 31, 1989, was >;-9,988. Improvement and Equipment -tutlay Fund The Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund was established to provide a source of funds for equipment purchases and improvements. The fund was established by a transfer from the General Fund and is maintained by annual budgeted transfers from the General Fund and by investment earn ings. Expenditures are for non-Enterprise Fund purposes. The fund balance as of December 31, 1989, was $262,848. -6- Citizens of the City of Orono May 18, 1990 Building Capital Outlay Fund The Building Capital Outlay Fund was established to receive annual budgeted transfers from the General Fund for the purpose of reducing the need for future bonding of non-enterprise building facilities. The fund balance as of December 31, 1989, was $2,222,977 after an operating transfer from the General Fund of $2,025,000 in December 1989. Debt Service Funds Debt Service Funds are used to account for the current year payment of matured principal and interest on long-term general obligation debt. Sources available for payment of the debt service are provided by special assessments and general obligation property caxes. The combined fund balance for all Debt Service Funds as of December 31 , 1989, was $1,385,655, which represents a decrease of $113,860 from 1988. Capital Project Funds Capital Project Funds are used to account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities. Municipal State-Aid Construction Fund The Municipal State-Aid Construction Fund is used to account for State-aid construction revenue and the use of that revenue for improvements to thoroughfare roads within the City. The fund balance as of December 31, 1989, was $3,519. Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund The Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund provides financing for construc tion costs prior to obtaining permanent financing or levying of assessments against benefltted properties for those projects funded directly. Within this fund there is also an account for major road and bridge repairs, construction, or maintenance. The undesignated fund balance as of December 31, 1989, was $70,524, an increase of $151,881 from 1988. The 1988 street lighting improvement cost of $112,257 was specially assessed against benefltted properties in 1989, while the 1988 street and storm sewer improvement costs are to be funded from dedicated Municipal State-Aid Fund 1939 revenue of $200,000 and from General Fund revenue of approximately $210,000 to be paid over ten years. In 1989, $190,000 was transferred from the Municipal State-Aid Fund and $374,161 (Including $344,161 for emergency contingencies) was transferred from the General Fund. -7- Citizens of the City of Orono May 18, 1990 Enterprise Funds Enterprise Funds are used to account for financial resources used in providing self-supporting public services in which most of the costs Involved are paid in the form of charges by the users of the services. Except for ownership, Enterprise Funds bear a close resemblance to privately owned utility or service enterprises. The City owns and operates a water utility, sewer utility, and a public golf course. Water Operating Fund The Water Operating Fund accounts for the provision of water services to the residents of the City who have water service available. All activi ties necessary to provide such services are accounted for in this fund, including administration, operations, maintenance, billing, and collection. The summary of operations for 1989 and 1988 is as follows: 1989 1988 -Operating revenue $165,041 $185,832 -€(^"erating expenses 195,859 177,618 -Operating Income (Loss)$(30,818)$ 8,214 Operating loss for 1989 does not include nonoperating revenue of $2A,752 or nonoperating expenses of $19,287. Operating income for 1988 does not include nonoperating revenue of $5,650 and nonoperating expenses of $1,222. Retained earnings as of December 31, 1989, were $133,174, which represents an increase of $5,979 from 1988, net of the effects of depre ciation on contributed assets and of nonoperating items. Sewer Operating Fund The Sewer Operating Fund accounts for the provision of sewer services to the residents of the City who have sanitary sewer service available. All activities necessary to provide such services are accounted for in this fund, including administration, operations, maintenance, billing, and collection. The summary of operations for 1989 and 1988 is as follows: 1989 1988 MM Operating revenue $401,693 $402,337 Operating expenses 430,322 452,319 Operating Loss $(28,629) $(49,982) -8- citizens of the City of Orono May 18. 1990 Operating loss for 1989 does not include nonoperating revenue of $87,965 or nonoperating expenses of $17,877. Operating loss for 1988 does not Include nonoperating revenue of $57,735. Retained earnings as of December 31, 1989, were $1,112,801, which represents an Increase of $169,063 from 1988, net of the effects of depreciation on contributed assets and of nonoperating items. Golf Course Operating Fund The Golf Course Operating Fund accounts for the operation of the City- owned and operated golf course sales and expenses necessary to provide this service. The summary of operations for 1989 and 1988 is as follows: Gross profit and operating revenue Operating expenses Operating Income (Loss) is follows: 1989 1988 $115,211 $ 88,867 98.302 103,526 $ 16.909 $(14,659) Operating Income for 1989 does not Include nonoperating revenue of $19. Operating loss for 1988 does not Include nonoperating expenses of $432. Retained earnings as of December 31, 1989, were $49,126, which represents an Increase of $17,182 from 1988, net of the effects of depreciation on contributed assets and of nonoperating items. DEBT ADMINISTRATION At December 31, 1989, the City had five bond issues outstanding. The City issued $2,300,000 of General Obligation Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds on September 16, 1989, bringing the total outstanding balance to $4,000,000 at December 31, 1989, all of which are General Obligation Bonds. The City improved its bond rating from Moody's Investors Service from Aa to Aal with the issuance of the 1989 bond issue. The City's legal debt limitation, based on State Statutes, equals 2% of market value. All City bonded debt at December 31, 1989, is special assessment or revenue funded and therefore is excluded from the limit. CASH MANAGEMENT Cash temporarily idle during the year was invested in demand deposits, cer tificates of deposit, obligations of federal agencies, the U.S. Treasury, repurchase agreements, bankers' acceptances, and commercial paper. The City's investment objective as stated in the investment policy is to first ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio, second to maximize yield while -9- Citizens of the City of Orono May 18, 1990 matching maturity dates with expenditure needs, and third to diversify the Investment portfolio by financial institution, government agency, or by the cor poration in the case of commercial paper to reduce the exposure to risk of loss. At December 31, 1989, the City had an investment portfolio of $7,915,275, at cost, diversified as shown in the following table: Type of Investment Cost Percent Certificates of Deposit $1,722,312 21.76% Commercial Paper 2,340,354 29.57 U.S. Federal Agencies 2,549,875 32.21 U.S. Treasury Obligations 423,414 5.35 Bankers' Acceptances 879,320 11.11 $7,915,275 100.00% For the year ended December 31, 1989, the City had investment Interest earnings of $512,320 or an average yield of 8.78%. RISK MANAGEMENT The City participates in the liability, property, and workers' compensation programs sponsored by the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust. In addi tion, the City appoints an agent of record to assist with the administration, loss prevention, and risk management. OTHER INFORMATION Independent Audit Minnesota State Statutes require that the City have an annual audit performed by a certified public accountant or the State Auditor. The City appointed the firm of Pannell Kerr Forster, Certified Public Accountants, to perform the audit for the year ended December 31, 1989. The Independent Auditor's Report on the general purpose financial statements and combining and individual fund state ments is Included in the Financial Section of this report. - Award The Government Finance Officers' Association (GFOA) awarded a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting to the City for its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1988. This was the second year that the City received this prestigious award. In order to be awarded a Certificate of Achievement, the City published an easily readable and efficiently organized Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. This report satisfied both generally accepted accounting principles and appli cable legal requirements. -10- ''»ns of the City of Orono May 18, 1990 M tm A Certificate of Achievement is valid for a period of one year only. We believe that our current Comprehensive Annual Financial Report continues to meet the Certificate of Achievement Program's requirements and we are submitting it to the GFOA to determine its eligibility for another certificate. Acknowledgements We would like to express our appreciation to the entire City staff for their individual contributions in assisting with the prepr'«ration of this report and to the outside agencies who assisted with essential information for this report. We also would like to express appreciation to the Mayor and City Councllmembers for their interest and support in planning and conducting the financial opera tions of the City. Marl Administrator Ison Thomas M. Kuehn Finance Director -11- Kl i CITY OF ORONO ORGANIZATIONAL CHART -12- CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA L n CITY COUNCIL AND OTHER OFFICIALS Year Ended December 31, 1989 Term of Office From To city Council: i Mayor James R. Grabek 1/01/89 12/31/90 CounciImembers J. Diann Goetten 1/01/87 12/31/90 Barbara A. Peterson 1/01/89 12/31/92 Edward Callahan 1/01/89 12/31/92 Alan R. Nettles 1/01/89 12/31/90 City Administrator Mark E. Bernliardson Finance Director - Treasurer Thomas M. Kuehn -City Clerk Dorothy M. Hallin •-t3- I i Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting Presented to City of Orono, Minnesota For its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ende^ December 31, 1988 A Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting is presented by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada to government units and public employee retirement systems whose comprehensive annual financial reports (CAFR s) achieve the highest standards in government accounting and financial reporting. c President Executive Director n\ u -14- E¥\ 0 D 1 FINA in CIAL section -!J ] mi n n J 'n ..■4 INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT City Council and Residents City of Orono Orono, Minnesota PANNELL KERR FORSTER Certified Public Accountants 400 Parl^ National Bank Bldg 5353 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis, MN 55416 Telephone (612) 545-0421 Telefax 612-545-0569 “1I J We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Orono, Minnesota, as of and for the year ended December 31, 1989, as listed In the table of contents. These general purpose financial statements are the respon sibility of the City’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these general purpose financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the general purpose financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the general purpose financial star ■- ments. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall general purpose financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the general purpose financial statements referred to above pre sent fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the City of Orono at December 31, 1989, and the results of its operations, changes in fund balance, and changes in financial position of the Proprietary Fund Type for the year then ended in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. Our audit was made for the purpose of forming an opinion on the general purpose financial statements taken as a whole. The combining and individual fund and account group statements and schedules as listed in the table of contents are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the general purpose financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the general purpose financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the general purpose financial statements taken as a whole. (Continued) -15- fi 51 ru The statistical information listed in the table of contents is not necessary for a fair presentation of the general purpose financial statements, but is pre sented as additional analytical data. This information is unaudited and we do not express an opinion on it. May 18, 1990 -16- GENERAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS rL n CITY OF ORONO COMBINED BALANCE SHEET ALL FUND TYPES AND ACCOUNT GROUPS As of December 31, 1989 (With Comparative Totals as of December 31, 1988) Governmental Fund “^pes General Special Revenue Debt Service ASSETS AND OTHER DEBITS Assets: Cash and Investments Receivables - Accounts Accrued interest Delinquent taxes Delinquent special assessments Deferred special assessments Contract for deed Due from other funds Advances to other funds Due from other governmental units Inventories Prepaid items Deferred charges Discount on revenue bonds Other assets Due from deferred compensation plan administrators Property, plant, and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation Restricted Assets: Cash and investments Accrued interest Other Debits: Amount available in - Debt Service Funds General Fund Amount to be provided for debt service Total Assets and Other Debits $ 811,105 $2,600,538 $1,316,075 43,820 6,707 83,457 63,486 178 42,879 553 96,706 39,766 58,670 41,990 4,334 68,498 1,380 45,611 492,780 33,855 1,925 $1,249,831 $2,644,358 $1,960,124 -17- Exhibit A-1 Proprietary Fiduciary Fund Type Fund Type Account Groups Totals (Memorandum Only) Capital Project Enterprise Agency General Long-Term Debt General Fixed Assets 1989 1988 - -$640,422 $ 703,951 $-$$$ 6,072,091 $ 5,612,923 —198,407 •——205,114 206,991 —27,882 18,446 ---242,103 227,395 -----64,866 53,658 -15,773 ---61,562 90,023 109,030 ----601,810 674,211 - ----42,879 57,154 8,135 8,547 ---51,090 202,717 -----96,706 113,541 -401,599 ---443,290 444,775 -18,385 ---18,385 19,166 -15,373 ---74,043 - -----41,990 36,935 -16,930 ---16,930 - -----4,334 7,231 __277,265 _277,265 218,960 -6,007,345 --1,383,984 7,391,329 7,063,273 -2,103,744 ---2,103,744 - ■- -18,141 ----18,141 — _1,385,655 1,385,655 1,499,515 --103,528 -103,528 95,119 ---314,345 -314,345 525,485 $785,469 $ 9,526,641 $277,265 $1,803,528 $1,383,984 $19,631,200 $17,149,072 See Notes to Financial Statements. (Continued) -18- CITY OF ORONO COMBINED BALANCE SHEET (Continued) ALL FUND TYPES AND ACCOUNT GROUPS As of December 31, 1989 (With Comparative Totals as of December 31, 1988) LIABILITIES, EQUITY, AND OTHER CREDITS Liabilities: Advances from other funds Accounts and contracts payable Severance payable Salaries payable Liabilities related to restricted assets - Accrued interest payable Accounts and contracts payable Deferred revenue - developer advances Due to other funds Due to other governmental units Deferred compensation payable to employees Deferred credits Deferred revenue Long-term debt Total Liabilities Equity and Other Credits: Investment in general fixed assets Contributed equity Retained earnings - Reserved for debt service Unreserved Fund balance - Reserved for Reserved for Unreserved - Designated Designated Designated Designated Designated prepaid items advances to other funds road/bridge projects emergency contingencies capital projects debt service vacation/severance liability Undesignated Total Equity and Other Credits for for for for for Total Liabilities, Equity, and Other Credits Governmental Fund Types Special Debt General Revenue Service $$$- 53,489 8,545 675 > - -- 32,252 —— _--• --- -- 43,208 -- 26,216 -168 --— _-- 106,543 -573.626 --— 261,708 8,545 574.469 _ --—- ---■ 58,670 _— 96,706 —— _—- --- -- --1,385,655 103,528 --* 729,219 2.635.813 - 988.123 2.635.813 1,385,655 1 ^ $1,249,831 $2,644,358 $1,960,124 MU -19-« ( «« Exhibit A-1 *Proprietary Fund Type Fiduciary Fund Type Account Groups Totals (Memorandum Only) •i.General Capital Long-Term General Proi^ct Enterprise Agency Debt Fixed Assets 1989 1988 « $ 96,706 $$$$$ 96,706 $ 113,541 4,969 6,147 ---73,825 87,132 _11,116 ---11,116 9,500 --3,666 ---35,918 31,826 42,744 _—-42,744 - 90,021 ---90,021 - _126,250 - --126,250 - _7,882 - --51,090 202,717 —12,046 ---38,430 24,688 -•_-277,265 --277,265 218,960 _159,660 ---159,660 169,191 117,165 ----797,334 899,988 -2,300,000 -1,803,528 -4,103,528 2,120,119 218,840 2,759,532 277,265 1.803,528 mm 5,903,887 3,877,662 1,383,984 1,383,984 1,310,924 *>0 -5,472,008 ---5,472,008 5,631,198 340,773 _-340,773 - -954,328 ---954,328 1,102,877 —58,670 - -----96,706 113,541 137,583 _137,583 - : ^ 355,003 —--355,003 325,279 3 519 -3,519 3,519 -1,385,655 1,499,515 ■ *•-103,528 95,119 70,524 —--3.435,556 3.189,438 566,629 6.767,109 --1.383,984 13.727,313*13.271.410 $785,469 $ 9.526,6h1 $ 277.265 $1,803,528 $1,383,984 $19,631,200 $17,149,072 See Notes to Financial Statements. -20- i CITY OF ORONO COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE - ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES Year Ended December 31, 1989 (With Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31, 1988) Revenue: Property taxes Special assessments Licenses and permits Intergovernmental revenue Charges for services Fines Other revenue - Interest earned on investments Sale or rent of property Miscellaneous Total Revenue Expenditures: Current - General government Public safety Streets Parks and recreation Recycling Miscellaneous Capital outlay Debt service Total Expenditures Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses): Operating transfers in Operating transfers (out) Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUE AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES OVER EXPEN DITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES Fund balance (deficit) - beginning of year Fund Balance - End of Year Special Debt General Revenue Service 00m, $ 1,179,747 $$ 31,794 876 -213,876 148,564 -i 489,697 -3,688 685,952 -_ 125,357 -- 190,750 93,576 112,101 — 20,126 2,766 _1« 22.828 19.738 201 2,863,897 116,080 361,660 655,987 f 1,376,323 -—, 494,742 -— 32,961 - 38,922 -_ 56,242 - 37,694 93,743 - --475,520 2,692,871 93,743 475,520 171,026 22,337 (113,860)- -2.074,200 — (2,448.361)-- (2,448.361)2.074,200 -* - $(2,277,335)$2,096,537 $ (113,860) md 3,265,458 539,276 1,499,515 ► f $ 988.123 $2,635,813 $1,385,655 : i m -21- Exhibit A-2 » 4 Totals Capital (Memorandum Only) *Prolect 1989 1988 $$ 1,211,5A1 $ 1,172,795 62,830 277,582 332,163 -1A8,56A 12A,33A 190,000 683,385 A91,A32 -685,952 6A3,151 ■ 4 -125,357 1A0,657 —37,AA0 A33,867 370,387 -22,892 12,157 6,286 A9,053 39,72A 296,556 3,638,193 3,326,800 -655,987 589,137 -1,376,323 1,2A7,623 -A9A,7A2 3AA,A07 -32,961 61,582 -38,922 - -56,2A2 67,160 «•26,250 157,687 503,338 -A75,520 53A,876 26,250 3,288,38A 3,3A8,123 270,30b 3A9,809 (21,323) 56A,161 2,638,361 178,079 (190,000)(2,638,361)(178,079) 37A,161 -- $ 6AA,A67 $ 3A9,809 $ (21,323) (77,838)5,226,All 5,2A7,73A $ 566,629 $ 5,576,220 $ 5,226,All ^ See Notes to Financial Statements. -22- CITY OF ORONO COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE BUDGET (GAAP BASIS) AND ACTUAL GENERAL AND SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Year Ended December 31, 1989 General Fund Revenue: ^ Property taxes Licenses and permits Intergovernmental revenue Charges for services Fines Other revenue - Interest earned on investments Sale or rent of property Miscellaneous Total Revenue Expenditures: Current - General government Public safety Streets Parks and recreation Recycling Miscellanecas Capital outlay Total Expenditures Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over ^.vpenditures Other Financing Sources (Uoes): Operating transfers in Operating transfers (out) Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUE AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES OVER EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES Fund balance - beginning of year Fund Balance - End of Year Budget Actual Over (Under) Budget $ 1,212,030 $1,179.747 $(32,283) 90,000 148,564 58,564 440,730 489.697 48,967 647,705 685,952 38.247 95,500 125.357 29,857 165,000 190,750 25,750 11,600 20,126 8,526 2,000 23,704 21,704 2,664,565 2,863,897 199,332 664,740 655.987 (8.753) 1,322,730 1.376.323 53,593 495,670 494.742 (928) 56,660 32.961 (23,699) 37,850 38,922 1,072 59,740 56,242 (3.498) 36,800 37,694 894 2.674,190 2.692.871 18,681 (9,625)171,026 180,651 (2.448.360)(2.448,361)(1) (2.448.360)(2.448.361)(1) $(2,457,98S) $(2,277,335) $180,6_^ 3.265,458 $ 988,123 i I m -23- Exhibit A-3 ! 4 Budget Actual Over (Under) Budget 4 $$$ - mm --— -— • ■■4 —-- —— AO,500 93,576 53,076 2,766 2,766 10.6A0 19,738 9,098 51,1A0 116,080“6A,9A0 __ i - - - ---— _- —_-- 132,830 93,7A3 (39,087) 132,830 93,7A3 (39,087) 4mm (81,690)22,337 10A,027 2,07A,200 2,07A,200 --— 2,07A,200 2,07A,200 - 4 M $1,992,510 $2,096,537 $10A,027 539,276 $2,635,813 i See Notes to Financial Statements^n -2A- CITY OF ORONO Exhibit A-4 COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENSES, AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS PROPRIETARY FUND TYfE Years Ended December 31, 1989 and 1988 Sales and Cost of Sales: Sales Cost of sales Gross Profit Operating Revenue: Metered water sales User charges Green fees Equipment rental Other Total Operating Revenue Total Gross Profit and Operating Revenue Operating Expenses: Personal services Purchased water Sewer disposal charges Professional .• -»s Operating and iw^...enance supplies Heat, light, and power Depreciation Rent, buildings, and equipment Maintenance and repairs Administrative and office expense Other expenses Total Operating Expenses Operating Loss Nonoperating Revenue (Expense): Interest earned cn investments, assets sold to other governmental units, and interfund loans Amortization of deferred credits Other expense Interest expense on interfund loans and revenue bonds Gain on sale of assets Total Nonoperating Revenue (Expense) NET INCOME Credit for depreciation on contributed assets Increase in Retained Earnings Retained earnings - beginning of year Reta)led Earnings - End of Year See Notes to Financial Statements.-25- Enterprise Funds * 1989 1988 r $15,832 $13,430 f 9,936 8,866 5,896 4,564 163,537 184,974 396,004 394,004 80,376 63,861 i 4 27,465 19,248 8,667 10,385 676,049 672,472 681,945 677,036 177,235 162,883 42,603 50,527 163,274 209,813 7,607 6,404 V. J 15,539 17,205 37,685 34,947 171,299 159,886 5,856 6,333 53,383 41,192 46,734 42,163 3,268 2,110 724,483 733,463 (42,538)(56,427) - 101,437 53,423 9,530 9,530 (771)- (36,393)(1,222) 1,769 - 75,572 61,731 $33,034 $5,304 159,190 150,320 P * m 192,224 155,624 M 1 .102,877 947.253 $1,295,101 $1,102,877 CITY OF ORONO Exhibit A-5 COMBINED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION PROPRIETARY FUND TYPE Years Ended December 31, 1989 and 1988 Enterprise Funds 1989 1988 -Sources of Working Capital: Net income $ 33,034 $5,304 Items not affecting working capital - Depreciation 171,299 159,886 • 4 Total Working Capital Provided From Operations 204,333 165,190 Additions to current liabilities related to restricted assets 259,015 - . i Capital contributions -473,013 Proceeds from sale of bonds, including discount 2,300,000 - Reduction of other assets, net of bond discount 20,971 21,476 .Increase in long-term liabilities 736 - Total Working Capital Provided 2,785,055 659,679 Uses of Working Capital: Additions to restricted assets 2,121,885 - ...Additions to property, plant, and equipment 426,295 482,275 Additions to other assets - bond discount 16,930 - Reduction of other liabilities 11,094 14.638 Total Working Capital Used 2,576.204 496,913 Increase in Working Capital $ 208,851 ?162,766 Changes in Components of Working Capital: Increase (decrease) in current assets - Cash and investments - operations $ 147,258 $166,374 Accounts receivable 2,762 13,070 Interest receivable - operations 2,925 (1.178) Delinquent special assessments receivable 3.780 1,418 Due from other funds 1,218 (283) -Due from other governmental units 1,288 669 Inventories (781)359 Prepaid expenses 15,373 (14,652) (Increase) decrease in current liabilities - Accounts payable - operations 5,603 (1.938) --Accrued salaries payable 726 (1.519) Due to other funds 31,616 (345) Due to other governmental units (2.917)791 Increase in Working Capital $ 208,851 162,766 See Notes to Financial Statements. -26- CITY OF ORONO NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS December 31, 1989 m ki m M Note 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES A. Organization The City operates under "Optional Plan A" form of government as defined in the State of Minnesota Statutes. The City Council, com posed of an elected mayor and four elected trustees or councilmerabers, exercises legislative authority and determines all matters of policy. The financial statements and the accounting policies of the City con form to generally accepted accounting ptlnclples as applicable to governmental units. B. Reporting Entity For financial reporting purposes the City's financial statements include all funds, account groups, departments, commissions, and other organizations over which City officials exercise oversight respon sibility. There are no other organizations that when considered would be included in the financial statements. Oversight respoi .^ility includes such aspects as appointment of governing body members, budget approval, a proval of property tax levies, outstanding debt secured by the City's full faith and credit or revenue, and responsibility for funding deficits. C. Basis of Statement Presentation The accounts of the City are organized on the basis of funds and account groups, each of which is considered a separate accounting entity. The City maintains the following funds, grouped by fund type and account group: 1) Governmental Fund Types - a) General Fund - The General Fund is the general operating fund of the City. It is used to account for all financial resources except those required to be accounted for in another fund. b) Special Revenue Funds - The Special Revenue Funds are used to account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources (other than expendable trusts or major capital projects) that are legally restricted to expenditures for specified purposes. c) Debt Service Funds - The Debt Service Funds are used to account for the accumulation of resources for, and the payment of, general long-term debt principal, interest, and related costs. -27- CITY OF ORONO NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (continued) d) Capital Project Funds *" The Capital Project Funds are used to account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities (other than those financed by Proprietary Funds). 2) Proprietary Fund Type - a) Enterprise Funds - The Enterprise Funds are used to account for operations that are financed and operated in a manner similar to private business enterprises — where the intent of the governing body is that the costs cf pro viding goods or services to the general public on a con tinuing basis be financed or recovered primarily through user charges. 3) Fiduciary Fund Type - a) Agency Funds - The Agency Funds are used to account for assets held by the City in the capacity of trustee or agent. Agency Funds are custodial in nature (assets equal liabilities) and do not involve measurement of results of operations. 4) Account Groups - a) General Fixed Assets - This account group contains the fixed assets acquired principally for general purposes and excludes fixed assets of the Proprietary Funds. b) General Long-Term Debt - This account group contain.- the long-term obligations of the City other than those liabil ities included in the Proprietary Funds. D. Basis of Accounting 1) Modified Accrual - The Governmental Fund Types and Agency Funds are accounted for using the modified accrual basis of accounting. Generally, only current assets and current liabilities are included in these funds. Governmental Funds use the "financial flow" measurement focus. Consequently, their revenue is recognized when it becomes measurable and available as net current assets. Available means collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to be used to pay liabilities of the current period. -28- CITY OF ORONO NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 1 Note 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (continued) Major revenue that la susceptible to accrual Includes property taxes, special assessments. Intergovernmental revenue, charges for services, and Interest earned on Investments. Major revenue that Is not susceptible to accrual Includes licenses and permits, fees, and miscellaneous revenue. Such revenue Is recorded only when received because It Is not measurable until collected. Expenditures are recognized under the modified accrual basis of accounting when the related fund liability Is Incurred, except for principal and Interest on general long-term debt which Is recognized when due. 2) Accrual - The Proprietary Funds are accounted for using the "capital maintenance" measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. Their revenue Is recognized when It Is earned and expenses are recognized when they are incurred. E. Budgets Budgets are adopted on a basis consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. Annual appropriated budgets are adopted for the General and Special Revenue Funds. All annual appropriations lapse at year-end; however, the City Council may approve carryover of specific amounts. The City does not use encumbrance accounting. F. Cash and Investments Cash balances from all funds are combined and invested to the extent available in short-term investments. Investments are stated at the lower of aggregate cost or market value. Earnings on Investments are allocated to the Individual funds based upon the average of monthly beginning cash and investment balances. Assets of the deferred com pensation plans are reported in an Agency Fund at market value. G. Property Taxes Property tax levies are set by the City Council in October of each year, and are certified to Hennepin County for collection in the following year. In Minnesota, counties act as collection agents for all property taxes. -29- CITY OF ORONO NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (continued) The County spreads all levies over taxable property. Such taxes become a lien on January 1 and are recorded as receivables by the City on that date. Revenue is accrued and recognized in the year collect ible. Taxes which remain unpaid at December 31 are classified as delinquent taxes receivable. Revenue from property taxes which is not collected within 60 days of year-end is deferred since it is not available to meet obligations of the current year. Real property taxes may be paid by taxpayers in two equal installments on May 15 and October 15. Personal property taxes may be paid on February 28 and June 30. The County provides tax settlemrnts to cities and other taxing districts four times a year, in February, April, June, and November. Cities in Minnesota operate under a levy limitation law which allows for an Increase in the tax levy each year equal to the Implicit Price Deflator Increase or 3X, whichever is greater, further Indexed by the percentage Increase in households or population, whichever is greater. Levies for bonded Indebtedness are not limited by this law. H. Special Assessments Special assessments represent the financing for public Improvements paid for by benefitting property ovmers. These assessments are recorded as receivables upon certification to the County. The corresponding revenue from the delinquent (unremitted) and deferred (certified but not yet levied) special assessments receivable is deferred until the year in which it becomes available (collected within 60 days of year-end). I. Inventories Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market on the first-in, first-out basis. J. Property, Plant, and Equipment Fixed assets are stated at cost, estimated historical cost, or in the case of contributions, at fair market value at the time received. Infrastructure fixed assets — roads, bridges, curbs and gutters, streets and sidewalks, drainage systems, lighting systems, and similar assets — are not included in the City's accounting records. 1) General Fixed Assets Account Group - General fixed assets are not depreciated. The costs of property, plant, and equipment are accounted for as current expenditures of the Governmental Fund Types in the year purchased. -30- CITY OF ORONO NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (continued) 2) Proprietary Fund Type - Fixed assets of the Proprietary Funds are depreciated using the stralght-llne method over the esti mated useful lives of assets, as follows: Buildings 25-50 Years Dlstributlon/Collectlon System 10-75 Years Equipment 3-20 Years Depreciation on contributed assets charged to operations Is closed to contributed capital. K* Vacation and Severance Benefits Payable (Compensated Absences) The liability for vested vacation and severance benefits is recorded in the General Long-Term Debt Account Group and in the Enterprise Funds, as appropriate. The current portion of the liability not applicable to Enterprise Funds Is recorded in the General Fund. L. Memorandum Only Columns Because the accounting system Is organized and operated on a fund basis, the columns on the combined financial statements captioned, "Totals (Memorandum Only)" are presented for Informational purposes only. They do not fairly present financial position or results of operations for the City as a whole and are not intended to represent consolidated Information. M. Comparative Data Comparative total data for the prior year has been presented In the accompanying financial statements in order to provide an understanding of changes in the City's financial position and operations. However, comparative data has not been presented in all statements because its inclusion would make certain statements unduly complex and dif ficult to understand. -31- r CITY OF ORONO NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 2. BUDGETS AND BUDGETARY ACCOUNTING The City follows these procedures in establishing the budgetary data reflected in the financial statements: 1) The City Administrator submits to the City Council a proposed operating budget for the fiscal year commencing on January 1 of the following year. The operating budget Includes proposed expenditures and the means of financing them. 2) At least one special Council meeting is conducted to obtain public comments as required by the State Truth in Taxation Law. 3) The budget is adopted by the City Council. Neither Minnesota Statutes nor City Code establish a legal level of control for the budgets presented. The City Code requires the City Administrator to make such recommendations for budget revi sions as he may from time to time determine to be derirable and necessary. The 1989 budget was amended at the department level. A) Formal budgetary integration is employed as a management control device during the year for the General Fund and Special Revenue Funds. Budgetary control for Debt Service Funds is achieved through general obligation bond provisions. Budgetary control for Capital Project Funds is accomplished through the use of project controls. 5) Budgets for the General Fund and Special Revenue Funds are adopted on a basis consistent with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Budgeted amounts presented are as originally adopted, or as amended by the City Council. Budgeted expenditure appropriations lapse at year- end; however, the City Council may approve carryover of specific amounts. Purchase commitments outstanding at year-end were not significant. During the year, the City made significant budget amendments to the General Fund appropriation and revenue as reflected in the following table. M -32- CITY OF ORONO NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 2. BUDGETS AND BUDGETARY ACCOUNTING (continued) Department: City Council Assessing Streets Recycling Other Financing Uses: Operating transfers (out) - To Building Fund To Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund Revenue: Intergovernmental revenue - County grant - recycling Charges for services - General government Adopted Budget 52,A50 58,170 444,740 Budget Amendment 15,000 18,950 50,930 37,850 Amended Budget 67,450 77,120 495,670 37,850 (120,000) (1,905,000) (2,025,000) (374,160) (374,160) 83,900 20,190 23,715 20,190 107,615 The expenditure budget increases were for the following purposes: * City Council - increased appropriation to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District for the Eurasian Milfoil Control Program. ® Assessing - The appropriation was increased to extend the current assessor's professional services contract from September 1 through December 31, 1989, while in the process of finding a replacement to start on January 1, 1990. ® Streets - The appropriation was increased to add certain street paving projects which were not able to be done in the prior year. ® Recycling - A new appropriation was required for 1989 due to mid-year start-up of program. -33- CITY OF ORONO NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 2. BUDGETS AND BUDGETARY ACCOUNTING (continued) ® Operating Transfer to Building Fund - Due to the anticipated start of construction of new City facilities, the City deter mined that certain funds should be clearly earmarked for that purpose. ® Operating Transfers to Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund - Two transfers were made; one for relocating the emergency con tingency account from the General Fund ($34A,161); and one for partial reimbursement on a joint street/storm sewer project with Hennepin County where the Initial funding of the City's share was provided by the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund. The revenue budget increases were to recognize the estimated amount of County grant funds for offsetting the initial recycling pick-up program 'osts and to recognize the estimated amount to be collected from the residential recycling customers. For 1989, departmental expenditures exceeded appropriations as follows: General Fund - Legal Police protection Fire protection Emergency preparedness Recycling pick-up Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund - Finance department General government buildings department Police department Building Capital Outlay Fund - Total expenditures Amount Over Budget $ 3,091 59,889 6,243 252 1,072 1,931 2,091 2,554 2,094 A portion the expenditures in police protection were funded by unbudge*^ad fees for service. Note 3. CASH AND INVESTMENTS Cash balances of all City funds are combined (pooled) and invested to the extent available in Federal Government Securities and various other investments authorize*! by Minnesota State Statutes. Each fund's portion of this pool is shnwu on the financial statements as "cash and investments." Earnings from such Investments are allocated to the individual funds on the basis of the applicable cash balances available by each of the funds during the year, and in accordance with State Statutes. -34- Hi Mm CITY OF ORONO NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 3. CASH AND INVESTMENTS (continued) For the purposes of Identifying the risk of Investing public funds, the balances are categorized as follows: A. Deposits Deposits consist of checking accounts, savings accounts, and cer tificates of deposit held In a bank or savings institution. At year-end, the carrying amount of the City's deposits was $1,982,512, while the balance on the bank records was $2,107,047. As of December 31 , 1989, all deposits of the City were insured or collateralized by securities held by the City or by its agent in the City's name. B. Investments Minnesota State Statutes authorize the City to invest in obligations of the U.S. Treasury, agencies, and instrumentalities, shares of investment companies whose only investments are in the aforementioned securities, obligations of the State of Minnesota or its municipali ties, bankers' acceptances, future contracts, repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements, and commercial paper of the highest quality with a maturity of no longer than 270 days. Any material purchase discounts or premiums are amortized over the term of the investment. Interest earnings are accrued at the balance sheet date and recognized as revenue when earned. The City's investments are categorized below to give an indication of the level of risk assumed at year-end. Category 1 includes invest ments that are insured or registered or for which the securities are held by the City or its agent in the City's name. Category 2 includes uninsured and unregistered investments for which the securities are held by the counterpar name. Category 3 indue which the securities ai U.S. Government Securities Coraaerclal Paper Bankers' Acceptances Assets held by Deferred Compensation Plan Administrators s trust department or agent in the City's uninsured and unregistered Investments for held by the counterparty or by its trust in the City's name. Credit Risk Category Carrying Market 1 2 3 Value Value $2,973,289 2,340,354 879,320 </>1 1 1<n1 1 1$2,973,289 2,340.354 879,320 $3,097,026 2,401,545 891,587 $6,192,%3 $ - $ -$6,192,%3 $6,390,158 $ 277,265 $ 277,265 -35- Note 3. Note 4. CITY OF ORONONOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 CASH AND INVESTMENTS (continued) C. Cash on Hand Cash In the possession of the City, consisting of petty cash and change funds, totaled $360 at year-end. PROPERTY, PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT A. Changes In General Fixed Assetb Land and land improvements Buildings and building Improvements Equipment Work in progress Land and land Improvements Bulld-^ igs and building improvements Equipment Dlstributlon/collection system Less accumulated depreciation Balance Beginning of Year Additions Deletions Balance End of Year $ 432,648 $$$ 432,648 145,958 732,318 130,457 57,397 145,958 805,378 $1,310,924 $ 130,457 57,397 $1,383,984 1 Property, Plant, and Equipment Water Operating Sewer Operating Golf Course Operating Total $ 113,605 $ 298,307 $-$ 411,912 25,132 -127,977 153,109 77,694 35,902 31,014 51,649 40,778 59,438 149,486 146,989 1,559,248 6,018,020 -7,577,268 1,811,581 6,398,990 228,193 8,438,764 603,862 1,793,629 33,928 2,431,419 $1,207,719 $4,605,361 $194,265 $6,007,345 -36- CITY OF ORONO NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 5. LONG-TERM DEBT A. Components of Long-Term Debt m le m H m M General Long-Term Debt: General Obligation Bends G.O. Refunding Bonds of 1976 Improvement Bonds of 1980 Inprovement Bonds of 1982 Inprovcment Bonds of 1985 Vacation and severance benefits payable Total General Long-Term Debt Enterprise Find Debt: Revenue Bonds - G.O. Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds of 1989 Original Issue Interest Rate Issue Date Final Maturity Date Balance End of Year $2,635,0005.50- 6.00K 8-01-76 2-01-91$ 300,000 $1,100,0007.10- 8.753;12-01-803-01-96 525,000 $ 475,0006.50-10.003;12-01-82 >01-99 175,000 $ 900,0005.50- 8.253;7-01-85 1-01-01 700,000 N/A N/A H/A N/A 103,528 1,803,528 $2,300,000 6.10- 6.60X 9-16-89 2-01-02 2,300,000 Total Long- Term Debt $4,103,528 B. Statement of Changes in Long-'Term Debt m General Hi Long-Term Enterprise Debt Fund Debt Total Long-term debt - beginning of year $2,120,119$$2,120,119 «Debt issued -2,300,0002.300.000 Debt retired (325.000)-(325,000) *Net change in vacation and severance benefits payable 8.409 -8.409' ^ Long-Term Debt - End of Year $1 .803,528$2,300,000$4,103,528 -37- CITY OF ORONO NHTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 5. LONG-TERM DEBT (continued) C. Minimum Debt Payments Minimum Annuax Principal and Interest Payments Required to Retire Long-Term Debt, Excluding Vacation and Severance Benefits Payable: Year Ending December 31, 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995-2002 General Long-Term Debt Enterprise Funt - ^Total $ 423,188 $ 128,231 $ 551,419 402,787 241,863 224,918 212,884 801,891 146,550 146,550 316,212 305,450 2.495.726 549,337 388,413 541,130 518,334 3.297.617 $^.307.531 $3.538.719 $5.846.259 D. Descriptions and Restrictions of lAng-Term Debt ® General Obligation Bonds - These bonds were issued to finance various improvements and will be repaid from taxes and cpecial assessments. All are backed by the full faith and credit of the City. * Refunding Bonds of 1976 - These bonds were issued to refund the Improvement Bond? of 1970A. 1970B. and 1974. Ni if these refunded issui were outstanding as 'emt* 1, 1989. ® Vac>*ion and Severance Benefits Payable liability represents vested benefits earned by emplo>*..s other than Proprietary Fund employees through the end of the year, which will be paid or used in future periods. The liability for Proprietary Fund employees is included in the accrued liabili ties of those funds. * G.O. Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds of 1989 - These bonds were issued to finance improvements to the water and sewer systems and will be rer^^in from net revenues of the water and sewer systems, conn^cti?-? charges, and special assessments levied against bene I it ted properties. Under the resolution aut lorizing the sale of the bonds, each month the City is required to credit to a Water and Sewer Bond Restricted Cash Account an amount not less than one-twelfth of the total amount of ,rincipal and interest on the bonds due and payable the following year. Aujounts credited to the Water and Sewer -38-• I m CITY OF ORONO NOTES TC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 5. LONG-TERM DEBT (continued) Account are to be used only for payment of principal and Interest on the bonds. Net revenues of the Water and Sewer System after i yment of operation and maintenance expenses are to be creditei to the Water and Sewer Bond Account. Unspent bond proceeds received are restricted for debt service or construction in the Water and Sewer Operating Enterprise Funds. E. Ultimate Responsibility for Debt All long-term debt is backed by the full faith and credit of the City. F. Resources to Meet Future Debt Requirements Amounts Available for Long-Term Debt - Available fund balance or retained earnings designated or reserved for repayment of long-term debt includes: General Fund Debt Service Funds Enterprise Funds $ 103,528 1,385,655 340,773 $1,829,956 Amount to be Provided in the General Long-Term Debt Account Group This represents future funding of severance and vaca tion benefits, and future taxes and special assessment v-ollec- tions designated for repayment of bonds. Note 6. DEFERRED REVENUE AND CREDITS A. Sewer Operating Enterprise Fund, Deferred Credits This amount represents the credits resulting fiom the transfer of the City's sewer treatment facilities to the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MVCC). The remaining balances due from MWCC total ..;"97,843 for r.he facilities and $3,163 for reserve capacity charges and are included in Due From Other Governmental Units as of December 31, 1989. The total price for each portion of the facilities will be received over 3C w: h interest at UX per annum by credits against the annual sewage handling charges of MWCC. MWCC has included the cost of these facilities in its rate base, thus "payment" of credits is dependent upon MWCC's setting future user fees at a level sufficient to cover all such credits irom pariicipating munici palities. Therefore, the revenue has been deferred until such user fees are paid or accrued. -39- CITY OF ORONO NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 6. DEFERRED REVENUE AND CREDITS (continued) Composition of the deferred balance Is as follows: Facility Treatment Works 1963 Interceptor 1965 Interceptor Total Deferred MWCC Acquisition Year 1971 1977 1977 Remaining Deferred Credits $ 4,317 145,608 9,735 $ 159,660 B. Contract for Deed The City sold a section of land to s i.'Oier.wners' association on a Contract for Deed In February 1984. The sales price of $100,000 will be received In equal quarterly payment'' •■••.rr a 15-year period, without Interest. The remaining $42,879 balance on the Contract for Deed at December 31, 1989, Is shown as deferred revenue In the General Fund until collected and available to finance current operations. C. 1985 S,>f al Assessments The City auopted a special assessment roll In 1985 which Included $46,175 relating to Improvements on City-owned property. The General Fund will pay these assessments over 15 years In annual Installments with 9.2% Interest. The remaining assessment principal balance of $33,855 at December 31 , 1989, has been recorded as due to/from other funds. The related revenue and charges have been deferred In the 1985 Improvement Debt Service and the General Funds, respectively. D. 1989 Special Assessments The City adopted special assessment rolls In 1989 which Included $8,135 relating to Improvements on City-owned property. The General Fund will pay these assessments In full In 1990. The assessment prin cipal has been recorded as due to/from other funds. The related reve nue and charges have been deferred In the Permanent Improvement Revolving Capital Project and the General Funds, respectively. E. Developer Advances In 1989, the City began construction of sewer and water Improvements along State Highway 12 but has not finalized the amounts to be spe cially assessed against benefitted properties. A new residential development within the project area was charged a preliminary amount ^ y -40- CITY OF ORONO Note 7. NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 6. DEFERRED REVENUE AND CREDITS (continued) for the Improvements, which has been deferred In the Water and Sewer Operating Funds, respectively, until the City determines the actual amount to be assessed. INDIVIDUAL FUND DISCLOSURES A. Interfund Advances Advances Advances To From General Fund Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund $ 96,706 $ 96,706 $96,7% $ 96,706 In 1988, the General Fund advanced $113,541 to the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund to pay the construction costs of the County Road 15 screet light project. This advance Is considered a loan and Is subject to repayment from the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund to the General Fund from special assessments levied against properties determined to benefit from the project. Because of the long-term nature of the advance, the fund balance has been reserved In the General Fund for a corresponding amount. In 1989, $16,835 was collected and applied to the advance. B. Interfund Receivables and Payables at Year-End Interfund Interfund Receivables Payables General Fund Debt Service Funds - $ 553 $43,208 1985 Improvement Fund Capital Project Funds - Permanent Improvement 33,855 —Revolving Fund Enterprise Funds - 8,135 ■ -Water Operating Fund -7,329 Sewer Operating Fund 8,547 553 -$51,090 $51,090 -41- Note 7. CITY OF ORONO NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 INDIVIDUAL FUND DISCLOSURES (continued) C. Interfund Transfers Made During the Year Funds From Amount Purpose General General Building Improvement and Equipment Outlay $2,025,000 $ 49,200 Capital Projects Capital Outlay Expenditures General Permanent Improve ment Revolving $ 30,000 Capital Projects General Permanent Improve- $ 344,161 ment Revolving Emergency Contin gency Account Transfer Municipal Permanent Improve- $ 190,000 State-Aid ment Revolving Construction Capital Projects For various reasons, certain funds have a portion of their fund equity reserved or designated for specific purposes. A discussion of each such item as it appears on the Combined Balance Sheet follows: Reservation of Retained Earnings Reserve for Revenue Bond Debt Service - This reserve in the Water and Sewer Operating ^unds represents fund balances which are presently committed to provide financial resources to pay principal and Interest on the City's general obligation water and sewer revenue bonds. Reservation of Fund Balances Reserves foi Advances to Other Funds and Prepaid Expenses - This reserve in the General Fund represents the amount of fund balance which does not represent spendable resources of the General Fund. Designated Unreserved Fund Balances Designated for Road/Bridge Projects - This amount in the Permanent Improvement Revolving Capital Project Fund repre sents fund balance which has been designated for specific road and bridge improvement projects. -42- J CITY OF ORONO NOTES T- FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 7. INDIVIDUAL FUND DISCLOSURES (continued) ® Designated for Emergency Contingencies - This amount in the Permanent Improvement Revolving Capital Project Fund repre sents fund balances which have been designated by the City Council to be segregated as an emergency source of fu.ids. ® Designated for Capital Projects - This amount in the Municipal State-Aid Streets Capital Project Fund represents fund balance which is presently committed to pay for an appropriate street project. * Designated for Debt Service - These amounts represent fund balances which are presently committed to provide financial resources to pay principal and Interest on the City's general obligation bonds. ® Designated for Vacation/Severance Liability - This amount in the General Fund represents fund balance which has been designated for payment of the estimated long-term liability for vacation and severance benefits. Note 8.SEGMENT INFORMATION FOR ENTERPRISE FUNDS The City provides services which are accounted for in the Enterprise Funds. The segment information for these Enterprise Funds for the t year ended December 31, 1989, is as follows: 5 •Golf 1 Water Sewer Course 1 Operating Operating Operating Total :«««Operating Revenue or Gross Profit $ 165,041 $ 401,693 $ 115,211 $ 681,945 t Depreciation Expense $ 36,273 $ 130,525 $ 4,501 $ 171,299 I 'Operating Income (Loss)$ (30,818) $ (28,629) $ 16,909 $ (42,538) Net Income (Loss)$ (25,353)$ 41,459 $ 16,928$ 33,034 i (Property, Plant, and.Equipment - iklditions $ 118,835 $ 307,131 $ 329 $ 426,295 Net Working Capital $ 113,926 $ 837,965 $ 6,387 $ 958,278 Total Assets $2,513,710 $6,810,456$ 202,475 $9,526,641 - Total Equity $1,198,227 $5,373,956 $ 194,926 $6,767,109 -43- CITY OF ORONO NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 9. PROPRIETARY FUNDS CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL This balance represents the cost of property contributed to the Enterprise Funds by the City, less depreciation thereon charged to operations. Changes occurring in this account during the year were as follows: Balance - beginning of year Less depreciation on contributed assets Balance - End of Year Water OperatliTg Sewer Operating Golf Course Operating Total $1,0%,385 $4,388,759 $ 146,054 $5,631,198 31,332 127,604 254 159,190 $1,065,053 $4,261,155 $ 145,000 $5,472,008 Note 10. DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLANS - STATEWIDE A. Plan Description Substantially all full-time and certain part-time employees of the City of Orono are covered by defined benefit pension plans admin istered by the Public Employees* Retirement Association of Minnesota (PERA). PERA administers the Public Employees' Retirement Fund (PERF) and the Public Employees' Police and Fire Fund (?E?''F) which are cost sharing, multiple-employer retirement plans. PERF members belong to either the Coordinated Plan or the Basic Plan. Coordinated members are covered by Social Security and Basic members are not. All new members must participate in the Coordinated Plan. All police offi cers, fire fighters, and peace officers who qualify for membership by Statute are covered by the PEPFF. The payroll for employees covered by PERF and PEPFF for the year ended December 31, 1989, was $645,095 and $609,618, respectively; the City's total payroll was $1,358,175. PERA provides retiremei.t efits as well as disability benefits to members, and benefits to ^vors upon the death of eligible members. Benefits are established L. ;ate Statute, and vest after three years of credited service. The defined retirement benefits are based on a member's average salary for any five successive years of allowable service, age, and years of credit at termination of service. Two methods are used to compute benefits for Coordinated and Basic mem bers. The retiring member receives the higher of step-rate benefit accrual formula (Method 1) or a level accrual formula (Method 2). -44- CITY OF ORONO I NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 10. DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLANS - STATEWIDE (continued) Under Method 1, the annuity accrual rate for a Basic member is 2% of the average salary for each ot the first ten years of service and 2.5% for each remaining year. For a Coordinated member, the annuity accrual rate is 1% of the average salary for each of the first ten years and 1.5% for each remaining year. Using Method 2, the annuity accrual rate is 2.5% of the average salary for Basic members and 1.5% for Coordinated members. For PEPFF members, the annuity accrual rate is 2.5% for each of the first 25 years and 2% for each remaining year. For PERF members whose annuity is calculated using Method 1, and for all PEPFF members, a full annuity is available when age plus years of service equal 90. There are different types of annuities available to members upon retirement. A normal annuity is a lifetime annuity that ceases upon the death of the retiree. No survivor annuity is payable. There are also various types of joint and survivor annuity options available which will reduce the monthly normal annuity amount, because the annuity is payable over joint lives. Members may also leave their contributions in the fund upon termination of public service, in order to qualify for a deferred annuity at retirement age. Refunds of contributions are available at any time to members who leave public service, but before retirement benefits begin. B. Contributions Required and Contributions Made Minnesota Statutes Chapter 353 sets the rates for employer and employee contributions. The City makes annual contributions to the pension plans equal to the amount required by State Statutes. According to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 356.215, Subdivision 4(g), the date of full funding required for the PERF and the PEPFF is the year 2020. As part of the annual actuarial valuation, PERA's actuary determines the sufficiency of the statutory contribution rates towards meeting the required full funding deadline. The actuary compares the actual contribution rate to a "required” contribution rate. Current combined statutory contribution rates and actuarially required contri bution rates for the plans are as follows: -45- CITY OF ORONO NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 10. DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLANS - STATEWIDE (continued) Statutory Rates For the Plan Year Ended June 30, 1989: Employees Employer Required Rates PERF (Basic and Coordinated Plans, Blended Rates) PEPFF k.llX 8.00% k.hlX 12.00% 9.42% 16.69% For the Plan Year Beginning July 1, 1989: PERF (Basic and Coordinated Plans, Blended Rates) PEPFF 4.47% 8.00% 4.46% 12.00% 8.83% 6.21% Total contributions made by the City during fiscal year 1989 were: Amounts Percentage of Covered Payroll Employees Employer Employee? Employer PERF (Coordinated Plan only) PEPFF $ 26,491 $ 28,104 48,769 73.154 4.11% 8.00% 4.36% 12.00% $ 75,260 S101.258 The City*s contribution (employer's share) for the year ended December 31, 1989, to the PERF represented approximately .03% of total contributions required of all participating entities. For the PEPFF, contributions for the year ended December 31, 1989, represented approximately .33% of total contribution? required of all par ticipating entities. C. Funding Status and Progress 1. Pension Benefit Obligation The "pension benefit obligation" is a standardized disclosure measure of the present value of pension benefits, adjusted for the effects of projected salary increases and step-rate bene fits, estimated to be payable in the future as a result of employee service to date. The measure, which is the actuarial -46- I - \ CITY OF ORONO NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 10. DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLANS - STATEWIDE (continued) present value of credited projected benefits, is intended to help users assess PERA's funding status on a going-concern basis, assess progress made in accumulating sufficient assets to pay benefits when due, and make comparisons among Public Employees’ Retirement Systems and among employers. PERA does not make separate measurements of assets and pension benefit obligation for individual employers. The pension benefit obligations as of June 30,1989, are sh ,wn —below:11 • 'FERf PEPFF (In Thousands) Total pension mm benefit obligation $3,714,257 $582,299 Net assets available for benefits, at cost (market values for PERF » $3,801,129; PEPFF - $694,227)2,934.977 637,868 Unfunded (assets in excess of) pension benefit obligation $ 779,280 $(55,569) The measurement of the pension benefit obligation is based on an actuarial valuation as of June 30, 1989 Net assets available to pay pension benefits were valued as of June 30, 1989. 2. Changes in Actuarial Methods and Benefit Provisions A numbe.* of benefit improvements became effective during fiscal year 1989. Some of the major Improvements affecting each fund Include a reduction in the period required for vesting from five years to three years; an option for members hiied before July 1, 1989, to have their annuity calculated under a level benefit accrual formula; the interest rate cre dited on refunds of member contributions increased from 5Z to 6X; and the provision for an automatic bounce back feature fcr all joint and survivor annuity options. In the PEPFF, age and/or service requirements were reduced for eligibility for a normal retirement annuity, an early retirement annuity, and for certain disability and survivor benefits. -47- CITY OF ORONO NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 10. DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLANS - STATEWIDE (continued) For each fund, there were changes in the actuarial assumptions used in the annual actuarial valuation. Effective for all funds beginning in fiscal year 1989, the pre-retirement interest rate assumption was Increased from 8.0% to 8.535. Additionally, for the PERF and the PEPFF, the amortization target date has been changed to 2020. Shown on the following page are the effects on the pension benefit obligation of these changes in plan benefits and actuarial assumptions. Increase (Decrease) in Pension Benefit Obligation Due To: PERF PEPFF (In Thousands) $127,472 $ 27,851 (84.154)(25,963) $ 43,318 $ 1,888 Changes in plan benefits Changes in actuarial assumptions Net increase in pension benefit obligation D. Ten-Year Historical Trend Information Ten-year historical trend information is presented in PERA’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the year ended June 30, 1989. This information is useful in assessing the pension plan's accumulation of sufficient assets to pay pension benefits as they become due. E. Related Party Investment.. As of June 30, 1989, and for the fiscal year then ended, PERA held no securities issued by the City or other related parties. Note 11. DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLANS The > offers its employees deferred compensation plans ertated in accord*>».».e with Internal Revenue Code Section 457. The plans, available to all employees, permit them to defer a portion oi their salary until future years. The deferred compensation is not aval, to employees until termination, retirement, death, or unfores emergency. -48- CITY OF ORONO NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) December 31, 1989 Note 11. DEFERRED COMPEN. 'ION PLANS (continued) All amounts of compensation deferred under the plans, all property and rights purchased with those amounts, and all income attributable to those amounts are solely the property and rights of the City, subject to the claims of the City's general creditors. Participants' rights under the plans are equal to those of general creditors of the City in an amount eqtil to the fair marlcet value of the deferred account for each participant. The City has no liability for losses under the plans but does ha<^e the duty of due care that would be required of an ordinary prudent Investor. The City believes that it is unlikely that it will use the assets to satisfy the claims of general creditors in the future. Note 12. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES The City and its Insurer were named as defendants in a case filed in May 19d9. A former police officer, while on duty, was injured in an automobile accident in February 1985 by an uninsured motorist and is seeking compensation under the uninsured motorist benefit of the City's Insurance policy in an amount in excess of $50,000. The City's Insurer is providing defense of this claim. L-'-veral othei' claims have been filed against the City. The City's insurer has accepted defense of these claims. The outcome of each of these cases is unknown. It is not determinable at this time whether unfavorable settlements of the claims will exceed insurance coverage. City management believes that the City will not incur an> monetary loss relating to the cases. No loss has been recorded on the City's financial statements relating to the claims. The City awarded several contracts related to Water and Sewer Fund System Improvements in 1989. The "'s commitment for uncompleted work o*^ these projects was appro y $185,000 at December 31, 1989. However, in April ^990 th^ .ity cancelled two of these contracts which had remaining contract balances for uncompleted work of approximately $101,000 at the time of cancellation. The contracts were ''ancelled dui to the contractor's failure to fulfill contract obligations. The City will complete these projects using a different contractor. GENERAL FUND The General Fund is the general operating fund of the City. It is used to account for all financial resources except those required to be accounted for in another fund. mfi -50- CITY OF ORONO Exhibit B-1 GT^MERAL FUND COMPARAilVE BALANCE SHEET As of December 31, 1989 and 1988 1989 1988 ASSETS Cash and <.* •it-.?nts $811,105 $2,961,668 ReceivabK'^ Accountj 6,707 11,346 Accrued interest 83,457 117,069 Delinquent taxes 63,486 52,484 Delinqjent special assessments 178 - Contract for deed 42,879 57,154 Due from other funds 553 140,306 Advances to other funds 96,706 113,541 Due from other governmental units 39,766 23,861 Other assets 4,334 7,231 Prepaid items 58,670 - Deferred charge - assessments on City-owned property 41.990 36,935 Total Assets ,249,831 $3,521,595 LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY Liabilities: Accounts payable $53,489 $ 66,571 Accrued salaries payable 32,252 27,434 Due to other funds 43,208 36,935 Due to other governmental units 26,216 15,559 Deferred revenue - Contract for deed 42,879 57,154 Delinquent taxes and special assessments 63,664 52,484 Total Liabilities 261,708 256,137 Fund Equity: Fund balance - Reserved tor prepaid items 58,670 - Reserved for advances to other funds 96,706 113,541 Unreserved - Designated for emergency contingencies -325,279 Designated for vacation/severance liability 103,528 95,119 Undesignated 729,219 2,731,519 Total Fund Equity 988,123 3.265.458 Total Liabilities and Fund Equity .249,831 $3,521,595 -51- CITY OF ORONO Exhibit B-2 GENERAL FUND 'STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE - BUDGET (GAAP BASIS) AND ACTUAL mm Year Ended December 31 , 1989 mm (With Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31, 1988) > 1 1989 1988 Over (Under) Budget Actual Budget Actualm Revenue: Taxes - Property $ 1,186,390 $ 1,170.674 $(15,716) $1,104,458Penalties and interest 25,640 9.073 (16,567)35,051Total Taxes 1,212,030 1,179,747 (32,283)1,139,509 Licenses and permits - Licenses 10,250 14,375 4,125 16,694Permits79.750 134,189 54.439 107,640Total Licenses —and Permits 90,000 148,564 58,564 124,334 mm Intergovernmental revenue - Federal emergency preparedness 12,000 4,000 (8,000)3,425>m»State grants - Local government aid 168,420 168,224 (196)164,902Homestead credit 163,930 163,930 160,547 •m Agricultural credit 2,370 2,373 3 1,932Police town aid 60,450 66,862 6,412 61,831mPolice training reimbursement 2,300 7,155 4,855 6,848 m Municipal State-aid streets 11,070 56,966 45.896 42.243Other local municipalities --_3,100 m County grant - recycling 20,190 20,187 (3) Total Intergovernmental m Revenue 440,730 489,697 48.967 444,828 m Charges for services - m General government 107,615 165,980 58,365 130,708Public safety 540,090 519.972 (20,118)512,443 m Total Charges m for Services 647,705 685,952 38,247 643,151 m Fines and forfeits 95,500 125,357 29,857 140,657 (Continued) -52- CITY OF ORONO Exhibit B-2 GENERAL FUND (Continued) STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE - BUDGET (GAAP BASIS) AND ACTUAL Year Ended December 31, 1989 (With Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31, 1988) 1989 1988 Over (Under) Budget Actual Budget Actual Revenue (Continued): — Other revenue - Interest earned on investments 165,000 190,750 25,750 219,444 Rents 5,400 5,850 450 4,950 Payment in lieu of taxes ---14,640 Refunds and reimbursements -19,745 19,745 - Special assessments -876 876 671 — Proceeds from contract for deed - land sale 6,200 14,276 8,076 7,207 Miscellaneous 2,000 3,083 1,083 11,841 Total Other Revenue 178,600 234,580 55,980 258,753 Total Revenue 2,664,565 2,863,897 199,332 2,751,232 Expenditures: General government - Mayor and council - Personal services 17,340 15,908 (1.432)15,153 Supplies 250 466 216 103 Other services and charges 49,860 50,989 1,129 31,405 Total Mayor and Council 67,450 67,363 (87)46,661 Administration • Personal services 134,560 133,086 (1.474)120,602 Supplies 4,950 3,197 (1,753) 4,298 Other services and charges 15,610 15,538 (72)17,580 Total Administration 155,120 151,821 (3,299)142,480 -> Elections -— Personal services 1,600 433 (1.167)7,885 Supplies ---778 Other services and charges 200 136 (64)1,405 — Total Elections 1,800 569 (1.231)10,068 Assessing - Personal service.*-2,110 1,266 (844)1,061 Supplies 1,040 979 (61)1,278 Other services and charges 73,970 74,184 214 50,489 Total Assessing 77,120 76,429 (691)52,828 (Continued) •53- CITY OF ORONO Exhibit B-2 GENERAL FUND (Continued) STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE - BUDGET (GAAP BASIS) AND ACTUAL Year Ended December 31, 1989 (With Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31, 1988) 1989 1988 Over (Under) Budget Actual Budget Actual Expenditures (Continued); General government (continued) - Finance - Personal services 96,810 95,354 (1.456)88,603 Supplies 1,770 1,168 (602)1,189 Other services and charges 33,840 32.108 (1.732)26,409 Total Finance 132,420 128,630 (3,790) 116,201 Legal - mm Other services and charges 179,340 182,431 3,091 178,186 Human services - -Other services and charges 10,950 10,454 (496)10,505 General government buildings - Personal services 12,170 6,788 (5,382)5,223 •mt Supplies 1,500 1,632 132 475 Other services and charges 26,870 29.870 3.000 26,510 Total General Government Buildings 40,540 38,290 (2.250)32.208 m Total General Gr^'ornment 664.740 655,987 (8,753)589,137 Public safety - Police protection - Personal services 760,460 802,063 41,603 737,196 ><4 Supplies 52,800 52,083 (717)49,959 •«Other services and charges 104,290 122,399 18,109 91,683 Capital outlay 36,800 37.694 894 23,165 Total Police Protection 954,350 1,014,239 59,889 902,003 Fire protection - Personal services --—64 Contracted fire protection 151,560 157.803 6.243 142,286 -Total Fire Protection 151,560 157,803 6,243 142,350 (Cootinued) -54- CITY OF ORONO Exhibit B-2 GENERAL FUND (Continued) STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE - BUDGET (GA.-P BASIS) AND ACTUAL Year Ended December 31, 1989 (With Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31, 1988) 1989 1988 Over (Under) Budget Actual Budget Actual Expenditures (Continued): gmm Public safety (continued) - Protective inspection and zoning - Personal services 199,910 191,915 (7,995)179,407 Supplies 9,900 6,341 (3,559)10,536 Other services and charges 32,110 32.207 97 26,451 Total Protective Inspection and Zoning 241,920 230,463 (11,457)216,394 Emergency preparedness -— Supplies 1,000 601 (399)245 Other services and charges 1,830 2,481 651 1,549 Total Emergency Preparedness 2,830 3,082 252 1,794 Animal control - Personal services 7,070 7,333 263 5,866 Supplies 400 196 (204)304 Other services and charges 1,400 901 (499)2,077 Total Animal Control 8,870 8,430 (440)8,247 ~ Total Public Safety 1,359,530 1.414,017 54,487 1,270,788 Streets - Personal services 186,750 191,352 4,602 163,412 — Supplies 219,280 218,948 (332)107,373 Other services and charges 89.640 84,442 (5,198)73,622 *—• Total Streets 495,670 494,742 (928)344,407 Parks and recreation - Personal serviced 38,860 20,929 (17,931)29,080 Supplies 3,800 1,085 (2,715)2,986 Other services and charges 14,000 10,947 (3,053)12,519 Total Parks and Recreation 56,660 32,961 (23,699)44,585 (Continued) -55-m CITY OF ORONO Exhibit B-2GENERAL FUND (Continued) STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE - BUDGET (GAAP BASIS) AND ACTUAL Year Ended December 31, 1989 (With Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31, 1988) Expenditures (Continued): Recycling pick-up program - Personal services Supplies Other services and charges Total Recycling Pick up Program Miscellaneous - Engineering Private improvements Contingency Total Miscellaneous Total Expenditures Excess (Deticiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses): Operating transfers in (out) - To Building Fund To Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund To Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund To 1985 Improvement Fund Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUE AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES OVER EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES Fund balance - beginning of year Fund Balance - End of Year 1989 1988 Over (Under) Budget Actual Budget Actual 3,020 3,218 198 16,540 16,835 295 - 18,290 18,869 •^79 - 37,850 38,922 1,072 - 5,8>J0 2,990 (2,810)3,389 -39,061 39,061 26,257 53,940 14,191 (39,749)32,780 59,740 56,242 (3,498)62,426 2.674,190 2,692,871 18,681 2.311.343 (9.625)171,026 180,651 439,889 (2,025,000)(2,025,000)-(20,000) (49,200)(49,200)-(46,250) (374.160)(374,161)(1)(30,000) ---(81,829) (2,448,360)(2,448,361)(1)(178.079) $(2,457,985)$(2,277,335) 3,265,458 $ 180,650 $261,810 3,003,648 $ 983.123 3,265,458 -56- r c r t SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Special Revenue Funds are used to account for revenue derived from specific revenue sources that are legally restricted to expenditures for specific purposes. Park Fund - useo to account for park dedication fees received to be used for land acquisition and park development. Improvement and Equipment Capital Outlay Fund - used to replace non-enterprise, non-police City equipment. Building Capital Outlay Fund - used to partially finance building facilities construction tnd additions through transfers from the General Fund. -57- an OF ORCNO SPE3CIAL REVENUE FWCS a0^fiININO BALANCE SHEET As of December 31, 1989 (With Comparative Totals as of December 31, 1988) Ebdilblt (M ASSETS Cash and investments Accnjed Interest receivable Total Assets Park Inprovement and Building Equipment Capital Outlay Outlay Totals 1989 1988 $143,469 $ 260,672 $2,196,397 $2,600,538 $ 524,792 6,519 8,721 28,580 43,820 18,850 $149,988 $ 269,393 $2,224,977 $2,644,358 $ 543,642 LIABIIJTIES AND FUM) BAIANQ5 Liabilities: Accounts payable Find Balance: Unreserved - Undesignated Total Liabilities and Find Balance $ - $ 6,545 $ 2,000 $ 8,545 $ 4,366 149,988 262,848 2,222,977 2,635,813 539,276 $149,^988 $ 269,393 $2,224,977 $2,644,358 $ 543,642 -58-II cm OF ORDNO Exhibit C-2SPECIAL REVENUE FUMK COMBINING STA3FMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDTIURES, AND OiANOES IN FUM) BALANCE Year Ended Decenijer 31, 1989 (With Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31, 1988) • -4 Inprovement 1 , and Building Equipment Capital Totals ■ 'Park Outlay Outlay 1989 1988 -Revenue: Intergovernmental revenue - Federal grants $ -$ -$$$4,734 —Other revenue - User fees -3,148 -3.148 111 Sale of equipoent -2,766 —2,766 — Park dedication fees 16,590 --16,590 7,900 Interest earned on Investments 11,399 21,741 60.436 93.576 y>,9)7 ■Total Revenue 27,989 27,655 60,436 116,060 50,168 --Expenditures: w Current - Parks and recreation - ••Park department -—16,997 j t Miscellaneous -—•Uyly^ CfiQ)ltal outlay -81,899 11,844 93,743 69,033 -Total Expenditures 81,899 11,844 93.743 90,764 Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures 27,989 (54,244)48,592 22,337 (40,5%) Other Financing Sources: Operating transfer in - From General Fund —49,200 2.025,000 2.074.200 66.250 -EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUE AT® OTHER FINANCING SaiOS CVER EXPEM)nURES $ 27,989 $ (5,0W)$2,073,592 $2,096,537 $25,654 Find balance - beginning of year 121,999 267.892 149,385 539,276 513.622 Find Balance - End of Year $149,988 $ 262,848 $2,222,977 $2,635,813L 539,276 J -59- CITY OF ORONO Exhibit C-3PARK FUND STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE - BUDGET (GAAP BASIS) AND ACTUAL Year Ended December 31, 1989 (With Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31, 1988) Revenue: Other revenue - Park dedication fees Interest earned on Investments Total Revenue Expenditures: Parks and recreation - Park department EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURES Fund balance - beginning of year Fund Balance - End of Year 1989 1988 Budget Actual Over (Under) Budget Actual $ 8,000 $ 16.590 $ 8,590 $ 7,900 9,000 11.399 2,399 8,923 17,000 27,989 10,989 16,823 16,997 i $ 17,000 $ 27,989 $ 10,989 $ (174) 121,999 122,173 $149,988 $121,999 •60- CITY OF ORONO Exhibit C-4 IMPROVEMENT AND EQUIPMENT OUTLAY FUND STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE - BUDGET (GAAP BASIS) AND ACTUAL Year Ended December 31, 1989 (With Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31, 1988) 1989 1988 Over (Under) mm Budget Actual Budget Actual Revenue: Other revenue - User fees $ 2,640 $ 3,148 $ 508 $ 727 Sale of equipment -2,766 2,766 - Interest earned on investments 19,000 21,741 2,741 18,399 Total Revenue 21,640 27,655 6,015 19,126 Expenditures: Capital outlay - General government - Administration department 7,600 2,328 (5.272)5,260 Elections department -- -20,296 mn)Finance department 2,550 4,481 1,931 739 General government buildings department 5,690 7.781 2,091 12,470 Public safety - Police department 5,140 7,694 2,554 - Building and zoning department 8,100 3,404 (4.696)3,040 Emergency preparedness 12,500 -(12,500)- Ht Streets 81,500 56,211 (25,289)21,938 M Total Capital Outlay Expenditures 123,080 81 .899 (41.181)63.743 Excess (Deficiency) of Ml Revenue Over Expenditures (I0l,440>(54,244)47,196 (44.6r;> Other Financing Sources: Operating transfer in - From General Fund 49.200 49,200 -46,250 4 tai EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUE AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES OVER EXPENDITURES 1 <52,,2*0)^ (5.044) $ 47,196 $ 1.633 Fund balance - beginning of year 267,892 266.259 Fund Balance - End of Year S 262,848 S 267,892 -61- CITY OF ORONO BUILDING CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE - BUDGET (GAAP BASIS) AND ACTUAL Year Ended December 31, 1989 (With Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31, 1988) Exhibit C-5 1989 1988 Over (Under)L* Budget Actual Budget Actual MU Revenue: Other revenue - Interest earned on Investments $ 12,500 $ 60,436 $ 47.936 $9,485 — Expenditures: Capital outlay -* Miscellaneous 9.750 11,844 2,094 5,290 Excess of Revenue Over Expenditures 2,750 48.592 45,842 4.195 Other Financing Sources:- Operating transfer in - From General Fund 2,025,000 2.025.000 -20,000 EXCESS OF REVENUE AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES OVER EXPENDITURES $2,027,750 $1 073.592 $ 45.842 $24.195 “ Fund balance - beginning of year 149,385 125.190 — Fund Balance - End of Year $2,222,977 149,385 -42- •i I i L DEBT SERVICE FUNDS Debt Service Funds are used to account for the accumulation of resources used for the payment of principal, interest, and fiscal agent fees on general long term debt. [ c I I I I I -63- cm OF ORDNO Bdiibit D-1 DEBT SERVIO: HMDS COMBINING BALANCE SHEET As of Decexcber 31, 1989 (With Comparative Totals as of December 31, 1988) 1966-76 1980 1982 1985 Inf)rovement Bonds Improvement Bonds Improvement Bonds Improvement Totals Bonds 1989 1988 ASSETS Cash and investments $ 542,039 $ 471,927 $ 145,120 $ 156,989 $1,316,075 $1,417,170 Receivables: ^ Accrued Interest Delincpjent taxes Delinquent special assessments Deferred special assessments Due from other funds 33,259 5,529 30,368 17,749 9,207 247,889 9,543 15,216 15,799 7,947 J,.380 Id,659 198,724 33,855 68,498 65,521 1,380 1,174 45,611 78,030 492,780 674,211 33,855 52,639 1,925 2.075, Due from other governmental inits — Total Assets 156 -395 1,374 $ 611,351 $ 7-'i,772 $ 186,073 $ 415,928 $1,960,124 $2,290,820 ^ LIABILITIES Arc HM) BALANCE ^ Liabilities: Accounts pay^le $ -$ -$ -$ 675 $ 675 $ 955 1 cji _ Due to other governmental units 168 ■"loo Deferred revenue - Delinquent taxes ^ Special assessments 35,897 257,096 31,015 1,380 214,383 1,380 1,174 538,391 752,241 Special assessments on ^ City Property Total Liabilities •i* —33.855 33,855 36,935 36,065 257,096 31,015 250,293 574,469 791,305 Ftmd Balance: Unreserved - Designated for debt service 575,286 489.676 155,058 165,635 1.385.655 1,499,515 <«• Total Liabilities and Fund Balance $ 611,351 $ 746.772 $ 186,073 $ 415.928 $1,960,124 $2,290,820i -64- cm OF ORDND Exhibit D-2 DEBT SERVICE RJICS (MINING C3F REVQWE, BCTOCITURES, AM) CHANGES IN FUM) BALANCE Year Ended Decenber 31, 1989 (With Comparative Totals for Year Ended Decenber 31, 1988) Revenue: Taiges - Property Penalties and interest Special assessments - Principal, Interest, and paialtles Intergovemmental revenue - Homestead credit State-aid hlg^Mays Other revenue - Interest earned on investments Miscellaneous Total Revenue Expenditures: Debt service - Retirement of bond principal Interest on bonds Fiscal agent fees Miscellaneous Total Expendlttires EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) CF FEVENUE OVER EXPQCnURES Find balance - beginning of year Residual equity transfer (out) to Permanent Improvement Revolving F\nd F\nd - Ekid of Year 1966-76 1980 1982 1985 Inprovement Improvement Inprovement Inprovement Totals Bonds Bonds Bonds Bonds 1989 1988 $ 5,709 $ 7 $ -$ 25,917 $ 31,633 $30,627 A 3 15A 161 275 A2,A39 80,282 A,505 86,650 213,876 299,611 3,688 3,688 3,812 -----35,945 A5,516 38,58A 13,761 14,240 112,101 102,265 - -201 201 184 93,668 118,876 18,266 130,850 361,660 472,719 150,000 75,000 50,000 5C..7A)325,000 360,000 22,A25 A6,275 17,937 57,525 144,162 166,663 240 180 675 1,095 932 A, 267 373 220 403 5,263 7,281 176,692'121,888 68,337 108,603 475,520 534,876 $ (83,Q2A)$ (3,012)$ (50,071)$ 22,247 $ (113,860) $(62,157) 658,310 A92,688 205,129 143,388 1,499,515 I1,568,982 (7,310) $ 575,286 $ 489,676 $ 155,058 $ 165,635 $1,385,655 $1,499,515 CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS Capital Project Funds are used to account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities. Municipal State-Aid Construction Fund - used to account for State-aid allotments used by the City for impiovemenc v^'>J^cts to designated roads within the City. Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund - used to account for construction costs prior to obtaining permanent financing. -66- CITY CF ORONO Exhibit E-1 CAPTEAL PROJECT FUICS COMBINING BALANCE SHEET As of December 31, 1989 (With Comparative Totals as of December 31, 1988) Minnesota Permanent State-Aid Improvement Totals Streets Revolving 1989 1988 ASSESS Cash and Investments $ 3,519 $ 636,903 $640,422 $152,600 Receivables: Accrued interest -27,882 27,882 10,434 Deferred special assessments -109,030 109,030 - Due from other funds 8,135 8,135 Total Assets $ 3,519 $ 781,950 $785,469 $163,034 0m • ^ UABHITIES and FUN) BALANCE Liabilities: -•Advances from other funds $ -$ 96,706 $ 96,706 $113,541 Accounts payable -4,969 4,%9 3,490 Due to other funds --—123,841 •m Deferred revenue - Special assessments -109,030 109,030 - Special assessments on City property -8,135 8,135 - Total Liabilities —218,840 218,840 240,872 Find Balance (Deficit); Unreserved - Designated for roadAnridge projects -137,583 137,583 - Designated for emergency contingencies —355,003 355,003 — Designated for capital projects 3,519 —3,519 3,519 4 Undesignated -70,524 70,524 (81.357) Total Fund Balance (Deficit)3,519 563,110 566,629 (77,838) Total Liabilities and Find BalaiKe $ 3.519 $ 781,950 $785,469 $163,034 aXY OF ORONO Ejdiibit E-2 CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS (XFBINING STAHMENT CF REVE2JUE, BOElICnURES, AND OiANGES IN FUTC BALANCE Year Ended December 31, 1989 (With Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31, 1988) Minnesota Penranent State-Aid Inprovement Totals Streets Revolving 1989 1988 Revenue: TajflBS - Property $ -$ -$ -$ 2,384 Special assessments - Principal, Interest, and penalties -62,830 62,830 31,881 Intergovemmental revenue - State aid for construction 190,000 -190,000 2,113 Other revenue - Interest earned on investments -37,440 37,440 11,871 Miscellaneous -6,286 6,286 4.432 Total Revenue 190,000 106,556 296,556 52,681 Esqienditures: Capital projects - Navarre Heists storm sewer -1,071 1,071 - Hlghwood storm sewer -365 365 1,485 Hlgjhway 12 sewer and other -11 11 5,589 Old Crystal Bay Road sealcoat ---2,113 Stubbs Bay sanitary sewer -5,678 5,678 4,980 Hazardous buildings -11,166 11,166 9,501 Crystal Bay sanitary sewer ---6,392 Wocxlhlll Avenue street -7,389 7,389 36,%3 County Road 15 storm sewer, street, and lights -570 570 344.117 Total Expenditures —26,250 26,250 411,140 Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures 190,000 80,306 270,306 (358,459) Other Financing Sources (Uses):— Operating troisfers in (out) - To Permanent Improvement Revolving Find (190,000)-(190,000)- From Minnesota State-Aid Streets Find -190,000 190,000 -MM From General Fund -374.161 374,161 111,829 Total Other Financing Sources (Uses)(190,000)564,161 374,161 111,829 EXCESS (DEFICH2JCY) CF REVENUE AT© OTHER FTNANCINC SOURCES OVER EXFGOnURES AM) OTHER FINANCING USES $ -$ 644,467 $ 6*4,467 $(246,630) • ■ Fund balance (deficit) - beginning of year 3,519 (81,357)(77,838)161,482 - Residual equity transfer in from G.O. State-Aid » •. Road Bonds of 1979 Fuxl ———7,310 • l\«i Balance (Deficit) - Ebd of Year $ 3,519 $ 563,110 $ 566,629 $ (77,838)‘ : Ml «• m ! • J ENTERPRISE FUNDS Enterprise Funds are used to account for the operations of self-supporting activities which render services or goods to the public. The accounting records are maintained on the accrual basis of accounting. Water Operating Fund - used to account for the provision of water services to the residents of the City who have water service available. Sewer Operating Fund - used to account for the provision of sewer services to the residents of the City who have sanitary sewer service available. Golf Course Operating Fund - used to account for the golf course operation sales and related expenses. mmJ -69- cm OF ORONOENTERPRISE FUNDS COMBINING BALANCE SHEET As of December 31, 1989 (With Conq)aratlve Totals as of December 31, 1988) Golf ASSETS Current Assets: Cash and investments Accounts receivable Delinquent special assessoents receivable Accru^ interest receivable Due from other funds Due from other gpvernnental units Inventory Prepaid Itene Total Current Assets Restricted Assets: Cash and investments Accrued Interest receivable TcyAl Restricted Assets Other Assets, Less Current Portion: Discount on revenue bonds Due from other funds Due from other govermental units Total Other Assets Property, Plant, sid Equipment: Work in progress land and land improvements Buildings and building improvements Equipment Distribution/collection system Less accumulated depreciation Net Property, Plant, and Equipment Total Assets Water Sewer Course Totals Operating Operating Operating 1989 1988 $ 120,800 $ 582,014 $ 1,137 $ 703,951 $ 556,693 -198,407 -198,407 195,645 -15,773 -15,773 11,993 1,312 15,791 1,343 18,446 15,521 -3,661 -3,661 2,443 593 18,074 -18,667 17,379 8,047 5,629 4.709 18,385 19,166 909 13,443 1,021 15,373 - 131,661 852,792 8,210 992,663 818,840 1,155,765 947,979 2,103,744 * 10,000 8,141 -18,141 - 1,165,765 956,120 *2,121,885 •* 8,565 8,365 16,930 -4,886 -4,886 7,329 -382,932 -382,932 401,460 8,565 3%, 183 404,748 406.789 113,605 298,307 411,912 25,132 -127,977 153,109 153,109 77,694 31,014 40,778 149.486 149,486 35,902 51,649 59,438 146,989 141.107 1,559,248 6,018,020 -7,577,268 7.577.268 1,811,581 6,3^.,990 228,193 8,438.764 8,020,970 603,862 1,793,629 33,928 2,431,419 2,268,621 1,207.719 4,605,361 194,265 6,007,345 5,752.349 $2,513,710 $6,810,456 $ 202,475 $9,526,641 $6,979,978 -70- Exhibit F-1 • • t »Coif Water Sewer Course Totals Operating Operating Operating 1989 1988 LIABILITIES AND FUND Equm mm current Liabilities: Accounts payable $ 2,674 $ 2,878 $ 595 $ 6,147 $ 11,750 Salaries payable 908 1,530 1,228 3,666 4,392 Due to other funds 2,443 553 -2,9%34,612 Due to other governmental units 11,710 336 -12,046 9,129 Deferred credits -9,530 -9,530 9,530 Xbtal Current Liabilities 17,735 14,827 1,823 34,385 69,413 Current Liabilities Related to Restricted Assets: Accrued interest payable 21,624 21,120 -42,744 Contracts payable 25,634 42,868 -68,502 - Accounts payable 7,728 13,791 -21,519 - Deferred revenue - developer advances 72,150 54,100 -126,250 - Total Current Liabilities Related to Restricted Assets 127,136 131,879 -259,015 - Long-Term Liabilities, Less Current Portion: Revenue bonds payable 1,163,570 1,136,430 -2,300,000 - Deferred credits -150,130 -150,130 159,661 Due to other funds 4,886 --4,886 7,329 mm Accrued vacation and severance benefits 2,156 3,234 5,726 11,116 9,500 m Total Long-Term Liabilities 1,170,612 1,289,794 5,726 2,466,132 176,490 -Total Liabilities 1,315,483 1,436,500 7,549 2,759,532 245,903 Rmd Equity: Contributed capital 1,065,053 4,261,155 145,800 5,472,008 5,631,198 Retained earnings (deficit) - Reserved for revenue bond debt service 172,510 168,263 -340,773 - Uireserved (39,336)944,538 49,126 954,328 1,102,877 *Total Petalned Earnings 133,174 1,112,801 49,126 1,295,101 1,102,877 Total Fund Equity 1,198,227 5,373,956 194,926 6.767.109 6.734.075 tm Total Liabilities and FUnd Equity $2,513,710 $6,810,456 $ 202,475 $9,526,641 $6,979,978 -71- ! ,, QTY OF ORONO Exhibit F-2 0HERPRISE FDMB COMBINING STAIOOr OF lEVENUE, EXPENSES, AND CHANGES IN STAINED EARNINGS Year Endal December 31, 1989 (With Caqparative Totals for Year End^ December 31, 1988) m ..i Water Sewer Golf Course Totals Operating Operating 1989 1988 mm Sales and Cost of Sales: Sales $ - $$15,832 $15,832 $13,430 Cost of sales --9,936 9,936 8,866 Gross Profit ——5,8%5,8%4,564 Operating Revenue: Metered water sales 163,537 163,537 184,974 User charges -3% ,004 -3% ,004 394,004 Green fees --80.376 80.376 63,861 •Equipment rental --27,465 *>7,465 19,248 Other 1,50^5,689 1.474 8,667 10,385 Total Operating Revenue 165,041 401,693 109,315 676,049 672.472 — Total (hnss Profit and Operating Revenue 165,041 401,693 115,211 681,945 677,036 Operating Expenses: Salaries and wages 41,503 65,688 47,050 154,241 142,685 Retirement contributions 4,909 7,730 4,218 16,857 15,680 Health and life insurance contributions 1,530 2,295 2,312 6,137 4,518 I\jrchased water 42,603 --42,603 50,527 ’ •»Sewer disposal charges -163,274 -163.274 209,813 Professional services 2,139 4,178 1,290 7,607 6,404 Operating and maintenance supplies 7,825 4,597 3,117 15,539 17,205 Heat, light, and power 23,336 10,784 3,565 37,685 34.947 Depreciation 36,273 130,525 4,501 171,299 159,886-<Rent, buildings, and equipment --5,856 5,856 6,333 Maintenance and repairs 24.274 21,049 8,060 53,383 41,192 ' 4 Administrative charges from (General Fund 890 1,220 1,100 3,210 2,900 CGmiunlcatians 1,158 1,114 1,210 3.482 3,766 Office supplies 27 25 265 317 248 4 Printing, publishing, aid advertising 239 404 2.769 3,412 2,873 m Data processing 2,386 5,294 -7,680 5,719 Insurance 6,0%10,446 12,091 28,633 26,657 Other expenses 671 1,699 898 3,268 2,110 m*Total Operating Expenses 195,859 430,322 98,302 724.483 733,463 ' 4 Operating Income (Loss)(30,818)(28,629)16,909 (42.538)(56.427) (Continued) -72- cm OF ORONO Bdilblt F-2 E2JTERPRISE FUM)S (Ccntlnued) OlTfilNING OF FEVE2^, EXPEI^, fit) CHANGES IN FETAINED EARNINCS Year Ended December 31, 1989 (With Ccxifiarative Totals for Year Ended December 31, 1988) Water Sewer Golf Course Totals 1989 1988 Noroperating Revenue (Expense): Interest earned on invesdnents 24,W5 59,784 19 83,848 35,313 Interest income from M«CC -16,612 16,612 17,320 Interest income from interfund loans -977 977 1,222 Amortization of deferred credits -9,530 9,530 9,530 Interest expense (17,917)(17,499)(35,416)(432) Interest expense on Interfund loons (977)-(977)(1.222) Revenue bond expense (393)(378)(771)- Gain on sale of assets 707 1,062 1,769 - Total Nonoperating Revenue (Expense)5,465 70.088 19 75.572 61,731 MT INOaC (UBS)$ (25.353) $41,459 $ 16,928 $ 33,034 $5,304 Credit for depreciation on contributed equity 31,332 127,604 254 159.190 150.320 Increase in Retained Earnings 5,979 169.063 17J«2 192,224 155,624 Retained earnings ~ beginning of yeat 127,195 943,738 31,944 1.102.877 947,253 Retained Earnings Bnd of Year $ 133,174 .112,801 $ 49,126 $1,295,101 $1 .102,877 -7>-t t ary of orono EJHERPRISE FUM)S OOMBLNING SEAITMENr OF CHANGES IN FINANCIAI. POSITION Year Ehded December 31, 1989 (With Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31, 1988) Golf Exhibit F-3 Water Sewer Course Totals Operating Operating Operating 1989 1988 Sources of Working Capital: Net Income (loss)$ (25,353)$ 41,459 $16,:.$ 33,034 $5,304 mm Items not affecting working capital -* Depreciation 36.273 130,525 4,501 171.299 159,886 Total Working Capital -Provided by Operations 10,920 171,984 21,429 204,333 165,190 Additions to current liabilities related to restricted assets 127,136 131,879 -259,015 - Capital contributions ----473,013 Proceeds from sale of bonds. Including discount 1,163,570 1,136,430 -2,300,000 - Reduction of other assets, net of bond discount -20.971 -20,971 21,476 —Increase in long-term liabilities --736 736 - Total Working Capital Provided 1,301,626 1,461,264 22,165 2,785,055 659,679 Uses of Working Capital: Additions to restricted assets 1,165,765 956,120 -2,121,885 - ■-Additions to property, plant, and equipment 118,835 307,131 329 426,295 482,275 Additions to other assets - bond discount 8,565 8,365 -16,930 - Reduction of long-term liabilities 2,091 9,003 -11,094 14,638 -Total Working Capital Used 1,295,256 1,280,619 329 2,576,204 4%.913 Increase in Working Capital $ 6,370 $ 180,645 $21,836 $ 208,851 $162,766 Changes in Components of Workii^ Capital: Increase (decrease) in current assets - Cash and investments - operations $ 7.277 $ 138.8W $ 1,137 $ 147,258 $166,374 Accounts receivahl'-2,920 (158)2,762 13,070 Delinquent special assessments receivable -3,780 -3,780 (1.178) Interest receivable - operations 109 2,602 214 2,925 1.418 Due from other funds -1,218 -1,218 (283) 'Due from other governmental inits 593 695 -1,288 669 Inventories (1.082)-XI (781)359 Prepaid items 909 13,443 1,021 15,373 (W.652) ■m (Increase) decrease in current Utilities - Accounts payable - operations 9^6 2,311 2,346 5,603 (1.938) Accrued sklarles payable ^3 (112)495 726 (1.519) Due to other finds -15,151 16,465 31,61-.(345) Due to other govemnent. ' units (2.725)(207)15 (2.917)791 Increase In Working Capital $ 6,370 $ iao.645 $21,836 $ 206,851 $162.766, -74- CITY OF ORONO WATER OPERATING FUND COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET of December 31, 1989 and 1988 ASSETS Current Assets; Cash and investments - operations Accrued interest receivable - operations Due from other governmtjntal units Inventory Prepaid items Total Current Assets Restricted Assets: Cash and investments - Debt service Construction Total Cash and Investments - Restricted Accrued interest receivable - Debt service Construction Total Accrued Interest Receivable - Restricted Total Restricted Assets Other Assets: Discount on revenue bonds Property, Plant, and Equipment: Work in progress Land and land improvements Buildings and building improvements Equipment Distribution/collection system Less accumulated depreciation Net Property, Plant, and Equipment Total Assets 1989 1988 $ 120,800 $ 113,523 : i 1,312 1,203 593 - 8,047 9,129 909 - 131,661 123,855 ] 264,065 891,700 -* 1,155,765 - 2,219 7,781 - 10,000 - 1,165,765 - f- .« 8,565 - 113,605 25,132 25,132 77,694 77,694 35,902 34,923 1,559,248 1,559,248 1,811.581 1,696,997 603,862 571,840 1.207,719 1,125,157 — $2,513,710 $1,249,012 - -75- mI Exhibit F-4 1989 19«8 U LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY Current Liabilities: Accounts payable - operations $ 2,674 $ 3,620 Salaries payable 908 1,251rDue to other funds 2,443 2,443 k:-Due to other governmental units 11,710 8,985 Total Current Liabilities 17,735 16,299 i Current Liabilities Related to Restricted Assets: Accrued interest payable - revenue bonds 21,624 tf—Contracts payable - revenue bond construction 25,634 - 1 Accounts payable - construction 7,728 - i.Deferred revenue - developer advances 72,150 - w Total Current Liabilities Related to Restricted Assets 127,136 - *>. r- Long-Term Liabilities, Less Current Portion: Revenue bonds payable 1,163,570!Due to other funds 4,886 7,329% •Accrued vacation and severance benefits 2,156 1,804 r Total Long-Term Liabilities 1,170,612 9,133 L Total Liabilities 1,315,483 25,4 M Fund Equity: Contributed capital 1,065,053 1,096,385 Retained earnings (deficit) - Reserved for revenue bond debt service 172,510 Unreserved (39,336)127,195 VM Total Retained Earnings 133,174 127,195 hi b> Total Fund Equity 1,198,227 1,223,580 h !■ Total Liabilities and Fund Equity $2,513,710 $1,249,012 -76- CITY OF ORONO Exhibit F-5 WATER OPERATING FUND COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENSES, AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS Years Ended December 31, 1989 and 1988 Operating Revenue: Metered water sales Other Total Operating Revenue Operating Expenses: Salaries and wages Retirement contributions Health and life insurance contributions Purchased water Professional services Operating and maintenance supplies Heat, light, and pow*r Depreciation Maintenance and repairs Administrative charges from v,«neral Fund Communications Office supplies Printing, publishlrg, and advertising Data processing Insurance Other expenses Total Operating Expenses Operating Income (Loss) Nonoperating Revenue (Expense): Gain on sale of assets Interest earned on Investments - Debt service Operations Construction Interest expense on Interfund loans Interest expense on revenue bonds Revenue bond expense Total Nonoperating Revenue (Expense) NET INCOME (LOSS) Credit for depreciation on contributed equity Increase in Retained Earnings Retained earnings - beginning of year Retained Earnings - End of Year -77- 1989 1988 $163,537 $184,974 1,504 858 165,041 185,832 — 41,503 36,276 4,909 4,265 1,530 958 42,603 50,527 2,139 2,038 7,825 7,878 23,336 22,263 36,273 36,931 24,274 7,079 rf<»0 800 1,1*8 925 27 88 239 262 2,386 1,996 6,096 5,009 671 323 195,859 177,618 (30,818)8,214 707 -- 3,638 — 8,905 5,650 - 11,502 - (977)- (17,917)- (393)(1.222) 5,465 4,428 — $(25,353)$ 12,642 — 31,332 33,019 5,979 45,661 127,195 81,534 $133,174 $127,195 »t I CITY OF ORONO WATER OPERATING FUND COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION Years Ended December 31, 1989 and 1988 Exhibit F-6 rt 1989 1988 U r r U 1. m m Sources of W'^rking Capital: Net income (loss) Items not affecting working capital - Depreciation Total Working Capital Provided From Operations Additions to current liabiH^e® related to restricted assets Proceeds from sale of bonu Aiicluding discount Total Working Capital Provided Uses of Working Capital: Additions to restricted assets Additions to property, plant, and equipment Additions to other assets - bond discount Reduction of other long-term liabilities, net of bonds payable Total Working Capital Used Increase in Working Capital Changes in Components of Working Capital: Increase (decrease) in current assets - Cash and Investments - operations Accounts receivable Interest receivable - operations Due from other funds Due from other governmental units Inventories Prepaid items (Increase) decrease in current liabilities Accounts payable - operations Accrued salaries payable Due to other governmental units Increase in Working Capital $ (25,353) $12,642 36,273 36,931 10,920 49,573 127,136 1.163,570 - 1,301,626 49,573 1,165,765 _ 118,835 - 8,565 — 2,091 3,359 1.295,256 3,359 $ 6,370 $46,214 $ 7.277 $47,727 -(283) 109 61 -(283) 593 - (1,082)34 909 — 946 (1.226) 343 (677) (2.725)861 ^ b.370 $46,214 i CITY OF ORONO SEWER OPERATING FUND COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET As of December 31, 1989 and 1988 ASSETS Current Assets: Cash and investments - operations Accounts receivable Delinquent special assessments receivable Accrued Interest receivable - operations Due from other funds Due from other governmental units Inventory Prepaid items Total Current Assets Restricted Assets: Cash and investments - Debt service Construction Total Cash and Investments - Restricted Accrued interest receivable - Debt service Construction Total Accrued Interest Receivable - Restricted Total Restricted Assets Other Assets, Less Current Portion: Due from other funds Due from other governmental units Discount on revenue bonds Total Other Assets Property, Plant, and Equipment: Work in progress Buildings and building improvements Equipment Distribution/collection system Less accumulated depreciation Net Property, Plant, and Equipment Total Assets -79- 1989 1988 ■- $ 582,014 $ 443,170 198,407 195,487 15,773 11,993 15,791 13,189 3,661 2,443 18,074 17,379 5,629 5,629 13,443 - 852,792 689,290 r* 241,456 - 706,523 - 947,979 — 2,027 - 6,114 - 8,141 -— 956,120 -- 4,886 7,329 382,932 401,460 8,365 - 396,183 408.789 J 298,307 31,014 31,014 51,649 47,075 6,018.020 6,018,020 1 6,398,990 6,096,109 J 1,793,629 1,667,354 4,605,361 4,428,755 1 $6,810,456 $5,526,834 J J J 1 L,. Ml L c -80- Exhibit F-7 m 1989 1988 ( « LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY fe_»i Current Liabilities: Accounts payable - operations $ 2,878 $ 5,189 Salaries payable 1,530 1,418 Due to other funds 553 15,704 t •Due to other governmental units 336 129 Deferred credits 9.530 9,530 Total Current Liabilities 14,827 31,970 f Current Liabilities Related to Restricted Assets: •iii Accrued interest payable - revenue bonds 21,120 _ Contracts payable - revenue bond construction 42,868 _ Accounts payable - construction 13,791 _ Deferred revenue - developer advances 54,100 - Total Current Liabilities* •Related to Restricted Assets 131,879 - -Long-Term Liabilities, Less Current Portion: Deferred credits 150,130 159,661 Revenue bonds payable 1,136,430 - «Accrued vacation and severance benefits 3,234 2.706 Total Long-Term Liabilities 1,289.794 162,367 Total Liabilities 1,436,500 194,337 »«»Fund Equity: Contributed capital 4,261,155 4,388,759 Retained earnings - M Reserved for revenue bond debt service 168,263 — Unreserved 944,538 943,738 •Ml Total Retained Earnings 1,112,801 943.738 tw Total Fund Equity 5,373,956 5,332,497 rL c Total Liabilities and Fund Equity $6,810,456 $5,526,834 CITY OF ORONO Exhibit F-8 SEWER OPERATING FUND COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENSES, AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS Years Ended December 31, 1989 and 1988 1989 1988 Operating Revenue: User charges $ 396,004 $394,004 Interest on accounts certified to County 3,710 3,456 Other 1,979 4,877 Total Operating Revenue 401.693 402,337 Operating Expenses:— Salaries and wages 65,688 58,182 Retirement contributions 7,730 6,958 Health and life insurance contributions 2,295 1,437 Sewer disposal charges 163,274 209,813 Professional services 4,178 3,156 Operating and maintenance supplies 4,597 3,872 Heat, light, and power 10,784 10,532 Depreciation 130,525 119,574 Maintenance and repairs 21,049 22,500 Administrative charges from General Fund 1,220 1,100 Communications 1,114 1,388 Office supplies 25 97 Printing, publishing, and advertising 404 134 •— Data processing 5,294 3,723 Insurance 10,446 9,093 ■■ Other expenses 1,699 760 Total Operating Expenses 430,322 452,319 Operating Loss (28,629) (49,982) Nonoperating Revenue (Expense):- Gain on sale of assets 1,062 — Interest earned on investments - Debt service 3,323 - Operations 47,424 29,663 Construction 9,037 — Interest income from MWCC 16,612 17,320 Interest Income on Interfund loans 977 1,222 Interest expense on revenue bonds (17,499)- Revenue bond expense (378)- Amortization of deferred credits 9,530 9,530 Total Nonoperating Revenue (Expense)70,088 57,735 W NET INCOME $ 41.459 $7,753 Credit for depreciation on contributed equity 127,604 117.047 - Increase in Retained Earnings 169,063 124,800 r Retained earnings - beginning of year 943,738 818,938 Retained Earnings - End of Year $1,112,801 $943,738 J -81- CITY OF ORONO Exhibit F-9 SEWER OPERATING FUND COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION Years Ended December 31, 1989 and 1988 1989 1988 ; • i Sources of Working Capital: IBM Net Income $ 41,459 $7,753 4 Items not affecting working capital - Depreciation 130,525 119,574 Total Working Capital Provided From Operations 171,984 127,327 ■4 Additions to current liabilities related mm to restricted assets 131,879 - Proceeds from sale of bonds, including discount 1,136,430 - Reduction of other assets, net of bond discount 20,971 21,476 Capital contributions -473,013 Total Working Capital Provided 1,461,264 621,816 Uses of Working Capital: Additions to restricted assets 956,120 - Additions to property, plant, and equipment 307,131 473,013 Additions to other assets - bond discount 8,365 - Reduction of other long-term liabilities, net of bonds payable 9,003 10,904 Total Working Capital Used 1,280,619 483,917 Increase in Working Capital $ 180,645 137,899 Changes in Components of Working Capital: Increase (decrease) in current assets - Cash and Investments - operations $ 138,844 $125,334 Accounts receivable 2,920 13,523 Delinquent special assessments receivable 3,780 (1,178) Interest receivable - operations 2,602 1,316 Due from other funds 1,218 - Due from other governmental units 695 669 Prepaid items 13,443 (14,652) (Increase) decrease in current liabilities - Accounts payable - operations 2,311 (2,860) Accrued salaries payable (112)(318) Due to other funds 15,151 16,120 Due to other governmental units (207)(55) mm Increase in Working Capital $ 180,645 137.899 -82- CITY OF ORONO Exhibit F-10 GOLF COURSE OPERATING FUND COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET As of December 31, 1989 and 1988 ASSETS Current Assets: Cash and Investments Accounts receivable Accrued Interest receivable Inventory Prepaid Items Total Current Assets Property, Plant, and Equipment: Land and land improvements Buildings and building Improvements Equipment Less accumulated depreciation Net Property, Plant, and Equipment Total Assets LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY Current Liabilities: Accounts payable Salaries payable Due to other funds Due to other governmental units Total Current Liabilities Long-Term Liabilities: Accrued vacation and severance benefits Total LlabllitJps Fund Equity: Contributed capital Retained earnings Total Fund Equity Total Liabilities and Fund Equity 1989 1988 $ 1.137 $ - -158 1,343 1,129 4,709 4,408 1,021 - 8,210 5,695 127,977 127,977 40,778 40,778 59,438 59,109 228,193 227,864 33,928 29,427 194,265 198,437 $202,475 $204,132 $ 595 $ 2,941 1,228 1,723 -16,465 -15 1,823 21,144 5,726 4,990 7,549 26,134 145,800 146,054 49,126 31,944 194,926 177.998 $202,475 $204,132 r -83- CITY OF ORONO Exhibit F-11 J GOLF COURSE OPERATING FUND COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENSES, AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS Years Ended December 31, 1989 and 1988 1989 1988 Sales and Cost of Sales: Sales $ 15,832 $ 13,430 1 ^Cost of sales 9.936 8.866 Gross Profit 5,896 4,564 Operating Revenue: Green fees 80,376 63,861 —Equipment rental 27,465 19,248 Other 1,474 1,194 Total Operating Revenue 109,315 84,303 —Total Gross Profit and Operating Revenue 115,211 88,867 >• -<4 Operating Expenses: Salaries and wages 47,050 48,227 Retirement contributions 4,218 4.457 4 Health and life Insurance contributions 2,312 2,123 Professional services 1,290 1,210 Operating and maintenance supplies 3,117 5,455 Heat, light, and power 3,565 2,152 Depreciation 4,501 3,381 Rent, buildings, and equipment 5.856 6,333 Maintenance and repairs 8,060 11,613 Administrative charges from General Fund 1,100 1,000 Communications 1,210 1,453 Office supplies 265 63 Printing, publishing, and advertising 2,769 2,477 Insurance 12,091 12,555 Other expenses 898 1.027 Total Operating Expenses 98.302 103,526 Operating Income (Loss)16,909 (14.659) ' «•Nonoperating Revenue (Expense): Interest earned on investments 19 Interest expense -(432) 0m Total Nonoperating Revenue (Expense)19 (432) mm NET INCOME (LOSS)$ 16,928 $(15,091) Credit for depreciation on contributed equity 254 254 Increase (Decrease) in Retained Earnings 17.182 (14,837) mm Retained earnings - beginning of year 31,944 46.781 Retained Earnings - End of Year $ 49.126 $ 31,944 -84- CITY OF ORONO Exhibit F-12 GOLF COURSE OPERATING FUND COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION Years Ended December 31, 1989 and 1988 Sources of Working Capital: Net income (loss) Items not affecting working capital - Depreciation Total Working Capital Provided (Used) by Operations Increase in long-term liabilities Total Working Capital Provided (Used) Uses of Working Capital; Additions to property, plant, and equipment Reductions of long-term liabilities Total Working Capital Used Increase (Decrease) in Working Capital Changes in Components of Working Capital; Increase (decrease) in current assets - Cash and investments Accounts receivable Interest receivable Inventories Prepaid items (Increase) decrease in current 'labilities Accounts payable Accrued salaries payable Due to other funds Due to other governmental units Increase (Decrease) in Working Capital 1989 1988 $ 16,928 $(15,091) 4,501 3,381 21,429 (11.710) 736 - 22,165 (11.710) 329 9,262 -375 329 9,637 $ 21,836 $(21,347) $ 1,137 $ (6,687) (158)(170) 214 41 301 325 1,021 - 2,346 2,148 495 (524) 16,465 (16,465) 15 (15) $ 21.836 $(21,347) -85- J J J AGENCY FUNDS Agency Funds are used to account for assets held by the City In an agent capacity for individuals, private organizations, other governmental units, or other funds. •m MS The Deferred Compensation Agency Funds, ICMA Fund, Minnesota Supplemental Investment Fund, and Great W*»st Life Insurance Company Fund account for employee deferred compensation plans created in accordance with Internal Revenue Code Section 457. 1 mt -86- CITY OF ORONO AGENCY FUNDS COMBINING STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN ASSETS AND LIABILITIES Year Ended December 31, 1989 Exhibit G-1 Balance Balance January 1, 1989 Additions Deductions December 31, 1989 Deferred Compensation Agency Fund (ICMA); ASSETS Due from deferred compen sation plan administrators $ 31,154 $15,427 $$ 46,570 LIABILITIES Deferred compensation payable to employees Deferred Compensation Agency Fund (Minnesota Supplemental Investment Fund): ASSETS Due from defer ed compen sation plan administrators LIABILITIES $ 31,154 $15,427 ^ $_29,987 $ 3,034 $ $ 46.570 $ 33,021 Deferred compensation payable to employees $ 29,987 $ 3,034 $$ 33,021 (Continued) -87- CITY OF ORONO Exhibit G-1 AGENCY FUNDS (Continued) COMBINING STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN ASSETS AND LIABILITIES Year Ended December 31, 1989 Deferred Compensation Agency Fund (Great West Life Insurance Company^: Balance Balance January 1, 1989 Additions Deductions December 31, 1989 ASSETS Due from deferred compen sation plan administrators LIABILITIES $ 157,819 $39.985 130 $ 197,674 1 1 Deferred compensation payable to employees $ 157,819 $39,985 130 $ 197,674 All Agenor Funds: ASSETS Due from deferred compen sation plan administrators LIABILITIES $ 218,960 $58,446 $ 277,265 Deferred compensation payable to employees $ 218,960 $58.446 $ 277.265 -88- m [FINANCIAL SCHEDULES I [ I CITY OF ORONO Schedule 1COMPARATIVE SCHEDULE OF GENERAL FIXED ASSETS f <BY SOURCE mm December 31, 1989 and 1988 ■■ • m 1989 1988 General Fixed Assets: m Land and land Improvements $ 432,648 $ 432,648 < 4 Buildings and building improvements 145,958 145,958 Equipment 805,378 732,318 0m Total General Fixed Assets $1,383,984 $1,310,924 0H Investment in General Fixed Assets by Source: ■General Fund after December 31, 1984 $ 72,511 $ 65,422 Special Revenue Funds after December 31, 1984 310,496 236,525 Donations after December 31, 1984 4,025 4,025 Years prior to January 1, 1985 996,952 1,004,952 -Total Investment in General Fixed Assets $1,383,984 $1,310,924 n C i: c -89- CITY OF ORONO Schedule 2 SCHEDULE OF GENERAL FIXED ASSETS BY FUNCTION AND ACTIVITY December 31, 1989 Buildings Function and Activity Land and Land Improvements and Building Improvements Equipment Total General Government: Council $-$ 5,000 $3,868 $8,868 Administration - -17,065 17.065 Elections - -24,476 24,476 Assessing --2,695 2,695 Finance --21,493 21,493 - Government buildings -104,059 26.979 131,038 Total General Government -109,059 96,576 205,635 Public Safety: Police --216,071 216,071 -• Protective Inspection and Zoning --40,204 40,204 Emergency Preparedness --13,315 13,315 Total Public Safety --269,590 269,590 - Streets -10,000 377.791 387,791 — Parks 104,599 1,899 61,421 16’' 919 Other - Unclassified 328,049 25,000 353,049 Total General Fixed Assets 432,648 $145,958 $805,378 $1 ,383,984 M m -90- pp*^- cm CF ORDND Schedule 3 SCHEDUIE OF CHANGES IN CHOAL FIXED ASSETS BY FUNCTION AND ACTIVm m m j ] Year Ended December 31 , 1989 General General Fixed Assets Fixed Assets Function and Activity January 1, 1989 Additions Deletions Decenber 31, 198 General (Sovemment; Council $ 8,868 $ -$ “$ 8,868 Administration 14,737 2,328 -17,065 Elections 24,476 --24,476 Assessing 2,695 --2,695 Finance 17,147 4,481 135 21,493 (k^vemment buildings 123,257 7,781 -131,038 1 Total General Government 191,180 14,590 135 205,635 —Public Safety: PoUce 201,289 56,251 41,469 216,071 Protective Inspection and Zoning 36,800 3,404 -40,204 Mi*Emergency Preparedness 13,315 -—13,315 •Total Rjblic Safety 251,404 59,655 41,469 269,590 MMi Streets 347,372 56,212 15,793 387,791 Mt Paries 167,919 --167,919 Other - Unclassified 353,049 —-353,049 Ml Total General Fixed Assets $ 1,310,924 $ 130,457 $57,397 $ 1,383,984 -91- ir CITY OF ORONO Schedule 4 FUTURE PROPERTY TAX LEVIES TO As of December 31, 1980 1982 Year Improvement Improvement Collectible Bonds Bonds RETIRE BONDS (1) 1989 1985 Improvement Bonds Total Levies — 1990 $17,700 (2)$ -$ 35,000 (3)$ 52,700 1991 17,300 -40,000 57,300 6, 1992 16,800 -50,000 66,800 it199316,100 -50,000 66,100 1994 15,300 400 50,000 65,700 1995 14,400 1,200 50,000 65,600 1996 -700 50,000 50,700 ^ 5 1997 -600 50,000 50,600 - 1998 -500 50,000 50,500 1999 --50,000 50,000 i 2000 --50.000 50,000 $97,600 $ 3,400 $ 525,000 $626,000 (1) The levies for these issues are the general obligation property tax levies which are in addition to the amounts levied in the special assessment rolls. Tax levies are placed (as required by law) at 105X of debt service requirements. (2) The City levied $17,700 as scheduled to finance the retirement of Improvement Bonds from the 1980 issue. The City may cancel future levies if the respective Debt Service Funds have sufficient sources to pay future debt requirements. (3) The City levied $35,000 for the 1985 Improvement Bonds due to the assessment appeals and subsequent reductions of deferred assessuents. In 1988, the City established future taxes to generate sufficient sources to pay future debt requirements as required by law. -92- m STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) CITY OF ORONO GENERAL REVENUE BY SOURCE (1) Charges General Licenses for Fiscal Property and Intergovernmental Current 0^ Year Tax Permits Revenue Services 1980 $ 581,430 $ 42,077 $ 558,537 $183,514 1981 629,341 52,553 543,123 322,370 - 1982 618,153 46,993 524,041 339,924 1983 784,942 71,243 503,122 376,032 1984 892,415 102,958 454,795 438,643 1985 891,422 102,811 453,488 473,850 - 1986 (2)988,547 102,533 525,735 605,002 - 1987 1,106,603 136,420 499,864 594,424 1988 1,170,411 124,334 489,319 643,151 1989 1,211,541 148,564 493,385 685,952 (1) Includes General, Special Revenue, and Debt Service Funds. (2) Reflects the adoption of Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 6, eliminating Special Assessment Fund Type. Debt Service Funds were established to account for general obligation debt previously recorded in Special Assessment Funds. -93- Table 1 ! i ‘ Fines and Penalties Special Assessments and Miscellaneous Total1-$ 22,904 $ 132,897 $1,521,359 i*31,315 238,356 1,817,058 • 33,239 263,030 1,825,380 1 ^37,518 198,147 1,971,004 1 46,400 267,437 2,202,648 t 61,611 257,624 2,240,806 i - ■: 84,877 1,028,474 3,335,168 : Ml i ‘« 102,058 717,467 3,156,836 140,657 706,247 3,274,119 125,357 676,838 3,341,637 -94- CITY OF ORONO GENERAL EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION (1) Fiscal Year General Government Public Safety Streets Parks and Recreation 1980 $309,876 $ 563,826 $ 309,969 $ 37,369 1981 317,269 693,458 287,490 42,830 1982 346,340 715,241 313,005 28,810 1983 384,577 835,149 326,183 30,628 198A 473,835 884,765 372,865 44,546 A. ~1985 408,354 946,828 306,479 43,659 1986 (2)458,631 1,089,627 461,855 46,656 0^ 1987 535,558 1,187,328 385,422 94,114 — 1988 589,137 1,247,623 344,407 61,582 1989 655,987 1,376,323 494,742 32,961 (1) Includes General, Special Revenue, and Debt Service Funds. (2) Reflects the adoption of Governnental Accounting Standards Board Statenent No. 6, eliminating Special Assessment Fund Type. Debt Service Funds were established to account for general obligation debt previously recorded in Special Assessment Funds. -95- 1 i Table 2 U Unallocated and Other Debt Service Capital Outlay Total 24,277 $ 18,038 $282,686 $1,546,041 107,121 43,938 7,661 1,499,767 114,225 42,363 5,016 1,565,000 49,367 40,780 55,295 1,721,979 37,315 44,105 71,123 1,928,554 38,949 42,241 107,698 1,894,208 126,389 743,450 95,240 3,021,848 63,154 678,773 70,614 3,014,963 67,160 534,876 92,198 2,936,983 95,164 475,520 131,437 3,262,134 L M L c c t t I I -96- CITY OF ORONO PROPERTY TAX LEVIES AND COLLECTIONS I *• i.. Fiscal Year Collected 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 Certified Tax Levy for Fiscal Period $ 732,063 808,869 864,414 955,578 1,067,448 1,001,056 1,089,634 1,246,520 1,293,426 1,382,690 Current Tax Collections $ 699,189 780,249 813,489 916,613 1,013,226 967,543 1,060,820 1,218,410 1,257,297 1,332,632 Percent of Lew Collected 95.5Z 96.5 94.1 95.9 94.9 96.7 97.4 97.7 97.2 96.4 ^ , nquent Tax Collections $13,710 20,549 16,017 25,974 27,131 36,949 36,316 28,478 27,998 30,844 1 -97- Table 3 Total Collections as a Percent of Current Levy_ _ Outstanding Delinquent Taxes Outstanding Delinquent Taxes as a Percent of Current Levy 97.4X $ 44,833 6.1% 99.0 63.190 7.8 96.0 71,325 8.3 98.6 82,170 8.6 97.5 105,090 9.8 100.3 90,476 9.0 100.7 63,690 5.8 100.0 45,770 3.7 99.4 53,658 4.1 98.6 64,866 4.7 -98- CITY OF ORONO ASSESSED VALUE OR TAX CAPACITY AND ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE OF TAXABLE PROPERTY (1) Taxes Payable Year Real Property Assessed Value or Tax Capacity Estimated Market Value Personal Property Assessed Value or Tax Canada Estimated Market Value Fiscal Disparities Adjustment to Assessed Value or Tax Capacity 1980 $ 54,040,636 $227,768,189 $ 949,999 $2,209,300 $104,891 1981 69,631,183 272,287,607 1,093,877 2,543,900 59,953 1982 78,477,346 306,471,208 1,180,049 2,744,300 78,090 1983 88,720,487 343,896,620 1,231,262 2,863,400 180,888 1984 93,709,375 357,904,300 1,355,446 3,152,200 135,293 1985 100,314,576 383,130,000 1,430,696 3,327,200 331,361 1986 98,788,864 385,901,800 1,542,969 3,588,500 446,042 1987 101,291,782 402,896,400 1,678,677 3,903,900 581.055 1988 105,021,213 431,023,100 1,596,719 3,713,300 796,738 1989 (2)14,049,094 477,834,580 183,499 3,495,200 119,216 (1) All property, assessed, tax capacity, and estimated market values, and fiscal disparities adjustment are from the Hennepin County Assessor. (2) Beginning with taxes payable in 1989, the terminology for Assessed Valuations and Mill Rates is no longer used. Tax Capacity replaces Assessed Valuations and Is determined in the same manner except using smaller percentages r each property class. -99-»• ( 4 a Total Assessed Value or Tax Capacity Estimated Market Value $ 55,095,526 $229,977,489 70,785,013 274,831,507 79,735,485 90,132,637 95,200,114 i02,.076,633 100,777,875 103,551,514 107,414,670 14,351,809 309,215,508 346,760,020 361,056,500 386,457,200 389.490.300 406.800.300 434,736,400 481,329,780 Ratio of Total A^ressed Value or Tax Capacity to Tc'i v-l Estimated Market Value 23.96Z 25.76 25.79 25.99 26.37 26.41 25.87 25.46 24.71 2.98 -100- Per Capita Valuations Assessed Value or Tax Capacity $ 8,049 10,334 11,691 13,216 13,959 14,>41 14,052 14,358 14,747 1,945 Estimated Market Value $33,598 40,121 45,340 50,845 52,941 55,051 54,307 56,406 59,684 65,230 Table 4 CITY OF ORONO PROPERTY TAX RATES - ALL OVERLAPPING GOVERNMENTS (1) (Per $1,000 of Assessed Value or Tax Capacity) City of Orono Taxes Payable Year 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 (2) General Fund 12.86 11.02 10.26 10.09 10.74 9.78 10.83 11.68 11.76 9.42 1985 Debt Service Fund .39 .28 .21 1966-1976 1980 Special Special Assessment Assessment Fund Fund .39 .37 .33 .29 .27 .22 .20 .19 Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund .03 .02 .02 .02 .02 Total 13.28 11.41 10.83 10.60 11.22 9.78 10.83 12.07 12.04 9.63 for ISD ?278. ; the City are served by other school districts. Property in .d be subject to one of the following rates Instead of the rate — Taxes Payable Year IS'. ^276 ISD #277 ISD #284 1980 46.48 51.88 38.85 — 1981 42.39 40.01 35.75 1982 44.85 47.38 40.68 1983 55.93 51.75 42.98 1^84 57.24 52.91 47.63 1985 55.93 49.75 46.51 *** 1986 58.67 57.52 '’.35 1987 61.55 53.56 ^9.88 1988 63.95 57.06 57.38 •• 1989 58.06 47.92 50.56 beginning with taxes payable in 1989, the terminology for Assessed Valuations and Mill Rates is no longer used. Tax Capacity replaces Assessed Valuations and is determined in the same manner except using smaller percentages for each property class. Tax Extension Rates are determined in a similar manner to Mill Rates in that the tax levy is divided by the tax capacity. -101- Table 5 ISD #278 School District Area Vo-Tech School Hennepin County Metro Council/ Transit Other Special Districts Total A7.27 1.68 31.20 2.6A 1.06 97.13 38.82 1.51 29.27 3.39 .78 85.18 A6.4A 1.A7 29.18 3.35 1.10 92.37 —51.39 1.12 28.A5 3.88 1.31 96.75 5A.82 1.A5 29.69 3.90 1.70 102.78 53.5A 1.A9 29.26 3.88 1.36 99.31 59.51 1.5A 29.69 3.80 2.16 107.53 55.08 1.A2 29.36 3.90 2.19 104.02 59.50 1.A9 31.67 A.05 2.28 111.03 50.01 1.22 27.10 3.A1 2.05 93.42 -102- CITY OF ORONO -103- SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEVIES AND COLLECTIONS Ratio of — Current Current Current Delinquent Fiscal Assessments Assessments Collections Assessments Year Due Collected to Amount Due Collected 1980 $ 294,003 $ 262,658 89.3Z $29,532 00m 1981 421,014 378,114 89.8 17,547 • 1982 374,813 341,295 91.1 24,112 1983 348,861 314,509 90.2 21,882 1984 444,067 373,123 84.0 19,381 1985 375,403 313,670 83.6 40,196 mm 1986 362,515 321,142 88.6 25,765 - 1987 296,702 262,268 88.4 23,446 1988 257,154 216,503 84.2 68,506 1989 208,158 183,261 88.0 17,604 I Special Assessments Delinquent Total Outstanding Assessments $ 123,229 $ 2,253,498 128,569 1,925,846 m ■« 102,984 1,720,166 mm 100,616 1,693,659 133,645 1,413,639 mm 159,058 2,047,811 136,302 1,247,407 mm {147,635 1,021,321 «i^ 90,023 764,234 61,562 663,372 { J Mi r Table 6 -104- J CITY OF ORONO RATIO OF NET GENERAL BONDED DEBT TO ASSESSED VALUE OR TAX CAPACITY AND NET BONDED DEBT PER CAPITA Fiscal Year Population (2) Assessed Value (in 1,000s) Gross Bonded Debt (1) Debt Service Funds Available 1986 7,172 $ 100,778 $ 1,722,088 $ 1,354,642 — 1987 7,212 103,552 1,504,562 1,158,862 1988 7,284 107,415 1,350,789 1,035,242 i 1989 7,379 14,352 (4)1,207,220 867,436 (1) Includes bonds recorded in the General Long-Term Debt Account Group. Prior to 1986, the General Long-Term Debt Account Group did not include any tax supported bonded debt. In 1986, the Special Assessment Fund Type was eliminated and such bonds were ^recorded in the General Long-Term Debt Account Group. Gross bonded debt has been reduced by deferred special assessments receivable in order to reflect only tax supported debt burden. Debt Service Funds available include amounts in Debt Service Funds established in 1986 to service general obligation debt pre viously recorded in Special Assessment Funds. For purposes of this analysis. Debt Service Funds available do not include individual fund balance amounts in excess of the related individual bond issue amount included in gross bonded debt. (2) Population from Metropolitan Council estimate as of April 1, annually. (3) Rating history from Moody Investors Service. (4) Beginning with fiscal year 1989, the terminology for Assessed Valuations is no longer used. Tax Capacity replaces Assessed Valuations and is determined in the same manner except using smaller percentages for each property class. -105-y r [I n u 3 mi Met Bonded Debt Ratio of Net Tax Supported Bonded Debt to Assessed Value Table 7 Net Bonded Debt Per Caoita Bonded Debt Rating (3) m $ 367,AA6 .36Z $51.23 Aa 3A5.700 .33 A7.93 Aa -315,5A7 .29 A3.32 Aa 339,78A 2.37 (A)A6.05 Aal -106- CITY OF ORONO Table 8 COMPUTATION OF LEGAL DEBT MARGIN December 31, 1989 Total Market Value $481,329,780 L.^ Debt Limit (2.0% of Market Value) Amount of Debt Applicable to Debt Limit: Total Bonded Debt $ 9,626,596 $4,000,000 Less Bonds Not Repaid Solely From Tax Levies G.O. Improvement Bonds G.O. Revenue Bonds 1.700.000 2.300.000 4,000,000 Total Amount of Debt Applicable to Debt Limit Legal Debt Margin $ 9,626,596 -107- cm OF ORDNO Table 9 tm u M L OOMPUr/MION OF DIRECT AM) CVERLAPPING DEBT December 31, 1989 Net Debt l: L Governmental Unit Gross Debt Sinking Finds Net Debt Applicable to Orono Percent Anount -Direct Dd)t: City of Orono $ 1.207,220 (6) $ 867,436 $ 339,784 lOO.OOCK $ 339,784 -Overlapping Debt: Sdiool Districts - No. 278 (Orono)2,735,000 -2,735,000 48.830 1,335,501 mm No. 276 (Minnetonka)7,012,723 1,104,068 5.908,655 .168 9,927 No. 277 (Vfestonka)-—22.851 ■ •No. 284 (Wayzata)30,669,148 1,872,470 28,7%,678 1.602 461,323 •**No 287 (Area Vo-Tech)3,300,000 949,095 2,350,905 .966 (1) 22.710 Hennepin County - Libraries (suburbs)5,170,000 1,684,954 3,485,046 1.830 63,777 ••Solid waste (revenue)28,000,000 -28,000,000 (2) Solid waste (general)27,350,000 770,000 26,580,000 1.246 331,187 Other 36,255,000 6.197,956 30,057,044 1.246 374,511 mm Metro Council - i ••Sewer district 273,910,000 35,650,091 238,259,909 —(3) Stadium 47,450,000 -47,450,000 -(4) mm Other 52,090,000 21,751.044 30,338,956 .655 *98,721 Metro Transit 10,950,000 3,707,000 7,243,000 .655 47.442 Suburbs Hennepin Parks 6,195,000 2,421,142 3.773.858 -(5) m Total Overlapping Debt 531,066.871 76.107,820 454.979.051 2.845,099 M Total Direct and ' mm Overlapping Debt $532,294,091 $76,975,256 $455,318,835 $3,184,883 (1) This debt is approxlmtely 50Z State-aid supjy ted and has been reduced accordingly. (2) Hennepin County solid wsce debt of $28,000,000 is exrluded since these obligations will be financed by refuse payments from users. (3) The ffetro Council sanitary sewer debt is excljded, inasmuch as these obligations are paid from metro area sewer service charges, including payments from the Orono Sever Operating E\xid. (4) Metro Council sports stadium debt is excluied since these obllgatiaiS will be financed by stadium revwwp and a City of Minneapolis hotel, motel, and li(jJor excise tax. (5) The Suburban Hennepin Parks debt is excluded since tiiese obligations will be financed by gplf ccwrse proceeds. (6) Gross bonded debt of $4,000,000 is reduced by deferred special assessments and pledged utility operating revenue to arrive at gross debt supported by taxes. -10ft-i CITY OF ORONO REVENUE BCN) OCWERAGE - HTIERPRISE FUMK (3) Table 10 Net Revenue Fiscal Gross Operating Available for Debt Service Requirenents Year Revenues (1) Expenses (2) Debt Service Principal Interest Total Coverage Water Operating FVmd 1989 $189,086 $ 159,586 $29,500 $$ 17,917 $17,917 1.65 S€wer Operating Fund 1989 489,658 299,797 (1) Total revenues, including interest. (2) Tc^al operating expa»es, net of depreriatlcxi. (3) There were no revenue beads prior to 1989. 189,861 17,499 17,499 10.85 1 1 -109- i 4 CITY OF ORONO RATIO OF ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE EXPENDITURES FOR Tab!! 11 f GENERAL BONDED DEBT TO TOTAL GENERAL EXPENDITURES (1) m t Fiscal Year Principal Interest and Other Total Debt Service Total General Expenditures Ratio of Debt Service to Total General Expenditures •1980 $ -$ 18,038 $ 18,038 $ 1,546,041 1.2% -1981 30,000 13,938 43,938 1,499,767 2.9 1982 30,000 12,363 42,363 1,565,000 2.7 1983 30,000 10,780 40,780 1,721,979 2.4 1984 35,000 9,105 44,105 1,928,554 2.3 1985 35,000 7,241 42,241 1,894,208 2.2 -1986 (2)520,000 224,693 744,693 3,021,848 24.6 1987 485,000 197,184 682,184 3,014,963 2^.6 1988 360,000 174,876 534,876 2,936,983 18.2 m 1989 325,000 150,520 475,520 3,262,134 14.6 m m f (1) (2) Includes General, Special Re^and Debt Service Funds. Beginning in 1986, expenditure* previously recorded in Special Assessment Funds becan^ a component of Debt Service Fund expenditures in accordance with Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 6. -110- Fiscal Year 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1983 1986 1987 1988 1989 CITY OF ORONO DEMOGRAPHIC STATISTICS Table 12 Population (1) 6,845 (2) 6,850 6,820 6,820 6,820 7,020 7,172 7,212 7,284 7.379 Per Capita Income (2) $ 16,120 * 18,048 18,900 * 20,507 22,070 * 23,627 24,060 * 25.100 * 26.100 * 27,200 * School Enrollment (3) 2,337 2,254 2,256 2.112 2,013 1,978 2,001 1,997 2,037 2,101 Unemf! C'^went Rate (4) 4.0Z 4.0 6.0 6.3 4.4 4.1 3.9 4.1 3.3 3.6 (1) Metro Covncil (2) Federal Census Bureau data (3) Minnesota Department of Educatic as repor'ied by Orono School District No. 278 ('4) From Minnesota Department of Economic Security; Hennepin County average Estimate -111- r-» L c r* U c I I c I I QTY OF ORONOPROPERTY VAIUE, OCNSTRLICTION, Al® BAI« DEPOSITS Table 13 Cdniiercial Construction (1) Residential Construction (1)Estiinated Market Value (2) Fiscal Nuniber of Year Permits Value Nunfcer of Permits Baric Deposits f3) Value lahistrlal/ Connerclal Residential Nan-Taxable 1980 1981 1982 $ 8,050 226,000 148 209 211 $ 3,626,260 $10,328,100 $217,440,089 $ 8,158,149 10,601,150 261,686,457 24,554,635 6,386,690 11.940,267 294,530,941 (1) (2) City Inspect* xlMpartment. $14,796,065 14,621,278 '4.080,597 11 21,320 241 9,726,860 13,336,600 330,560,020 -15,032,685 12 66,200 323 13,559,790 14,043,400 343,860,900 -16,879,156 I V 8 243,595 314 15,583,160 14,463,800 368,666,200 -18,521,933 1986 11 80,050 343 14,065,465 14,733,500 371,168,300 -2^331,671 1987 28 2,555,700 343 19,824,845 15,652,600 387,243,800 22,325,430 25,215,095 1988 23 3,920,090 330 15,836,267 16,206,600 393,876,700 -25,353,000 1989 26 162,700 360 17,416.288 16,734,000 441,270,880 -27,693,000 Hennepin County Aae^sing Department; Residential includes farra; hon-Taxable is valued by the County once every six years. (3) As reported to Cooiaercial West by i rat Bank of the Lakes -112- CITY OF ORONO PRINCIPAL TAXPAYERS Table 14 11 Taxpayer Washington Scientific Van Dale, Inc. Wayzata Country Club Private Residence Private Residence Private Residence Private Residence Woodhill Country Club Private Residence Private Residence Type of Business Manufacturing Manufacturing Private Club Single Family Residence Single Family Residence Single Family Residence Single Family Residence Private Club Single Family Residence Single Family Residence Assessed 1988 Payable 1989 Tax Capacity $ 138,570 90,140 89,897 58,353 51,809 51,120 50,604 38,739 32,316 29,111 $ 630,659 Percent of Total Tax Capacity .96% .63 .63 .41 .36 .36 .35 .27 .22 .20 1 4.39% Rote: Beginning with taxes payable in 1989, the terminology for Assessed Valuations and Hill Rates is no longer used. Tax Capacity replacrs Assessed Valuations and is determined in the same manner except using smaller percentages for each prop erty class. Tax Extension Rates are determined in a similar manner to Mill Rates in that the tax levy is divided by the Tax Capacity. -113- CITY OF ORONO Table 15 Date of Incorporation Form of Government Area Miles of Str^fV-: City Private State and County Number of Street Lights Fire Protection: Number of cities providing contracted fire coverage Police Protection: Number of stations Number of police officers Number of cities served Education: Attendance centers Number of students Water and Sewer Operation: Number of connections - Water Sewer Recreation and Culture: Number of parks Number of swimming beaches Employees: Classified service/full-time Part-time/seasonal MISCELLANEOUS STATISTICS December 31, 1989 December 17, 1954; effective January 1, 1955 Optional Plan "A”; Council-Administrator 24.5 Square Miles; 50% is Open Water or Marshland 58.39 9.10 29.28 120 1 17 4 3 2,101 835 1,676 10 With 44.20 Total Acres 3 With 1.40 Total Acres 37 13 -IH- CITY OF ORONO Table 16 ASSESSED VALUATIONS, TAX LEVIES, AND MILL RATES, OR TAX CAPACITY, TAX LEVIES, AND TAX EXTENSION RATES Collectible in 1990 1989 1988 Assessed Valuations or Tax Capacity: Real property $ 12,568,353 $ 14,049,094 $105,021,213 — Personal property 172,131 183,499 1,596,719 Fiscal disparities contribution (253,952)(267,253)(2,041,756) Fiscal disparities distribution 405.682 386,469 2.838.494 - Total Assessed Valuations or Tax Capacity $ 12,892.214 $ 14,351.809 $107,414,670 Tax Levies by County Auditor: General Fund $ 1,585,546 $ 1,352,690 $ 1,263,426 Debt Service Fund - 1985 Improvement Bonds 35,000 30,000 30,000 1980 Improvement Bonds 17,700 - Total Tax Levies $ 1,638,246 $ 1,382,690 $ 1,293,426 Mill Rates or Tax Extension Rates by County Auditor: General Fund 12.36U 9.419%11.762 Mills Debt Service Fund - 1985 Improvement Bonds .273 .209 .280 1980 Improvement Bonds .138 -- Total Mill Rates or Tax Extension Rates 12.772X 9.628%12.042 Mills Note: Beginning with taxes collectible in 1989, the terminology for Assessed -• Valuations and Mill Rates is ilo longer used. Tax Capacity replaces Assessed - Valuations and is determined jIn the saoie manner except using smaller percentages for each property class. Tax Extension Rates are determined in a similar manner to Mill Rates in that the tax levy is divided by the Tax Capacity.— -115- " INDEPENDENT AUDITOR*S REPORT ON INTERN. ;L CONTROL STRUCTURE AND OTHER REQUIRED REPORTS - n n m N P" INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL STRUCTURE BASED SOLELY ON A STUDY AND EVALUATION MADE AS A PART OF AN AUDIT OF THE GENERAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PANNELL KERR FORSTER Certified Public Accountants 400 Park National Bank Bldg. S353 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis, MN 55416 Telephone (612) 545-0421 Telefax 612-545-0569 m m m m m r« m» City Council and Residents City of Orono Orono, Minnesota We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Orono, Minnesota, as of and for the year ended December 31 , 1989, and have Issued our report thereon dated May 18, 1990. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards, Issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about w.iether the general purpose financial state ments are free of material misstatement. In planning and performing our audit of the general purpose financial statements of the City of Orono for the year ended December 31, 1989, wc considered its internal control structure in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the general purpose financial statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control structure. The management of the City of Orono is responsible for establishing and main taining an internal control structure. In fulfilling this responsibility, esti mates and judgements by management are required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of internal control structure policies and procedures. The objectives of an internal control structure are to provide management with reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss from unauthorized use or disposition, and that transactions are executed in accordance with management's authorization and recorded properly to permit the preparation of general purpose financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Because of Inherent limitations in any Internal control structure, errors or irregularities may nevertheless occur and not be detected. Also, projection of any evaluation of the structure to future periods is subject to the risk that procedures may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and operation of policies and procedures may deteriorate. (Continued) -116- !-• I t m ! ♦ For the purpose of this report, we have classified the significant internal control structure policies and procedures in the following categories: cash receipts/revenue, cash disbursements/expenditures, payroll, and external finan cial reporting. Our consideration of the internal control structure included all of the control categories listed above. The purpose of our consideration of the internal control structure was to determine the nature, timing, and extent of the auditing procedures necessary for expressing an opinion on the general purpose financial statements. i i P» m ■ * ¥ « r m ru c c We noted certain matters involving the internal control structure and its opera tion that we consider to be reportable conditions under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. Reportable conditions Involve matters coming to our attention relating to significant deficiencies in the design or operation of the internal control structure that, in our judge ment, could adversely affect the entity's ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data consistent with the assertions of managemenc In the general purpose financial statements. Because of the limited size of your office staff, your organization has limited segregation of duties. A good system of internal accounting control con templates an adequate segregation of duties so that no one individual handles a transaction from inception to completion. While we recognize that your organi zation is not large enough to permit an adequate segregation of duties in all respects, it is important that you be aware of this condition. A material weakness is a reportable condition in which the design or operation of the specific internal control structure rements does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that errors or irregularities in amounts that would be material in relation to the general purpose financial statements being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. Our consideration of the Internal control structure would not necessarily disclose all matters in the internal control structure that might be reportable conditions and, accordingly, would not necessarily disclose all reportable con ditions that are also considered to be material weaknesses as defined above. We believe that the reportable condition described above is a material weakness. We also noted other matters involving the internal control structure and its operation that we have reported to the management of the City of Orono in a separate letter dated May 18, i990. This report is Intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City of Orono and should not be used for any other purpose. This restric tion is not intended to limit the distribution of this report which, upon accep tance by the City Council, is a matter of public record. May 18, 1990 -117- INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S COMPLIANCE REPORT BASED ON AN AUDIT OF THE GENERAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE VTITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDAPDS PANNELL KERR FORSTER Certified Public Accountants 400 Park National Bank Bldg 5353 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis, MN 55416 Telephone (612) 545-0421 Telefax 612-545-0569 i "I ** * m i :<l i * City Council and Residents City of Orono Orono, Minnesota We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Orono, Minnesota, for the year ended December 31, 1989, and have Issued our report thereon dated May 18, 1990. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards, Issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the general purpose financial state- ments are free of material misstatement. Compliance with laws, regulations, contracts, and grants applicable to the City of Orono is the responsibility of the City's management. As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the general purpose financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of the City's compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants. However, our objective was not to provide an opinion on overall compllarre with such provisions. The results of our tests indicate that, with respect to the items tested, the City of Orono complied, in all material respects, with the provisions referred to in the preceding paragraph. With respect to items not tested, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the City had not complied, in all material respects, with those provisions. This report Is Intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City of Orono and should not be used for any other purpose. This restric tion Is not intended to limit the distribution of this report which, upon accep tance by the City Council, Is a matter of public record. May 18, 1990 -118- ..-4 Ml PANNELL KERR FORSTER Certified Public Accountants INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT ON COMPLIANCE 400 Park National Bank Bldg. 5353 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis, MN 55416 Telephone (612) 545-0421 Telefax 612-545-0569 WITH MINNESOTA STATE LAWS AND REGULATIONS City Council and Residents City of Orono Orono, Minnesota We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Orono, Minnesota, for the year ended December 31, 1989, and have issued our report thereon dated May 18, 1990. Our audit was made in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and the provisions of the Legal Compliance Audit Guide promulgated by the Legal Compliance Task Force pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 6.65. Accordingly, the audit included such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. The Legal Compliance Audit Guide covers five main categories of compliance to be tested: contracting and bidding, deposits and investments, conflicts of Interest, public indebtedness, and claims and disbursements. Our study included all of the listed categories. The results of our tests Indicate that for the items tested tie City of Orono complied with the material terms and conditions of applicable legal provisions. Further, for the items not tested, based on our audit and the procedures referred to above, nothing came to our attention to indicate that the City had not complied with such legal provisions. This report is Intended solely for the use of the City Council and management of the City of Crono and should not be used for any other purpose. This restric tion is not Intended to limit the distribution of this report which, upon accep tance by the City Council, is a matter of public record. May 18, 1990 -119- May 18, 1990 PANNELL KERR FORSTER Certified Public Accountants 400 Park Nationa' Bank BkJg. 5353 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis, MN 55416 Telephone (612) 545-0421 Telefax 612-545-0569 City Council and Residents City of Orono Orono, Minnesota We offer the following comments relating to your 1989 audit are provided to assist you with the financial planning for your City and the continued improve ment of your accounting records. Water and Sewer Enterprise Funds In the Water and Sewer Enterprise Funds, assets have been restricted and retained earnings have been reserved for debt service in accordance with the resolution for the sale of the 1989 Revenue Bonds. For the life of the bond issue, the City will be required to maintain restricted assets in an amount at least equal to the following year's debt service require ments. Furthermore, once construction is completed, the improvements financed by the bond issue will begin to be depreciated, thus increasing annual operating expenses. It is important to consider the increased expenses and debt service requirements when establishing utility rates. Designation of Fund Balance A recent memo issued by the League of Minnesota Cities suggests that the Cit' Council designate portions of fund balance in order to earmark those funds for special purposes. The City currently uses fund balance designa tions as a means to segregate funds to be used for particular purposes. However, one designation you may desire to establish for the General Fund could be for "working capital." With the unusual cash flow variances of a municipality, it would be prudent to set aside enough fund balance to assure positive cash flow for the full year. A practical formula, such as a percentage of the expenditure budget for the upcoming year, could be developed to provide the annual amount to designate. We understand the City staff did consider working capital requirements prior to making the transfer to the Sullding Capital Outlay Fund. city Council and Residents May 18, 1990 Investment Risk The City was notified on May 1, 1990, that one of the investment banking firms used by the City of Orono (M.H. Novick & Co., Inc.) was going out of business within 30 days of notification. All City investments held by that investment banking firm at the time of its closing were transferred to that firm's clearance agent (Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc.) in a custodial capacity, pending City notification as to what to do with the investments. Although covered by the custodian's insurance, these securi ties remain registered in the name of Prudential-Bache in the account of M.H. Novick & Co., Inc. We understand that the securities will be trans ferred to an account established for the City on July 1, 1990. The investments are classified in the low risk category in the notes to finan cial statements because of the availability of broker's insurance. This situation serves to illustrate the need to be aware of how the City's investments are held. The main concern in the investment of public funds is the safeguarding of assets. There is some element of risk inherent in any type of investment, activity, and the City is limited by State Statute as to what investments it can participate in; however, there are some steps we recommend the City consider for all Investments to further protect itself from loss: • Whenever possible, investments purchased through broker/dealers should be held in the City's name and should be delivered to the City or the City's agent. ® Investments purchased through broker/dealers that for some reason cannot be placed in the City's name or delivered to the City or the City's agent should be insured against default. In any case where the SIPC or other insurance carried by the broker/dealer is inadequate to cover the City's investments, the possibility of a broker/dealer obtaining additional insurance or a broker's bond should be explored. Condition of City Records We would like to commend the Finance Department for a job well done In preparing for this year's audit. We found the City's records as well as the audit workpapers prepared by the Finance Director to have been well organized and of a high quality. Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting As you are aware, the City's 1987 and 1988 Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFR) have both been awarded a "Certificate of Achievement for Excellence In Financial Reporting" by the Government Finance Officers' Association (GFOA). We wish to once again congratulate the City Finance Department management and staff on this achievement. The Certificate City Council and Residents May 18,1990 Frogram recognizes the highest standards of financial reporting, and the award reflects a great deal of hard work and dedication by the City's per sonnel. We also commend the City's decision to participate in this program again this year, which shows that the City is committed to main taining this level of excellence. Graphic Information Microcomputers are utilized extensively while performing audits of City records. A beneficial result is that certain trend analysis and analyti cal relationship information can be obtained. The following pages contain certain generalized graphs produced from our electronic workpapers which may be of interest to you. Some of this information does appear in the various schedules of the City's financial statements while some infor mation is from other sources which mav not have been subject to our audit procedures. Comments on Specific Graphs The General Fund cash flow and fund balance graphs reflect decreases resulting from the transfer of $2,023,000 to the Building Capital Outlay Fund in 1989. The monthly cash and investment flow graph shows the increase in total cash and Investments for all funds as a result of the issuance of Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds. ALL FUNDS FINANCIAL POSITION aTY OF ORONO 1963 1964 1965 1986 1967 AS OF DECEMBER 31 □ CASH 6 INVESTMENTS FUND BAL 6 RET EARN 1969 CASH AND INVESTMENT FLOW aTY OF ORONO MONTH END CASH A MMLSTMLNT BALANCES FOR IBM C GEJtfRAL FUND * ALL FUNDS . i ! GENERAL FUND FINANCIAL POSITION 1983 1984 1985 1986 1967 1969 AT DECEMBER 31 □ CASH 8 INVESTMENTS ^ FUND BALANCE GENERAL FUND REVENUE/EXPENDITURES CITY OF ORONO YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31 □ ACTUAL REVENUE « ACTUAL EXPENDITURES GENERAL FUND REVENUECITYOFORONO FOR YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31 □ ACTUAL REVENUES REVENUE BUDGET GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURE CITYOFORONO 1983 1964 1965 1968 1967 FOR YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31 □ ACTUAL EXPENDITURES - EXPENDITURE BUDGET 1969 UTILITY REVENUE aiYoroRONO FOR YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31 WATER REVENUE + SEWER REVENUE TAX LEVIES 1963 1964 1965 1968 1969 YEAR LEVY C0LIXCTI6LE GENERAL REVENUE OtST SERVICE City Council and Residents May 18, 1990 We would be pleased to discuss these recommendations with you and to assist with any changes you wish to make. We also wish to express our thanks for the cour tesy and assistance extended to us during the course of our audit. Sincerely, PANNELL KERR FORSTER Kenneth W. Malloy, Partner-in-Charge KWM:sel Ii 61490.6 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Adrainistrato DATE: June 14, 1990 SUBJECT: 1991 Strategic Planning COUNCIL MEETING JUN25I990 CITY OF ORONO Attachment: ISSUE - A. 1990 Adopted Strategic Plan B. Possible Ideas for 1991 1. Initiation of the strategic planning process for 1991. 2. Determination by Council of format that they would choose to use for the planning for 1991. INTRODUCTION - During the last several years in the late summer or fall Council has engaged in a strategic planning process to set both its short and longterm direction. This past year it was done in conjunction with the budget process so that the objectives to which there is a dollar cost may be decided upon during the budget process. DISCUSSION - Issue 2 Process Initiation - In addition to presenting the currently adopted goals Attachment B outlines ideas that could be possibly incorporated in a plan for next year based "initial brain storming" done on a staff level. In addition the process is to generate discussion by CounciImembers on what objectives they would like to see in 1991. Issue #2 2 Format for Strategic Planning - Alternatives for this include: 1. Holding a separate meeting for strategic plan. full review of the 2. Do in conjunction with the regular Council meeting which would primarily focus on an update of the objectives currently found in the plan for 1991. 3. Handle the strategic planning in conjunction with a special meeting on the budget either prior to or subsequent to submission of the maximum for budgeting for 1991 as requried by Truth in Taxation. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Accept the information presented. 2. Select the desired format. 3. Table for further discussion. 4. Suggest other objectives and/or mod i f .'.ca t i ons for the strategic plan in advance of further discussion or the matter. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council provide additional ideas for strategic planning for 1991 and either have the discussion as part of the regular Council meeting to update objectives or incoporate in the budget process at a special meeting held for that process. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that Council accept the information giving to staff additional ideas for 1991 and that the matter be scheduled in conjunction with the budget process. Ayes _, Nays _. cc! Department Heads 1 ■f-:; i Adopted 11/10/86 Revised 10/09/87 Revised 08/30/88 Revised 12/01/89 CITY OF ORONO EXTERNAL ANALYSIS - Increased private businesses delivery of traditional public services Selected demands for service increases including mandates from external agencies such as soild waste management, comparable worth, truth in taxation and a restrictive financial climate Increase communication and information links Increased duplication of authority in selected areas Increa 3^d development pressure due to transportation link upgrade and saturated second ring development Fluctuating State and growing metropolitan economies Pressure for jurisdiction increase by multiplicity of agencies (County, LMCD, Metro Council, etc.) Increasing development/ re-development pressure on lakeshore property INTERNAL ANALYSIS - Expertise in Contracting business both in and out with other entitites both public and private - Strong history and orientation of responsiveness to local citizenry/consumers Strong environmental commitment Need to strengthen continuity of staff through training and on-going information management systems Need to strengthen the organizational image both inside and outside the organization CITY OF ORONO KEY STRATEGIC ISSUES Adopted 11/10/86 Revised 10/09/87 Revised 08/30/88 Revised 12/01/89 1. Ensure appropriate continuity and development of organizational members. 2. Determination of community development direction and process for the next five years. 3. Appropriate utilization of contracting entities together with future exploration of improved sharing of services. When such organizations are willing to cooperate on a mutua l bene~ficial basis. 4. Provide for the effective marketing and delivery of services. 5. Ensure appropriate communications and information provision together with improved community identity. 6. Development of an appropriate financial policy. 7. Determine direction following completion of City facilities analysis program. 8. Achievement of goals for solid waste management through improved recycling efforts. Adopted 11/10/86 Revised 10/09/87 Revised 08/30/88 Revised 12/01/89 CITY OF ORONO 1989 STRATEGIC PLANNING FOR 1990 KEY ISSUE OBJECTIVES 1.Community Development Direction and Process - How Should We Develop? - Change Around Us - Storm Water Management Commercial and Residential - Navarre - Highway 12 - Land Use - Potential Corridor for Upgrade - Safety Improvements 2. - Re-zoning - Process and Control Environmental Protection - Protection of significant lake and other natural amenities 3.Organizational Development - Strategic Planning Direction 4. Service Delivery - Utilization of Contracting Entities Provider Recipient(Review Date/Frequency) Pc tential Police Building/Zoning Inspections Utility - Public Works Back up Administration Asses «ing Garage Street Maintenance Fire (1992/10 yrsT (Police/Mutual Aid) Attorney (1990/5) Engineering (1990/5) Planning (1991/5) Inspections (Back up) (1990/As appropriate) Auditor (1991/10) Assessing (1989/5) Management Information Service (1992/5) Recycling (1990/5 yrs) Contractural Service Provision Review Criteria - Financial - Legal - Service Capacity • Administration - Market . , rn Resources Continuity and Staff Development - Maintain High Level of Continuity - Department Head Teamwork - Selective Hiring/Targeting/Flexibility - High Level of Staff Competency - In-House Training - Targeting Development - Overlap/Continuity - Policy Body - Staff - Management Information System 6. Market/Delivery Level of Service - Realistic/Palatable Cost Market - - Other Communities - Within the Community - Means to Market - Alternative Delivery System - Targeting Communication and Information - Effective Delivery/Identity - Type of Information - Required (State/Local) - Desired - Media - Cable - Newspaper - Newsletter - Brochure (Parks, etc.) - Market - Available - Access - Information and Referral - Image - Means for Current Information Draft 08/22/89 Revised 12/01/89 CITY OF ORONO 1989 Strategic Planning for 1990 STATUS 1. Community Development A. Highway i2 1. ) Safety Improvement - 1992 * Review preliminary plans * Adopt if appropriate * Work with MnDOT on right-of-way/frontage roads * Encourage stoplight Willow/12 2. ) Long Term Solution * Encourage MnDOT undertake feasibility study * Upon feasibility study work with MnB©T to undertake corridor seieetion study ^ Undertake corridor selection study with MnDOT consultant and surrounding cities * Take appropriate planning steps if needed in potential corridors B. County Road 116 * Monitor action by County as to its proposed construction * Review and if appropriate adopt a preliminary design * Review and if appropriate adopt a final design C. Highway 12 Corridor * Implement projects ordered in 1989 * Betermrne uttiities eonstruetion to be provided D* Community Transportation Plan * Public/Private street - review policy * Undertake capital budget designated projects 10/89 02/90 07/90 10/89 07/98 02/90 12/90 Completed Have announced corridor study initiation 11/89 10/90 Completed Currently delayed to 1994 Sewer/Water mains to be completed 12/89 : i 02/90 Capita 1 Budget Plan (see plan! E. Navarre Redevelopment * Determine desired direction * Determine beautification plan implementation if any * Complete Master Planning, if appropriate * Determine need for Tax Increment District F. LMCD Comprehensive Management Plan * Review all drafts for issues and direction * Present desired changes to LMCD 2/90 03/90 07/90 i2/09 Meeting held 11/18/89 Initial Review to 11/2775? Initial meeting 12/2/69' 1750 G. Storm Water Management * Ascertain available mapping * Develop RFP for study if appropriate H. Marina Control * Initiate review 01/90 * Complete review 03/90 2. Environmental Protection A. Stubbs Bay * Establish policies regarding the project * Determine if the project is appropriate * Prepare plans and specifications * Hold hearings and if appropriate order project * Bond for project * Commence project * Complete project * Assess project B. Solid Waste Kanangeraent * Review recycling efforts * Determine if further solid waste regulation appropriate * Review organized collection if appropriate 3. Organizational Development * 1991 Strategic Plan * 1991 Legislative Plan * 1991-2001 Capital Budget * 1991 Budget Process 11/89 01/90 02/90 04/90 03/90 05/90 11/90 10/90? 06/90 12/90 12/90 07/-09/90 09/-11/90 07/-09/90 06/-10/90 If 4. Service Delivery A. Golf course * Develop * Determine 5 year direction B. Assessing * Implement revised contractor/ arrangement C. Financial * Complete financial strategic plan D. Facilites Upgrade * Determine direction 10/89 03/90 01/90 01/90 10/89 (See facilities * If undertaken commence construction 11/09 timetable) E. Service Reviews * Engineering * Legal 5. Human Resources 03/90 0^79(5 A. Personnel Development * Formulate City Employee Development Policy * Explore performance incentive program * Explore IRS 125 * eompiy with IRS Section 89 require*' to * Implement Employee Recognition Prcg^ i 04/90 0^/90 02/90 Congress Repealed 01/90 6. Marketing 61490.7 STRATEGIC PLANNING 1991 IDEAS Community Developmont Lake Use Selected Areas Witin City Authority Shoreland Regulations Lake Minnetonka Other Lakes Within the City's Boundries Comprehensive Plan Revisions Accessory Structures Revision Navarre Area Beautification Decorative Christmas Lighting Signs Master Planning Transportation Highway 12 Corridor Selection Completion Coordination with Community Transportation Plan Update Services Electrical Territory Determination Development of Geographic Base Data Explore Development of Ultimap System Development of Capital Equipment Replacement Policy 61490.12 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator DATS: June 14, 1990 SUBJECT; Transient Merchants JUN 2 5 1990 OF OROtfo Attachment; A. Transient Merchants Memo Dated 5/25/90 (Memo Only) B. Westonka Chamber Letter Dated 6/13/90 C. League of Minnesota Cities Handbook Information Datf' ^89 ISSUE - Presentation to Council of Westonka Chamber's position regarding transient merchants. INTRODUCTION - As indicated previously the Westonka Chamber was in the process of formulating their position regarding transient merchants. It should be noted that the City of Mound limits transient merchants to a specific place and specific times during the week. DISCUSS ION - As noted in Attachment C to totally exclude solicitation from a community may not be possible, but if Council is interested, it should be further researched by the City Attorney. On the other hand a City could leave this area unregulated if it so chose. Should the Council choose to limit, but not exclude, transient merchants solicitation it may choose to look at the following; Specified area for such sale (narrower than commercially zoned property such as done in Mound) Times of day (day of the week) Length of permit Number of permits allowed per year Number of days per year maximum for such merchants on the other hand Council may choose to have little or no restriction on this activity if it chooses. The City in its application has limited solicitation to 60 da»' in the past but has had no limit on the number of times that su can be renewed. ALTERNATIVES - 1, Accept the information iV*''.'- 2. Table for further discussion. 3. Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that Council give an Indication as to whether they desire to further explore the level of regulation of transient merchants. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by _, that Council direct staff as to what they desire regarding transient merchants. Ayes __, Nays __. Westonka Chamber Chic Remien, Executive Director 5600 Lynwood Boulevard Mound, MN 55364 5169C TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, Ci\.y Adrainistrato|jr May 1990 SUBJECT: Transient Merchants Attachment:A. Council Minutes 4/11/88, 4/25/88 and 6/23/88 B. Ordinance No. 5.30 Solicitors C. Ordinance No. 50, 2nd Series Amending 5.30 in Part D. Labatt Letter Dated 4/20/90 E. Penke Note Dated 5/13/90 F. Butterfield Letter Dated 5/21/90 G. Kilbo Memo Dated 5/25/89 H. Mobile Peddlers 4/1/88 ISSUE 1. Updating Council regarding selected solicitors licenses in the Navarre area and the City generally. 2. Determine if Council desires a license to be issued. INTRODUCTION -- As Council may recall the issue of solicitors licenses and~location of those in Navarre was raised in 1988. As noted in Attachment A at the time the solicitor was allowed to receive their license and to continue in the residential location with the owner being allowed to submit for rezoning of the property in conjunction with an overall Navarre Master Plan. Obviously the Navarre Master Plan has not had any strong interest in moving forward. The City has again recently received complaints and a review of the records indicated that the individual who did have licenses in 1988 apparently was selling in 1989 without licenses and has continued in 1990 to sell without licenses on residentailly zoned property (3790 Shoreline Drive.) DISCUSSION - As you will note in Attag,hment B related to the Ordinance the elements for permitting transient sales are as follows: A. The individual be licensed. B. That it be on commerrlally zoned property. C. That the location is at the discretion of the Police Chief when taking into account safety issues. The policy issue of whether the City should allow such transient merchants at all has up to this point not been directly addressed by Council apart from licensing. It has been suggested that as an alternative to prohibiting such, that they "pay their fair share" of taxes etc. related to their usage. (The parallel raised was one where in New York City such merchants have to be on a waiting list for a limited number of licenses and that the current rate is about $7,500/year.) Another alternative would be to establish a "Flea Market" similar to that in Mound. Either would require an ordinance amendment. As noted in Attachments C there are instances where people, because the vendor is along the road side have stopped in the east bound lane. One telephone caller indicated he had kids run across traffic, almost causing an accident, to purchase flowers from the person in this location. This has created a dangerous situation and possibly could result in pedestrians being struck. At the beginning of May it was determine by staff that the Flower Man had not submitted for a license he was sent a letter on May 7th which he received about mid-week indicating that he did not have a license and could not sell. On Sunday, May 13th (Mother's Day) he was selling and was approached by a police officer as to possible licensing. He indicated that he did not have a license and after warning Mr. Penke, the Officer left. Apparent:'. / Mr. Penke continued to sell despite the fact that he did not 4 v e a license and had been told that he could not sell withc/Ut a license. Mr. Penke has subsequently submitted for a license, however, the City staff has indicated that it can only be in a commercial zone that has been deemed safe by the Chief of Police. As such it would require that he has permission from the property owner on whose property he will be located. In addition the property must be so configured so all purchasers would be required to pull into the parking lot in order to undertake the sales. The property from which he has currently been selling is not conducive to that and may in fact generate safety problems not only because of its location, but because of the physical arrangements to allow interested patrons in pulling off the street to conduct their business. If the owner of the property desires to undertake a rezoning they could do so on their own volition but would also have to make arrangements to provide for necessary ingress and egress of all patrons for such sales even if they were granted rezoning. This may not be possible with the property. It would be more appropriate to consider rezoning in the context of a Master Plan. These issues apply not only to "The Flower Man" but all other transient merchants within the City. The City is exploring potential transient seafood operation in the Navarre area together with transient merchant utilizing the property at County Road 6 and Highway 12. Issue #2 On May 25, 1990 Mr. Indritz, an attorney representing Penke indicated Mr. Keaveny had granted permission to Mr. Penke to sell u £rom his property. Chief Kilbo v'ill review the specific location on site to determine if it is in a safe location. While the City Clerk can issue a license upon recomrnendation of the Chief, the Ordinance langu^.ge in Section Subd 5 (C) requires he recommend denial if tnere has been a violation of Section 5.30. Mr. Penke has been selling without a license since 1989 and was specifically warned and subsequently ticketed for that violation earlier this month. As such it is referred to Council for either approval or denial. ALTERNATIVES Issue #1. 1. Accept the infoimation. 2. Amend the requireraents of the ordinance. 3. Table for futher discussion. 4. Take no action. Issue #2. 1. Approval. 2. Direct denial. 3. Table. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council accept the information as presented and direct staff to provide uniform enforcement in this area on a complaint and license review. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded __, that Council accept the information and direct staff that there be uniform enforcement on complaint and license processing basis. Ayes __, Nays __. cc: A1 Penke Dick Indritz, Reed and Pond ( . . - i 1990 .ith -92 ler 92 «n 92 Westonka Area Chamber of Commerce Paul Huber 91 Bill McNamee '91 Mary Pauly '90 Donna Quigley 90 5600 Lynwood Boulevard. Mound. MN 55364 • 472-6780 June 13. 1990 To: Mayor Grabek and City Council Members City of Orono From: Westonka Area Chamber of Commerce RE: Policy statement reoardino itinerant merchants. Reaardinu the issu« of itinerant merchants in westonka. there are three mar'or areas of concern that our membership would like to have you corsidar as you review and enforce your policies in this area. First - are these temporary being mad^ 1 :■ 11 by the set of rules thet iny established business must? Secondly, do t! - — b_.sor.03S oractices sore tires ccso o threat to cublic safety? Finally are thev esthotiroll** a'onoolins? Flouse be aware of the fac** much of Westonka’s established business commu>'vl r». which far.>=!S taxes and votes here, views these itinerant au-rchants as opportunists, who siphon off vital income withu-ut contribwtina much of the community suooort that permanent busine.-*s6s routinely provide. It appears to us that they are seldom, in reality, reouired to dbide by basic statutes regardlr.a signage, oarkina etc. Safety is al.so a concern. Any p*=rr.anent business is required bv law to observe certain established guidelines recardinc health, parking, tstc. which presumably have been e.stablished to ensure public safety. Although, the same would, hopefiilly, apply to the itineve»''. ...erchant that in reality does not seer to be the case. We have had incidents in Westonka whin sifity, especially traffic -^v, has been ignored by this type of business. Esthetics may not appear to be as critical an issue as either of the first two are. However, in a community that needs to take every opportunity to improve its attention to physical appearance, we cannot allow any chance to address the issue of •*how does it look** to pass by without scrutiny. Finally, we understand that these less established types of peddlers, that sometimes seem to **pop-up** out of nowhere must pose a real headache for our area cities and we appreciate your dilemma! However, we still would like to urge you to review your ordinances and enforcement policies regarding itinerant merchants to be assured that the financial health, public safety, and esthetic concerns of our Cc-mmunity are being appropriately served. ,, -------------- ■> • ‘Working fogef/icr b---—----------. 1989 Supplement cnapcer ii Animals State law authorizes cities to regulate the keeping of animals; to restrain their running at large; to authorize their impounding, sale, or sum mary destruction; and to establish pounds. While this probably docs not authorize a complete prohibition against keeping animals within tne city limits, it does permit reasonable regulations pre venting a public nuisance. For example, cities can prohibit bees, domestic animals, and fowl from cer tain districts within the city. It is even possible to prohibit some kinds of livestock, such as hogs, en tirely. Dogs and Cats This section refers specifically to dogs, because most cities regulate them, but there is no reason why the citv couldn’t apply the same regulatory measures to other animals, such as cats. Cities may license dogs and regulate their keeping. The license fee must be reasonable ard substantial enough to cover regulatory costs Licensing ordinances usually apply only to dogs which have attained a certain age, usually from three to six months. State law expressly grants cities authority to regulate potentially dangerous dogs, but prohibits ordinances that deal with spe cific breeds of dogs. In almost all cases, the city clerk has the duty of collecting license fees, keeping a list of dogs and owners, and issuing the license tags. Some cities however, give these duties to the city police. Whether or not a dog owner may keep a dog on the owner s property without being subject to a dog license fee depends ou the ordinance. Most or dinances make no distinction between dogs running at large and dogs confined to their owner’s premises when imposing licensing requirements. Cities may prevent dogs from running at large. Usually, such a prohibition includes a licensing re quirement which finances enforcement. Prohibitions against running at large are common in Minnesota cities. These are of various types: year-iound prohibition of running at large of all dogs; seasonal prohibition of running at large of all dogs; prohibition of running at large at night; prohibition of running at large on order of the council or other official; restrictions on running at large of certain dogs; and prohibition of running at large on school grounds. Cities may also destroy dogs found running at large if that is a violation of the ordinance. State law requires cities to hold all seized animals, in cluding do«, for five business days before destroy ing them, The ordinance can require that they be kept longer. The law doesn't require a posted notice, but a notice could eliminate or minimize trouble, particularly if the dty impounds the dog of a non-resident. A city gives a pound master, who may be the chief of police, authority over dog pounds. Owners usually may have their dogs released from such a pound only by paying an impounding fee and the cost of feeding the dog in the pound. Ordinances often provide for the dog's destruction if no one chimes it within a specified time, five days or longer. To prevent rabies, cities may require owners to muzzle dogs, quarantine or destroy rabid dogs, and vaccinate all dogs with anti-rabies vaceme. Under state law, it is a petty misdemeanor for an owner or custodian to allow a dog to be at large without a tag or without rabies vaccination. As with any other ordinance, dog ordinances pro vide for fine or imprisonment of people (usually the owners or keepers of dogs) convicted of viola tions. Although the maximum penalty is S700 fine or 90 days imprisonment or both, many ordinances have considerably lower penalties. Furthermore, most cities have found arrest unnecessarily drastic and have preferred to serve a court summons and complaint upon a violator. As an additional en forcement measure, the ordinance may provide for the impounding or destruction of the dog, with or without notice to the owner. Before passing dog ordinances, cities should hold public hearings or otherwise sample public opinion. They should make every attempt to secure the cooperation of dog owners. Peddlers and Transient Merchants Statutory cities may license and regulate auc tioneers, transient merchants and deal^s, hawkers, peddlers, solicitors, and canvassers. Handbook for Minnesota Cities Page 207 Licensing and Regulation 1988 Supplement In framing an ordinance, the council must specify precisely the kinds of transient dealers it intends to regulate. The term peddler is not legally synonomous with the te^’ms solicitor, canvasser, or transient merchant. The ordinance should specifi cally mention each of them. Cities must use caution when regulating charitable and religious solicitors because of the First Amendment rights of free speech and freedom of religion. Before plying their trade, peddlers or hawkers must first get an annual license from the county auditor of each county in which they intend to do business. Similarly, transient merchants must gel a county license before ihcv bold temporary, so- called 'closing out sales,' or engage in any of the other forms of transient selling, the statutes define. The county licensing law does not limit city action regulating hawkers or the business of transient merchants. Regulation of transient sellers may take several different forms. Prohibiting the Business State statutes allow cities to totally exclude cer tain classes of transient merchant events. However, cities probably cannot prohibit transient selling entirely, whether t -rdinance applies to non-residents alone or not . regulation of business is very different from complete prohibition. Given the power to regulate, cities enjoy con siderable discretion in deciding what restraints they should impose. If certain phases of a business are nothing more than fraudulent schemes to trap the unsuspecting or unwarv. they can undoubtedly prohibit them altogether. On the other hand, if regulation or partial regulation will suffice to control the nuisance features of a business, any or dinance outlawing it completely would probably be invalid unless the courts regard the business as having little or no particular benefit to society. Green River Approach The Green River approach makes it a nuisance for someone to go upon private property to peddle or solicit orders for goods or merchandise, unless the owner or occupant extends an express or im plied invitation to the seller. The approach does not apply to soliciting the sale of personal services. Only house-to-house peddling or soliciting the s^e of goods, wares, or merchandise falls within its scope. It is doubtful that it can extend to cover uninvited calls to business places. Regulatory Licensing Apart from the Green River approach, regula tion of transient sellers by a licensing ordinance is by far the most common method cities use to con trol this business technique. License fees, however, must be reasonable, and the ordinance cannot give preferential treatment to resident transient ven dors as opposed to non-residents. Ordinances cannot prohibit the sale of some items and permit ihc sale of all others, unless the prohibited items have some adverse effect on the public health, morals, safety, or general welfare. Because of the constitutional prohibition against state interference with interstate commerce, cities cannot collect license fees from solicitors taking orders in one state for goods they will deliver in the future from another state. So, while the city can impose regulatory licensing upon peddling without restriction, it cannot impose it on most solicitors. Licensing ordinances probably may not apply to peddlers or solicitors who sell or dis tribute religious books, periodicals, and tracts, 'however odd their brand of salvation might seem to be.' 199 Licensing v. the Green River Approach The Green River ordinance has at least two advantages over a licensing ordinance. A licensing ordinance cannot generally exact a license fee from solicitors taking orders in one state for delivery of goods from another state, but the Green River or dinance applies to interstate as well as intrastate transactions. Furthermore, the Green River or dinance absolutely prohibits the practices which the ordinance defines, where a licensing ordinance permits them if the transient dealer pays the license fee. On the other hand, a licensing oi dinance is a tested and legally sound method of rcgulaliomthc Green River ordinance may or may not be. ^ Also, a licensing ordinance regulates cases in which the caller is invited as well as those in which he or she is not . Modified Green River Ordinance A modified version of the Green River or dinance permits householders to prohibit peddlers and solicitor5 by posting a sign in^cati^ that they (■;) o Page 208 Handbook for Minnesota Cities 1989 Supplement Chapter 12 do not wish to be disturbed by salespeople. This ordinance then makes it an offense to violate the householder's expressed wish. Such an ordinance can apply to solicitors in interstate commerce as well as to peddlers or solicitors engaged in the sale or distribution of religious materials. Taxation of IVansient Sellers' Merchandise If after May 1 of any year, a transient merchant carries or sends merchandise for sale in a tempo rary place of business, and the assessor has not al ready assessed the merchandise, the transient merchant must immediately notify the local asses sor. The assessor must then value and assess the property for taxation purposes. The tax be comes due and pa’'able as soon as the assessor cer tifies it to the county treasurer. Curfew A statutory city council may, by ordinance, es tablish a city curfew for juveniles and provide penalties for repeated violations. The city may impose these penalties cither on the juvenile or on those legally responsible for his or her conduct. Besides the maximum age of child and the curfew hour, the ordinance should address the following questions. 1. Should the ordinance apply to parenti as well as to the child? 2. Should the ordinance make third parties (such as the operators of amusement places) liable for the child’s presence on their premises after the curfew? 3. Should the ordinance forbid the presence of juveniles on the streets or in public places, or should it merely forbid loitering? 4. Should the child be exempt from jurisdic tion of the ordinance for specific reasons or good causes such as family emergenev^ married minor, etc.? The general history of curfew ordinances indi cates that cities only enforce them periodically, usually on outbreaks of juvenile dcliquency. In some cases, communities do not even attempt to apply the curfew generally, but permit their police officers to ‘selectively enforce* it. By this method, the police then use the law to clear the streets only of juveniles suspected of criminal designs. These ordinances are difficult to enforce in the courts. Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled a criminal statute unconstitutional which required a loiterer to provide credible and reliable identifica tion to a peace officer, but which had no specified standards as to what would satisfy the identifica tion requirement. The Court found the statute un constitutionally vague because it encouraged arbitrary enforcement. Gambling With the exception of the state lottery, paramutual horse racing, bingo games, pinball ma chines, tipboards, paddlewbeels, and raffles, Minnesota laws prohibit all forms of gambling and gambling devices. The slate has now assumed primary responsibil ity for the licensing of organizations to conduct bingo and raffles and operate tipboards, pad- dlewheels, pull tabs, and ticket jars. Cities have the authority to disapprove state license applications within 60 days of receiving notice of a gambling license application by passing a resolution and giving notice to the state board. Only fraternal, re ligious. veterans, and certain non-profit organiza tions arc eligible for licenses. Cities may adopt more stringent regulations of any form of gambling within its jurisdiaion, includ ing the outright prohibition of any gambling. Citi-s cannot require an oganinzation to make specific ex penditures of more than 10 percent of its net profits derived from lawful gambling, or require an organ ization to make an expenditure to the local unit as a condition to operate within the dty, with the ex ception of '•llowable investigation fees or taxes. A city may by ordinance require that a licensed organization conducting lawful gambling within its jurisdiction expend all or a portion oHis expendi tures within the city's trade area. The or dinance must define the city's trade area and must specify the percentage of expenditures which most be expended within the trade area. Cities cannot require a local license or permit of any person or organization which has a state license. ^ Cities may imp^ a local permit and fee i<x any gambling activities which do not need a state license, although the law pir for some limited gambling without obtain >g state license or local permit. Cities may also assess an investigation fee on state-licensed organizatiw in aaounu depending on the class of the city. ^ Pcrmi^le investiga- tioo fees may not exceed S500 for cities of the first Handbook for Minnesota Cities Page 209 Licensing and Regulation 1989 Supplement class, S250 for second class dlics, and SlOO for third and fourth class cities. In lieu of an investigation fee, cities may impose a local gambling tax on each licensed organization within the city's jurisdiction if the amount is neces sary to cover the city's costs to regulate lawful gam bling. 210 The tax may not exceed three percent of the gross receipts, less prizes of the organizations. The dly must, by March 15, file an annual report with the state charitable gambling control board showing the amount of revenue produced by the tax during the year and the use of the proceeds. The dty may use proceeds only for regulating gam bling acth'ities. Pinball Machines Piaball devices arc legal when they do not dis tribute something of value. If a person can win a prize on such machines, other than a chance to replav, the machines arc gambling devices and ille gal . 211 Cities may adopt ordinances regulating and licensing pinball machines within city limits. Advantages of such an ordinance are that it permit.' the dty to obtain revenues and it enables the coun cil to keep a check on the number and various kinds of devices in operation. Some cities prohibit the machines entirely. Video Gambling Devices Electronic games that Simula^ ^ games such as poker, blackjack, or other common forms of gam bling are not subject to local con^*©!. The state’s liquor control division is the licensing and enforce ment authority. The dty should receive from the state for each machine within the dty. *-1^ Cable Communications Federal and state laws govern the authority of statutory and charter cities to issue franchises and otherwise reflate cable communication system operators. 2W A dty entering into its first franchise agreement, or renewing an existing franciiise, should seek ad vice from its attorney and the League. The League has sample franchise agreements .^1^ Public Dances State law no longer requires^a license and police protection for pubUc dances. “^1^ Cities still have the authority, however, to regulate public dances. Obscenity State law defines and prohibits obscene perfor mances and materials. 218 Violation of the law is a gross misdemeanor which may require dty attor neys to prosecute offen.'«s. State law also makes it a misdemeanor to display sexually explidt material in certain public places. 2l^ City offidals may want to review these statutes before dedding to pass any local ordinances. Cigarette Licensing, Smoking, and Drug Parapbemalia Any city coundl may license and regulate the retail sale of cigareiics, cigarette paper, ur dgarette wrappers. 220 There is no maximum license fee. Stale law prohibits the sale of pipes, cigarette papers, and tobacco to minors. Cities may CMCt other resfriaions on tobacco-related devices. 221 The law which prohibits the use or possession, the delivering or manufacture, and the advertise ment of drug paraphernalia, states that it does not pre-empt enforcement or preclude adoption of city or county ordinances prohibiting or otherwise regulating the manufacture, delivery, possession or advertisement of drug paraphernalia. ^— Tear Gas Any person over lo }cars of age may possess and use an authorized tear gas compound from an aerosol container to defend his or her person or property. Cities have the authority to license vendors of tear gas compounds, to impose a license fee and qualifications for obtaining a license, to set the duration of licenses, and to restrict the number of licenses. 223 xhc local governing body may estab lish the grounds, notice, and hearing procedures for revocation of licenses it issues. D. How This Chapter Applies to Home Rule Charter Cities Almost all of this chapter applies to charter cities. However, there are several cKCpcions ftw first cla» ddes ta the liquor sutuces. I } e Page 210 Handbook for MiaDcsoia Cities Tos Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Prom: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Date: June 21, 1990 Subject: Temporary Employment - Orono Golf Course JUN 2 51990 CITY OF ORONO On May 29, 1990 Council approved the employment of Forest Jastrom as a temporary counter helper due to the resignation of Don Yeager. Information that was not ir i uded in that memo was that Don Yeager would remain as a te^ orary employee as a "starter"* on busy weekends. Therefor. ‘U . veager's position has changed and he has not been terminated. Recommendation - To change Mr. Don Yeager's position from terminated to "starter" position effective May 16, 1990 at an hourly rate of $5.25. , seconded by , to change Mr.Proposed Notion - Moved by ___ Don Yeager's position from terminated to starter 'i*-ion t-'ffective May 16, 1990 at an hourly rate of $5.25. A»' _ _, nays _ _. TO: From: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator/ Forwarded recommending approval. r 61490.8 TO: FROM: DATE: June 14, 1990 SUBJECT: Facilities Citizen Review Committee f^^yor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administratc^jQ^ mcil MEETM6 JUN 2 51990 CITY OF Attachment: A. Facility Committee’s Agenda Materials for 6/14/90 (Previously transmitted to Council) B. LaDean McWilliams Letter Dated 6/8/90 C. Facility Committee Meeting Notice for 6/28/90 (Notice only) ISSUE - Presentation to the Council of the preliminary directions of the Facilities Committee. INTRODUCTION - The Committee has held three meetings to date and at the meeting of 6/14 they requested that Jack Boarman prepare a slide show of city hall types, together with slides illustrating various materials and building types. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council accept the information presented. cc: Jack Boarman Department Heads I'- •- ■■ • . A y'zS''^ Vt. . ^ TTI' C.VC''-ty \ '■ ■ j UsSsH^HU 'J- yff^- 'J r (llLil^, ^''(A-^ cO JUN 5 1990 ' 1 C y £. 7^.., ^ /** /CcUOt' '/^C2v^ - < J /' - y O . /• .y fc/ ^ r / -ri ( .<u*yj -7^ i.-U^t-''/ , -/L / o-A^ ■> Tti c^— r^2ic. . .^ • ;,^,f £-^i-iuuU-^ ^w^LrUi^v 1/ cJ \A^y-f^ —(^ ''C „ ^ , f /. /, .■UA JU.t^^ f-tJu , ,, ___I, w i- - ^ . I i A t -~uT • Ai-a- .Wt% -“7" '■> ,,/ c -tty ^ 7^ ...Tu; % L^-Cx S^lcU- J^^hyjL TTAdhifn^^sr ’e CITY OP ORONO CITIZBH FACILITY REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTICE THURSDAY, JUNE 28, 1990 7:00 P.M. Based on our meeting of June 14, 1990 the Committee requested that the architect present a slide show as to City Hall styles, materials, etc. In addition some asked to be given locations of recently completed City Halls so they may view them at their convenience if they choose. Attached are locations of the following: CHANHASSEN (1980) CHASKA SAVAGE BURNSVILLE LAKEVILLE MENDOTA HEIGHTS MAPLEWOOD CHAMPLIN MAPLE GROVE GOLDEN VALLEY (remodel) EAGAN ----r^v1 )1 1 1 c«tl tltwll gU«M« * If % I—4U—..*47------- I COluMBiJS T • oaiv i»< I I «Kia| S—^ttooaita HtNNCPIN CO MOO«l«> Cial(* i (••IMaMaCI “*•'"* II Coaoi(----- II MI»Uf I rw ^I MKUNOI ■*(0«u I CANVIR CO■ _j-----------f----------I j c*«*>*« 1 c.wJ iliitesSi ■ M**MI* gtCM •iO«lilliAVO« C.9.! C!i*D IMVCt fttOVC niiCNrs |ti (Ofltil »•••• DAKOTA CO. I CM04Mj a«« I I I I '■------------------i----------- I I I w*'«i IV< •* I ...... I /^rT? *-—' y ' 1m* WU SCOTT CO. i>f.a««ci| •••••• __ I______ _L_ __ MUtrtMal I I ! I ---t«!rr s s.fw.l M I * Ja — - —I-------^ •I VMM . ••• I .4.____I Qisl ’a !••«■ iM I I M«I I 0*M I I ,:^"L___i_^v|-----A—1—1 I 1 j ______J---------1 -------» 1 tatiac rata 2 oteao J MiaatToata tiat" 4 Toaaa tar s tICUt'Ot • sttiaBOO* 7 KMOiaat ■ MiBicial lalt f victoria 10 tettiatoaif■ WVV**" II irtiat l»«t II II » «0VI II Niitior 14 coiuKtia Hil«Hl» 15 It aaTHOaf IS cauMtOtkl 17 raiCOa a€l6HM 10 Miaeota 10 Ukveait 20 G»tt C lOu O 21 laaoravk 22 Oticao®* 22 rial irtiaci 24 aaaioalti 2S 6IK »■»*• 24 4itCHaOO0 27 •Kill al»a 24 ta iroat 20 aaiitax 20 oaa rata aliftatl SI laalkaao »• 0M2 22 tt aatf 2 out* ____County J-*-'____- Township •**«•______Municipslity Tff 2, Areas presently served by municipal ir supplies, either totally or partially. 61490.4 Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat(^|^i^X!]3 TO: FROM: DATE: June 14, 1990 SUBJECT: Update - Sewer Plant j/4 f'^ouaciL mETm JUN 2 y I9S0 OF ORONO Attachment: A. City of Long Lake Letter Dated 6/8/90 ISSUE - Presentation to Council of letter indicating the City of Long Lake's desire enter into discussions on this matter. INTRODUCTION - In response to the City of Orono's letter of May T9TTT90TTHe City of Long Lake has indicated their interest in further discussions on this matter. Discussion of the City's position for these upcoming discussions would be most appropriately held in executive session. The City's Attorney has been in contact with Arlo Vande Vegte regarding possible scheduling of these in July. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by _<. _. , _, Council jiccept the infcrraation and handle any futher discussion on this matter as it relates to settlement discussions of a pending legal issue to an executive session. Ayes , Nays m.City of Long LakeP. 0. BOX L LONG LAKE. MINN. 55356 0 crrv CP '^SCNO June 3, 1990 JUN 1 2 1990 James Grabek, Mayor City of Orono P.O. Box 6o Crystal Bay, MM 55323 Reference: Long Lake Sewer Plant Annexation Dear Mayor Grabek; Your invitation to discuss the above subject natter is most gratifying. I believe it is the only sensible (and economical) way to bring this matter to a mutually agreeable conclusion. Please contact Arlo Vande Vegte at 475-2219 to set up the time and location for holding the negotiations. Very truly yours, Mrzr~ A. W. Kunze Mayor cc; Terrence Merrett, Executive Director, Municipal Board Thomas Barrett, Popham Haik Chris Dietzen, Larkins, Hoffman, Daly and Lindgren Arlo Vande Vegte 6690.3 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: June 21, 1990 SUBJECT: Orono Tennis Team Recognition COUKCiL MEETING JUN2 51990 CITY OF ORONO Attachment: A. Draft Resolution of Recognition ISSUE - Adoption of a resolution recognizing the e^^orts of the Orono Tennis Team. exce1lent INTRODUCTION - The Orono Tennis Team has for the first time in its history successfully beat teams through the Regionals in order to have a berth in the State Torunaments. On Thrusday, June 7, 1990 they took 2nd place in the State. An updated resolution may be available Monday night. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by __, that Council adopt Resolution #__ recognizing the efforts of the Orono Tennis Team in reaching and achieving 2nd place in the State Tournament. Ayes , Nays __. A RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING THE ORONO TENNIS TEAM WHBRBASr the City of Orono continues to recognize excellent achievement of persons in its community, and WHEREAS, the Orono Boys Tennis Team on June 7, 1990 won the semi-finals by defeating Granite Falls and Breck; and WHEREAS, the Tennis Team has previously won the conference, had All Conference appointment and subsection wins; and WHEREAS, team members accomplished this through setting a series of goals for themselves. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Orono recognizes the excellent achievement of the Orono Boys Tennis Team in their achieving a berth in the state championships and recognizes the following team members: TED ADAMS CHRIS BIZZANO TIM GEORGE DAVE EVANS JAY HAKE NED HOSSETH ERIK PETERSON ERLAND SAXEGAARD KEVIN SILUS STEVE STROUP and their Coach: TIM MOYNIHAN Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held June 11, 1990. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: r < ♦-tf r 1 »rV A RESOLUTIOH RECOGNIZING THE 1990 OPONO BOYS VARSITY TENNIS TEAM WHEREAS, the City of Orono continues to recognize excellent achievement of persons in its community, and WHEREAS, the Orono Boys Tennis Team on May 29, 1990 won the semi-finals and finals of Section 2A by defeatiiig Granite Falls and Breck; and WHEREAS, the Varsity Tennis Team has 6 All Conference appointments; and WHEREAS, this is the first Orono team in school history to go to the State Tournament; and WHEREAS, team members accomplished this through setting a series of goals for themselves. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Orono recognizes the excellent achievement of the urono Boys Varsity Tennis Team in their achieving a berth in the state championships on June 7, 1990 placing 2nd in the state championships, recognizes the following team members: TED ADAMS DAVE EVANS JAY HAKE ERIK PETERSON KEVIN SILUS CHRIS BIZZANO TIM GEORGE NED HOSETH ERLEND SAXEGAARD STEVE STROUP and their Coach: TIM MOYNIHAN Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held June 25, 1990. ATTEST:James R. Grabek, Mayor Dorotiiy M. Hallin, City Cl^ J I 62090.2Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Pros:John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Date:June 21, 1990 COUNCIL MEETING Subject:Resolution of Appreciation - Philip Bradley, Park Commission Chair JUN 2 5 1990 CITY OF ORONO On May 1, 1990 Phil Bradley resigned as Chair of the Park Commission but will remain as a Park Commission Member. So that the Council and citizens can extend their appreciation for service to the Community, I have prepared a resolution of appreciation for Council review and approval. ReconBendation - To approve Resolution #_____ extending the Council's appreciation and thanks for service to the Community. , seconded by to approveProposed Motion - Moved by _ _, - - - - - - .. _ _. Resolution I_ _ _ extending the Council's appreciation and thanks for service to the Community. Ayes _ _, nays _ _. Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members \To: From: Mark £. Bernhardson, City Administrate Forwarded recommending approval. A RESOLUTION OP APPRECIATION PHILIP BRADLEY, PARK COMMISSION CHAIR WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEf^EAS, the City Council does recognize residents for service to the Community; and WHEREAS, Mr Philip Bradley, 4075 Oak Street, Orono, was appointed to the Park Commission on January 28, 1985; and WHEREAS, Philip Bradley was instrumental in assisting in the preparation of the Comprehensive Bike/Hike Trail Plan for the City of Orono; and WHEREAS, Philip Bradley was appointed Chair of the Park Commission on September 28, 1988; and WHEREAS, Philip Bradley was instrumental in assisting in the review and upgrading of the Park Dedication Fee Schedule; and WHEREAS, Philip Bradley resigned as Chair of the Park Commission in May of 1990; and WHEREAS, Philip Bradley will continue to serve as a Park Commission Member. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Orono City Council and the citizens of Orono wish to extend their appreciation and thanks for the years of service to the City of Orono. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 25th day of June, 1990. Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Acting Mayor ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk 6690.11 TO: K: and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat DATS: June 21, 1990 SUBJECT: Police Tepartment 1989 Financial Report -.OL ^ ^ -'<^011MEETIMG JUN 2 51990 of OROflO Attachment: A. 1989 Police Department Operations Financial Report Attached is the financial information for the police contracts for 1989. The 1989 Police Annual Report will be placed on the agenda for discussion at the July 9, 1990 meeting. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by __, the Orono City Council acknowledges receipt of the Police Department's 1989 Operations Financial Report. Ayes _, Nays _. 53190.1 TO: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director OATS: June 1, 1990 SUBJECT: 1989 Police Department Operations - Financia. 'flevr Attached are schedules comparing the 1989 actual expenditures to the budgets for the police department operations in the "base" contract, and the additional manpower contracts for Long Lake and Spring Park. Also attached is a copy of the 1989 cost distribution by city and the resulting amount due to or from each city. The 1989 costs are $40,792 over budget. The amount over budget is made up of three parts; the base contract is over budget $24,236; the Long Lake additional manpower is over budget $12,035 and the Spring Park additional manpower is over budget $4,521. The net effect of the 1989 final contract costs is that Long Lake will be charged $13,408 in 1990, Minnetonka Beach will be charged $916 in 1990, and Spring Park will be charged $4,961 in 1990. These are a result of higher than anticipated costs offset somewhat by higher than anticipated revenues from the State for "Police Town Aid" and for the POST state aid for schooling. 53190.13 CITY OF ORONO ACTUAL COST DISTRIBUTION BY PARTICIPANT COMPARED TO ESTIMATED COST DISTRIDOTION BY PARTICIPANT 1989 BUDGET TcAF MINNETONKA SPRING ESTIMATED COST DISTRIBUTION ORONO LONG LAKE BEACH PARK TOTAL Compos It I applied except to Contract Charge 70.91%13.00%6.25%9.84%100.000% Base Budget Administration $479,982 47,999 $ 88,018 8,802 $42,305 4,230 $ 66,603 6,660 $676,908 67,691 Total Police Town Aid Credit (1988-89) 527,981 (24,889) 96,820 (4,564) 46,535 (2,193) 73,263 (3,454) 744,599 (35,100) Total Net of Town Aid Contract Charge 503,092 92,256 19,027 44,342 9,145 69,809 14,398 709,499 42,570 Total $503,092 $111,283 $53,487 $ 84,207 $752,069 Additional Manpower Town Aid Credit (1988-89) $110,488 (9,750) $176,139 (15,600) $286,627 (25,350) Contract Charge 100,738 6,044 160,539 9,633 261,277 15.677 Total $106,782 $170,172 $276,954 GRAND TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $503,092 $218,065 $53,487 $254,379 $1. '29,023 ACTUAL COSTS PISTRIBUTION Gross Costs Administration $490,668 49,067 $ 89,955 8. 995 $43,247 4,325 $ 68,089 6,809 $691,959 69,196 Total Police Town Aid Credit (1988-99) 539,735 (28,050 98,950 .3,143) 47,572 (2,472) 74,898 (3,892) 761,155 (39,557) Tota- -et of Town Aid Contract Charge 68b 93,807 19,348 45,100 9,303 71,006 14,645 721,598 43,29b Total . 585 $113,155 $54,40 $ 85,651 $764,894 Additional Manpower Town Aid Credit (1988-89) $ir2,123 (10,502) $180,660 (16,803) $320,783 (27,305) Total Net of Town Aid Contract Charge 111,^21 6,697 163,857 9.832 275.478 16.529 Total $118,318 $173,689 $292,007 GRAND TOTAL ACTUAL COST $511,685 $231,473 $54,403 $259,340 $1,056,901 Aetjai Costs Over (Under) Est. Costs $ 8,593 $ 13,408 $916 $ 4,961 $ 27,878 onatge (Credit) to 1990 Contract Billing Date 07/01/90 Billing Date 10/01/90 $ 6,704 6,704 $458 458 $ 18? -,481 TOTAL CHARGE (CREDIT)$ 13,408 $916 4,961 153190.12 CITY OF QRONO POLICE DEPAP3MENT 1989 BUDGET YEAR year WDSD iwPaffigR 31, 1989 Salaries - Regular Salaries - Overtime Salaries - Ten^xDrary Scdaries - Sever ei ice Salaries - Holiday (Union) P.E.R.A. and F.I.C.A. Hospitalization & Life Insurance Wbrker Compensation Insurance Office Supplies Motor Fuels and Lubricants Clothing & Personal Equipment Building & Grounds Maint. Supplies Equipment Parts f Access Books & Periodicals Training Supplies Legal Consulting Other Consulting Telephone Postage Printing & Publishing Utilities Radio Rental Building Rental Maintenance - Office Equipment - Automotive Equipment - Misc. Equipment - Building & Grounds Janitoriad Service LOGIS - Admin. Services/Data Processing Meetings, Conferences & School Insurances Memberships Travel, Mileage, Parking Licenses & Tcuces Capital Outlay - Buildings - Office Fumitur^i & Equip - Automotive '••(uiproent Equip.aent POST State Aid Reimbursement TOTAL BUDGCT BASE CONTRACT ACTUAL ACTUAL OVER (UNDER) BUDGE] $362,490 $362,197 $ (293) 10,750 21,300 10,550 5,500 6,091 591 -0--0--0- 9,686 8,638 (1,048) 46,588 48,207 1,619 22,550 26,208 3,658 18,533 16,502 (2,031) 6,000 7,618 1,618 28,000 24,658 (3,342) 6,876 7,537 661 300 442 142 4,500 7,322 2,822 1,200 1,769 569 3,800 925 (2,875) 1,500 857 (643) 7,000 6,723 (277) 7,000 7,419 419 1,800 1,866 66 2,500 5,471 2,971 2,900 3,429 529 12,260 7,171 (5,089) 9,080 10,286 1,206 3,500 2,143 (1,357) U,000 18,509 7,509 1,500 1,935 435 1,500 2,722 1,222 3,200 3,502 302 8,570 13,524 4,954 9,000 11,382 2,382 19,650 21,888 2,238 1,360 1,754 394 650 644 (6) 180 781 601 1,000 -0-(1,000) 2,400 1,381 :i,019) 28,900 32,521 3,621 4,500 3,792 (708) —™(7,155)(7,155) f^,725 $ 24, aS3S3a 3B3B SSS3CS3SS sssatssss • CITY OP ORONO 53190.11 POLICE DEPARTMENT 1989 BUDGET YEAR • YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,1989 ACTUAL OVER BUDGET ACTUAL (UNDER) BUDGET LONG LAKE ADDITIONAL MANPOWER Salaries - Regular $ 80,900 $ 88,746 7,846 Overtime 3,750 6,768 3,018 s Holiday 3,439 3,644 205 P.E.R.A./F.I.C.A.10,549 12,545 1,996 Hospitalization & Life Ins.5,700 5,180 (520) Workmens Compensation Insurance 5,266 4,690 (576) Clothing & Personal Equipment 824 950 126 Memberships & Licenses 60 -0-(60) TOTAL ADDITIONAL M.\H1‘0WER $110,488 $122,523 $ 12,035 333=3333 3S33S333 SPRING PARK ADDITIONAL MANPOWER Salaries - Regular $129,180 $133,558 4,378 Oveitime 6,000 7,952 1,952 Holiday 5,435 5,545 110 P.E.R.A./F.I.C.A.16,793 18,256 1,463 Hospitalization & Life Ins.^,020 6,586 (2,434) Workmens Compensation Insurance 8,331 7.415 (916) Clothing & Personal Equipment 1,300 1,348 48 Memberships & Licenses 80 -0-(80) TOTAL ADDITIONAL MANPOWER $176,139 $180,660 $ 4,521 333333=3 33333333 33333333 POLICE SERVICE CONTRACT 53190.10 SERVICE YEAR 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 ORIGINAL CONTRACT Af'iOUNT ADJUSTMENT APPLIED NET FOLLOWING CONTRACT YEAR COST CITY OF LONG LAKE $218,065 231.886 213,171 213,226 158,005 149,485 130,328 121,497 114,724 112.887 63,936 $ 13,408 (9,550) (8,201) (19,691) 3,701 (3,247) 2,320 (14,969) (8,694) (2,466) (892) $231,473 222,336 204,970 193,535 161,706 146,238 132,648 106,528 106,030 110,421 63,044 CITY OF MINNETONKA BEACH 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 $53,487 53,812 46.889 44,478 38,753 36,379 32,592 29,459 25,820 26.889 19,616 $ 916 (4,360) (73) (988) (1,226) 3SZ 916 (1,205) 564 1,134 (271) $54,403 4S, 152 46,816 43,490 37,527 36,764 33,508 28,254 26,384 28,023 19,345 rTTY OF SPRING PARK 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 $254,379 244,237 220,193 227,553 173,957 164,235 153,222 141,936 1981(lst year) 130,548 4,961 (20,498) (21,981) (23,340) (410) (5,845) (2,053) (6,212) 3,302 $259,340 223,739 198.212 204.213 173,547 158,390 151,169 135,724 133,850 61990.1 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 19, 1990 JUN 25 1990 SUBJECT: Administrator's Information CITY OF ORONO NAVARRE/LIVINGSTON STORM SEWER - Attached please find a copy of a letter sent to the residents regarding a potential private solution in the area, (Attachment A) SANDY BEACH RESORT - Staff has been working with the owner of the property and Ft Ti anticipated that the owner will file a sketch plan review for that property presented at the Planning Commission's July meeting. COUNTY ROAD 1 5 WELCOME SIGNS - It was felt by John Gerhardson that it would be appropriate that any sign have incorporated in it the logo. We are currently awaiting the completion of the logo contest. Additionally the initial plan had expected to have up to three signs in the area. If they are the same type as those going up in Mound and Spring Park it is estimated that all three signs may cost in the neighborhood of $3-4,000. Once a design is developed this will be presented for Council consideration. BEDERWOOD "GRAND OPENING" - The opening was rained out on Saturday, June 16th and has been rescheduled for Saturday, June 23rd. BEDERWOOD PARK - PARKING LOT - In preparation for the open house the metal posts were placed to indicate car centering. As a result of this, it is anticipated that 40 cars will be able to park in the parking lot. Depending on the initial months level of business at the park will determine whether the current parking lot is configured as adequate or if it will need to be expanded as proposed as part of the review. ELECTRICAL UTILITY TERRITORIES - Attachment B is a letter sent to the electric utilities regarding a meeting on territorial areas. Attached also is a letter from Marlow Peterson along vith copies of Northern States Power electric rates. NATURE CONSERVANCY/BAYS IDE - LUCE LINE - As you may recall during the Par ten discussion there was an indication 40 acres currently owned by the Nature Conservancy adjacent to his property on the west was being offered t"»r consideration by the City for its ownership. This will be referred to the Park Commission at their July _, 1990 meeting. BIG ISLAND TOUR - JUNE 27 - Attachment C was given to Council regarding the upcoming date. Only two persons between Council and Planning Commission have indicated interest in attending this, if so it may be appropriate to delay that tour until more people can be available. Please contact Jeanne regarding whether you will be able to attend or not. — ehTY^ - OF ORONa CITY of ORONO Post Office Box 66•Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323*Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka June 19, 1990 Karen and Mark Cuff 3572 Livingston Avenue Wayzata, MN 55391 Dear Karen and Mark, On Wednesday, June 6th, City Engineer Glenn Cook, Assistant Zoning Administrator Mike Gaffron and myself visited your property to see if there were new alternatives for addressing the drainage situation in your area. After a preliminary review of the site, Mark arrived home and we were able to discuss what you anticipated as far as future plans for the property. Based on that and further discussion it appeared that there was a feasible private alternative. Th^t private alternative is outlined in the Attachment A. If this appears to be a desirable direction for you, you may want to work in conjunction with your neighbor to the northeast of your property and also engage an engineer to do a more definitive layout of the proposal. Once this has been developed it may require certain permits from the City depending on the amount of grading and fill that would be required. If it is under 100 cubic yards it could be a permit issued by staff, if over that it may require a conditional use permit through Council. It is possible that a majority of this work would be done in conjunction with a building permit for the garage structure that you had desired. incerely,A Mark E. Bernhardson City Administrator cc: Mayor and City Council John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Glenn Cook, City Engineer Mike Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Admin. Bt lLDl.NG & ZONING - 473-7357 ASSESSING SDMISIsmAnOMHVANa -473-735« FAX - 4734)510 PL BUG >»ORfcS - 473-73S# (?'■P'_;. —----------------------------------------------------------T- —T -- II —^ ‘ '^\\-v\k3L\j CRYSTAL PI RSP June 18, 1990 Northern Minnetonkj 5505 Count Excelsior. K............... Telephone (612) 474-8881 CITY Of r'qONO ]f^ City of Orono 1335 South Brown Road Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 ATTN: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator JUN Z 0 1390 RE: City of Orono - NSP/Wright Hennepin Coop Electric Territorial Boundaries and Rate Schedules from Northern States Power Company Dear Mark: First of all, thanks for helping with the Council Approval of the Northern States Power Company 20 year franchise. Enclosed are copies of our Rate Schedules as you requested. I am in the process of setting up a meeting with Wright Hennepin Coop Electric to discuss the Territorial Boundaries and a possible trade or buy out. I will keep you informed as to this progress. Sincerely, Marlow E. Peterson Manager, Community Services cc:Mayor Jim Grabek mayor 'I ;.v, . , , ! 1 5 1 o S C < 2 Su O ao «5 S’ t/5 o o Qt tj E ^ ?ia I .- a> >3-0 > O c it: > = 3 , §.= . o >2 a c t: c (u o y « i= -o i: E g « « 4.- ~ £ 0) 2 ^ ° E S c y o 2 O « y O > V t: E M u 0) 0>r^nISS J ii 2 c ^ 2 i: flj 0) <0 0) x: <fl OQ -o u 3 y St: (U w E i 3 0» 0 O* 55 1 ? ? cE ui Q Vop d>c 3 > f8 5 o O eo 00 r>- m 40 (O «o o o d d </> CO 00 t£^ nm in to o o d d to ^ X •= $ 0) it: ii w O>- o *i« Of E Vi _3 x>< M 3 u. ra a> O m 0> (A 3 — u. n ra "o ifi S ® ra c/) Q. CO = Z X3 o» = x: ^ ® = 2! 3 °2 SLS 26 Z £ 2 3 _ O ^ U ° = i2 ;. o $ y ^ E ^ 2 I 4» r O 0) U a» '!> “ >N — 56 *OC -a 3 X3 3 §=fs> 5 S -S 2 1 2d (u §1$ « 40 C3) flj <✓ .grSscS 0 3 S R25 ol o! sfa IS I U 3 o c 5 -2 = § u 9 E = 0) ulB3g 6*=E ««■^ = 1 « - 2Is §-= U S/) 0, y y ■q. 2E if ^ I «’ 12 -C a* •= y £ t— a. o c 5 — >•2S “-2 ■= •g m S.S (u S' Cl ^|ly “ u g;| Si 2I-5 a ? .2 41 S? 3 S"O 2 £ 2 > % o<0, o s. s^S P ?oEm.. |o S ESS>.0 :o Z <3 < c52o5« c a, “• = £.§ > I I I2 J 5 01 C31 ra E m “IHtl St|>|2 S 5 £ S s O ^ 0) O o o " m ■” -r 5 6 3: T3 Sillii is 5 ? si ^JJi^ S 5 g S o S. 0> £ 3 m "" C\j lifili CO 3 9 0) 2 « g££o£ 3 !! ? i si = I =”UI < 0. a « mo w CO 1'39 » « n it § o S2ef in o - (j M 2 3 ill !i 3 ^ O w >■ 3 I| O J O > CT >>^ T3 !r. £ 3 2 01g ° I? ® r o = ® 5 c £ ■c * o Ct- o 3 § ® E r.-y\Y.; • •».'. ••..',',vt^.». wr." *.-‘-a<| - • •■ ■■.' -. ■ ,^^’•, ..‘V... .. L.■V- S I “ Pt? Is| 9 'o ^ S9 S o •C (U O E r- ■A .V « ® ffi £ 1 M (0$ ^ ^ y x: o . i: . o S S 5 «m -?• k- _ w 3> S E-|il!S| 0) 2 Q.y ». O ® O '"^ aiflilllillll «o X 7 O,'' 9- S E c S « §. ™ C Q.« C .2 I ? g»r kk, S E c I § 5; " Q- . ® «£IE « g .2 ^ 5; “ISs « £ o 5 E ra « 9 u re -C ra Q. » llUlll I 2 c I £ 5J “= r:® ;cSui c E S5 >-4,i2o®c«i -■OC-®q ,3« - ? > g Sis iili “ ?€ I Z « $ ® u ^ 2 « c I I ^ic|>J ^5 ^ ,7? oi re 5 Sf& <0 w " -o^is c S -!5 c S . O ,2 E2o5t3 . ? S3 C re §|o«2«^2=^oQ-gojoj^—a a. »- « cn £ 5P 5 u °r 2 iSSc? « re«2|c n re £ ■« = ««■ o i2 '2s“S4^2 SHillllfi." w _- •© t/> W re« ■o 0 ® (O c« 1t 2* 05 75 ® 2 a « :s i m O re E ^ S JtifSo™ litis sare O S 2 s- 2$"a0 re m o o Q. o 5 « ^ re III 1 |o re o; jo y > ouII re CD £ £g 5 saf SS4•- a^ = re e c OC|2e E - r £ reS 1 -3?£ 2^2 2 £«-*"«• C c 2 c 0 0^0 E J o-Sf A. <•« >•0 y re .go? _ ^ O) Q. °ll5 reO•D — o o o w Q. ee o ^ o ^Is = re £ Z ™ g 5 ^ g t >Jd 2 o in « O) re £ U 2 - c 5 S p ^* £ ^UJ S 1 s 5. II 5^ 2 5 £?= 0» O « 2 3^ U- O CQ o >« O) « Ui I re<^ k- "2 o) - C CL 1-0 o k- .20 . C ^re . re a>O Q. 5 C -S a CO o o cz S. o 3 c . • O 3 . 5 S, o o S o c o -2 E0 . o O 1 i I i 2 5l|s| l-ist = tl|5E SS "q. w re -o CO •? s Sos> 51l2 re 5 o E iS 2 c5 >• o £ re re 5 ? 522| 00^ 1 ZZ ^• ? o o re E J> 1 :S £ ® re 0 “ = 1Pa-.■Ut131 5 E » >'"'3Sis.'^1 S>> ~ “O .re c « o I re S Q. ^ « re Ogi2«5® i!pll *--t » “5•* Z Z — 5) "o "o oi 5lfp|lsl O 3 S 5 Cg re o 2££^5 5li?s o-£ £ 5 o 2 E = s 52.5 2 ™ |gg *2 S<o £SS?£22 iinii E a re re o. w re - •o CO lll!sUtil E o2 cS 2 re 2 |o 3 re c - Z o 2 -2 E ^J D £ 0)i: P =O O i § 5 i i 6gBi"’^ = l£^° iIIS p•e =3 m re O re ^ « O £ re «. C4 0, 21 c. ^ — 3 r ^ as £30* = ^2re » 2 2 re2 «=: O S S => VIliilHI=5iiSIllsa « (j'2 2 ® <= 9 2 c re re ,» o re ®l s ^ £ « I S Si^lii 2°2S.o^^ili ?5 i| re' •* 2 5 ® . O o e IPJ Q l c “* ^ re o »£Bq £ o £ o re O : E ® 5: ® s^ s ^ 2l-rre u. « T3 o> re re w ■g - o re-I - 5 re x: c re — re s s.> - -I f i...^ ^ Q J< re ca ire -X O (O o — re o re a — Hi a 2 >i re g«c.so . O jc r a 2 ^ o - I 5* E 2 SII re i E, E o a; M r- GO E 5 S I S I EC re iSZl •p re - ~ o 2 I 5 Si ® ®S 52re|Ei^o*Eor? 1-1*115112118 loI^ 3 ^5‘ = o2 >S ! = 5-S5£-=c|ss«Ilfs. iiflllllp - = re.® -''^^O&.reO.'',:.iliiiHsiHiiiiq 9c ||reE£®H2??.i c Wi - ® i 0 3£s^a o|l|® 2®re® 2c20 !i!i= y? 2 S o o |;i5i«*lli11=1 • V. * r • » ■ *4 £iii$,Jr4 " =2.^ “ s s| ssicrij 3 >. m 5 >-t: E - cn o o 5;t3 S! c = 1^2 |g •a c £ w II ls!i» 2S.|2|^i |iis|?si 2|ls! fc =1 ‘J ^ ®silff; 2 _• o > 5 ^H a > (0«9 eo a Q. a> 5 5i E 3( ’z - S S=I ij? = go® s P S•r c o>S 95 S2^o*=g|^^ !0 5 $ ‘6 aoU?^ a « 2? S ~|l o 1 s':; ” 1>I 5 q CO H 3 ^ 9>I ^2 c 9 .-V <V £ C = O ll U « I- a| E|o is s i 2 I c ^2 2 85|| "^ol 2 3 . ^ « 2 o >• G 5) c?cOoo|iSS - ~ 2 2^ s s E; “ s-g g "1 a||2 a£ -■“3— ‘-iGO'S So « I 5|*i g r2 2 2>>-£?5. '’oo'^co^™ 0) <0 E 2 0- £?>.« .1 ®5 2§ IS g,|5 2 ^ 15 5 o "6 ® -c 5) • SIeII 111^2. flslflc 2 0) o |5 O^i S S5» 8««Sai:-»13s gESo|| 9j 2-w,,Cco-d® * *5 ® ^ c Z C -££20 <«a,*"Occa,-S.g’gbSgri(fl-29?^|-Ooy ^ S G I Q- "* 31 ®||sf2|gS 5 5-1 >•3 1^ 1 «®ss «> a> o o OI f>l o ri ri «d M 1“- O O ” -6 ?“ ^“'^3 3 - Ile< m o !L>• ►- y) 0. I| 9co 9(/) 4) 4> ^ 3):2s S5I2 < > >. a» 3 3 1 cn 9 f.-. 9 ?S555 |Si888o CN* ^ 5 W »-• Q 1i ? i os . 5l^?!! 3 « 2 O o S o c 5 5 o« w 0 iois pi!» s « .u 5 s i I ai*^ ’ «?zl!? k >. o 2 • ~ « £ 6 u E $ %«I< I su. s ll 22 ’ « fO t i ® 2 6-0 * si’ 0 I s A* /< 4>.' .V*. ■; i <pH ■ •! T3 C <0 A o a (0 o>« ii t tn« o u — X (TI jDi! 3 </l <A l| lilt: 2 c ? lili?— (i» ® 2 c o «n c r: • *= Z ^ E •W ^ “ w(0 ® 3) >> a>- ® a > • -S if Zi !l -■ E 5 « 2 il|l s| || if"* ^ « 2J o2 Q. 2 E § ocl|i5 S = l>^E§-*isll « c S s •* 2*2 ® ® o £ c®E-o>a-i-lsc£ «E2SE5552|* 5Lf jtS«§:>2i;r®|®=:5 I >•cn3 Cl EoO w to o CL (/>a> <u> coZ I c. u Sos I * o ?>£ « c€ o 1l £ 2 « u </> ® 3 S > - £ r >. O o o»«m > c o» « Irt — • §il Il2r: ; l§. SS^i - ® 3iislo o ® unu £o> 3 O C •D C ® o .*5 S ® E 2 £ 0 — •« v 1 - 5 2 « £ mSS5.Is I? ® E S « ^ C sll . S2 3! ® S « II C <rt *o 3 « U « ® — * i Iz III ® 3"fl COwe !>• W -B ® 2 >* •• . o y ’ ? 5i 5 * Si|3£ Si'S * i‘l| hii ® -: ® ill^o >S'S 5 ^ £ ® £ iiil - • w 2£ * £ 0» O S' 3 ® S2ls55S lilpll Il5ss'«i ^III so I sells*? ®a: 3 o>® i S £j|2£|3Cissslsi ■v;i -a. *. I. * ' • ■ j w 01 CO O I h2 ^11 uj 5 £ = « 5£t - ■^ 5? «o « c >uj 2 g93^ o > (£ 7=5 UJ 55 0(0 ^ <rt _j ® < 2 :<:;5Sg jt- ,-3: i > O c s V w o o> .£ « 2 S < ? Sl ll •o o C OJ V ST * 0) 00 ° « s M Q. 1 £ o> i§ I 2 I!I! * ^ T £ - o 2 O s£ 3 X 0) 2; m S« o 2o O 3 ai JO <o £2 |I 0) e 0) o o till ' - ?s— irt^ x: o c £ 2 0) <0 J>>i = ii|i|s?l §28i3 T§>^ 3 I 8S5?S|e l~il l§illsH £.£-Q> rg 4; Ii3 « »= SJCBJIC — ^--O . 23g°Si55^ = j,-fS°5Sc^ sSc|i>°|o >" fl I5 O 0> 3o>. ^|iji 2" = i~S *5 Sj |S;-x|3|ag 2 I s aS." ?o Sm 5 I ® 2 « C I t3 > o !2 3 C ® ^ ® 5; ® O o > ||5,o> ►- £ c CO c 3 —} f? ^■isn 2* • a| " o o S • S ? ? «* 2 5?u u • 2^ o 5 I I JSs • • « r* CO (/» 09 CO h. o X o 00 »I w ^ c S ^il r o'‘ £ ^ o r J ^ o O o 5SsSQ. «» g J m d h. « 5“- ac 3 O 8 a 9 E 8 5 ^ E?« r; c w Sk CL H «, O X . Q. C t: c •5 0 9 5 5^ £ E ® 5 5 w 2£ «2 I £ o i Syo°- 5 ai««§: olip ? psi a S o = Is |l*5- O t»-C Q. « ® O § s .. > OO if 5 ^ y d &I I 2 £ • ® w o. E E 0) §5 2 • III ? 5 c o ttl u. o S « >f ^ 3 = S|2 O o 3 O C S o § " o o E^' Ib 2^Bmuiunlass^ Sll5- s|>-|| 4- ft o E J II•o cuf! t ® > 0. i: s S2 S£ 82 SS 2 ^ •o • _S 5" e5^ f-a.* i j|: 2*0 > u i 8 OS . O y ^ u c 5 2 o5 « o E2 S o l£3^® tills l»il| E ®a. ^ S ®‘ 1 z £ g|5x: ® 8 > o -f iaif (A (A V ■c^ ® « ?o 2 cIo 2 "5 >“2 £ o < 5l| Its »?- • isIIIUss S s o *£ LS2 ?S§ i“5 Iff "Il E ^ i = «•"it I o e !ii |5| li i c c °«S|•o 5 o S5 £ I d > « ? 2 ® I 1:q:• £ = S|? XT3 ® i • — ll| 5il"fil III lio? ss sfii |5j! III! |S||2| ■i l.| sf s' slsl2§ 2 i^ € I £ ! S§*- i? iloilii * I? '• • ' s - ^ O'-Ul II! s I Is 3 ” §1^1 ® 3 ® £ ^ ® 3 §£ S^?5 0^1 2sis l^sl S|f S ? |c C ? g «^E^i I S 2 0 2 ' yj o e52 • . 5 If'I i inn o « « « -£ ^ S cl.5cM- i.% ,'^7-vT a ®w i)c 3 to to i g ^ eu sn <N a0 0 d d I 0>o a a> •< •i* 2 c >. i_ « ?S?2 ss3i o « £ T3 IIS* |S?i c - o«= 5 2 "m « cr £if e « I s fe l§‘°“a0.0 ?2r* r* «- ** o 22 o ® 6 -O § ^ - - S-Qw w ® m o a> •° E S en (« 2c" «B -O 0» §65? 3 “ -D a SS,JE2| l=* «ll«a a'~ ®O o « ^ 2 5> -o W >5 I ® r. > «* I o 15S' is i» III s s 2® g ® III Ia32>. w ^ « C % °llis 21- , 2 o « = S5 “ Q. « "5 J. ® ® o y ® © 2 ^ ESS I- ® o ^|o *" ® *- S52s 1°£ >* c u © ® oiS I ^li E © >< Q V tfi uj 0 5w jf ":S =cc< s-S oi .SSI'Stm I < £izO toS 2L o 3 c © -5 c© . u g 1= ® P 55^ g=* c 8 M a£ M O illt 5^ S" III I O>• P 141 f-s'sf® 2 5 © » • *” ■O m . tf) 15 P® £ " • 5 w. 2 S 2 “• © ©o. c O 1IIL" ■C ©- - - •o CO lll!| ilsil *1 -3 Q d 5 * • 3 ® c X! ||S •w * si 2= :;■*II5 *2 Ss s s S5 y o © —C3 I II (/) 3 ifs « ll ol S| 3 ^ oZ >. S|d8 S,2L « jr jc ®!O « _ >«*r o |s|s fslIsIlsSissI ^Sl>.S‘=?5ji^^sisss = 1 ilr - -o Eo." iil?lfll||l « ofs^ii fsisl Is ’■S55 ^ ^ P - ® co=i?1*1^ c ?l;sol£|* Ifill l||?l l=!|fnm £^2 ^*|il|||lfi|l lll-l *llfllli§lf l?h © • £ .• s 3: |2£ |5S=,1$ E Em iisi II = • 2 © © iim ?S|.3!« I g J © « 1 5 i I i T '.•. -ym . .* .■* ‘t • ■ • • ■* . ' » ij« s oc c >.3 lioz u> o in o m « in «o CO lo o o SS2§ . ri CO (b in ^ T- ^ cn c o f ■si.S Sf s ?ii|® 9 3 “ ::-6 2^ i O 3 3 Oy, 1:fl^l i o gSiiegg V ^ ?« 3 3 ^ E w i? w B ? Jr 0^ o> Q. e X ^I2I5 ® o i‘=ii flili s 3 0 su. S M j£ I O SS555 |S888g CM 5. 5li|«E as So. ■C re - IQ C/5 Qi p ^ c .y ® S ^ O' x: i= S. o E J e E ■w<s 3 S ^ ii It ts^ Q. O « ™ •“ '30) C iS >1. o o> ® E ^ 5 • S “•(/> Us ol I iSS tf)(C M V S.3 re ■§ 3 O O ^ ^ I S ^|iia||. « aSa.. re |5i S o ■53 o >« C oi-t 2 2^ E « 2 o c C ^ re « t3 ?li CC-j : 15^ 51 f I £ 3 - s »S®*S e “s ESSS hSS^Si l|til*ll5 2 g iifl^ a '£ E Pll 6e §" S3 . ^ 0) o 8 s s Sf & « o 3 CJ 5 - Eo ,0 re o. $u£.Ecs>aSEre I ^ ® ■5 S 3re U « 3a. scn S ren W U - ^ « .S' « Q. 5 ^ 5 £1 - c »!=1= g « gl=c s2S®|ns'i iissiiSos? sasSo. _, 00 wre ■ T> (f) -?a!SZ !^5 isitif 1a5 - Q. U m ® - '30, C 2 ^ 01 O) 2 E -o 1 |S0.y) 111liii 3 « “-C/5 Sjlls*55 2*-o ^*5 5 2*^ 2 .f S u ^ ^ o D •«i| re CQ E ssl °»5 11$ Ul £ Si E ii £ ifl . cc g C iii§ 38&a ^E|58o« K .0 re< _ 2 re O > if s 2 If? Mlm 3 uj _ I ■Ch = (50 E £ o c re»>.c O re re E E £ O <0 w 31 ifs s li Pf|lf Hi cji£ I s £ i re re I o— o res o 1Ss £ o E $ lit CB re § re o> ® jC o>^ r 2^0 II cS ’llIils4w t: 5 S. o ^re " E®ig| © £ £ — "O ™ ~ ?S it? 1 is 1 e £& = !i »ssE ? c se ?£® » ^ u „ » ° °- sll|sll%s I 8. I a £ II ® gS"®^re E 2f-gg -£ ? "SfSfIII SE ®?2g|g .© m: o « a. ill l|||^5 oi. 5 S. I 5|si||| • I • S’ T 3 ulhs.5 E • o I « ?| « re *5|!|{| re o| §€ I “si !'|:iII 8 I S ^"5UiV a, — re ■ .Q C/5 £ Si " ix|52 liilli S|illK 8. U E ) Si| |i?| = £ o- ®il| = Sl“ s ? ?i! . S.* nil !11*3 u U f ■ Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members From: Date: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator June 8, 1990 Subject: Afternoon Tour of Big Island Veteran Camp Facility Alan Wisdorf has invited the Planning Commission and Council to a site tour and luncheon for Wednesday, June 27, 1990 at 12:00 p.m. The Camp is in possession of a new pontoon boat. Mr. Wisdorf promises a safe trip to the Island for all. In case of rain we would schedule the inspection tour for the very next day on Thursday, the 28th. Please let Jeanne Mabusth (473-7357) know if you wish to attend by a deadline date of Wednesday, June 20, 1990. It is staff's understanding that the pontoon will pick members up at the Excelsior public dock and that box lunches with cold drinks will be furnished. Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Michael Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Lyle Oman, Senior Building Inspector Bruce Vang, Field Inspector John Gerhardson, Public Works Director s..* Jki LIST OF LICENSES FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL FOR MEETING OF June 25, 1990 COUNCIL MEETING J'JN 2 51990 i'lTY OF ORONO There are no licenses. : i 1 i ^t 62290.2 TO:Mayor and City Council /^ COUHCIL MEETIHQ FROM:Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator V DATE: A June 22, 1990 JUN25I990 SUBJECT:License - Al Penke I'm OF OROHO Attachments; A. Penke Letter Dated 6/19/90 ISSUE - B. Overton Letter Dated 6/19/90 C. Petition Determine if Council desires to issue a license to Al Penke; A.) Location at 3455 Shoreline as indicated on Attachment B B.) Allow an alternate location at 3600-02 Shoreline INTRODUCTION - At the Council’s June 11, 1990 meeting they tabled consideration of the license pending a safe location satisfactory to the Police Chief be established. DISCUSSION - The location noted on Attachment B is agreeable to the Chief at this time. (An alternative safe location would be the row of parking immediately adjacent to the buildings.) He previously indicated the location at 3600-02 Shoreline, as indicated, was safe. As noted in Attachment A they would like approval of both locations although they would only use one location at a time. Attachment C represents petition they have had signed supporting their business. RECOMxMENDATION - Given the location, it is recommended a license be issued based on the following criteria; A. Use of only one location and one vehicle «t a time with both locations approved. (At 3455 the truck should either be at the location shown on the letter or in the row of parking abutting the building.) B. Valid for 60 days. C. The City reserves the right to review the license during the period if experience indicates unanticipated safety problems. D. The license is not valid at a particular location should the owner revoke permission. E. Any sicnage must be in accordance with City regulations. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that a transient merchants license be issued to Al Penke based on meeting staff's recommended criteria as stated above. Ayes _, Nays _. cc: Chief Kilbo Al Penke, Route 2, Box 223, Cokato, MN 55321 ' "*V“*r* '•; ■ ' '• •, ! • • ' ' * 4 «/v- »r .- . - ^ 1 . ;• ■• •>•• ••• ; ■ - ■ V.- • r. -; • .* ;• ♦ • - •;• . . ' ■■ .'•■• ,<W'■.I'-. .. i.’if'ii'ifn *iTi i'*i'''i ‘ S "’’•''T • —n.« /) A ---- , flrrna^^T- r - ■ /, . ; • ■ “TS; “PTiaujcn Xid Courdl ■f^nv. /Q>xUJUN 2 1 iQ(V) ftre; da^fu 1990 jb^fcv. Cme Su “2a idham M: ymau eans£M^j CL£ifiAjCXJ(^duCiA<7yU) Ml ajoLdMMi J/u Q0iAj^a^namonm Jccatdm.SAiCO -09. UhouU^ Mv ca ^ tde. Mfo/’ti sthJt aJMA^KOjte „i2otL OjJcuUoMe ^CL ^ack-af, ^ U sdoJytcL J2jMeA JjPi::aJuan 2)ouii ’^- ■^h Ji^caZumaJme CJu^/dcidChl apfmo^ii). Z(Jc Jlo^ Co<jM.dS-M'MLtk^a'Kci^ Ox PoJ^ -w ^:._ . > -y.: • v'^V !!* : -» » ,;•*•*•• “ • ■• Sr* '•*•. V •••■••• v’ ■ »•..>...♦•■; June 19, 1990 Dear Al, The purpose of this letter is to verify, in writing, our contingent approval of your renting one parking property locat-d at 3455 Shoreline Drive. The specific parking space is in front of Down East Craftsman half way between the building and the street. I understand that you will be selling flowers at that location. The rental agreement is contingent upon the existing leasees at our property not objecting reqarding this arrangement. As we have discussed, if I receive any complaints from our current tenants I will have to terainate ou^ agrLment immediately. Please make the $50.00 payment for each 30 calendar days payable to: Overson Properties 17211 14th Ave. N. Plymouth, MN 55447 Sincerely, John B. Overson Property Manager 17211 14th Ave. N. Plymouth, MN 55447 ,^ ^ / T 1 ''■X~r ! 1 V# -t u IV \v>'' \ -V - v^ V-* -'..- ^ , •:.• *■;.*^ . : ••.r jrv ‘. • ••■•.* •• ..■ ■-■•••* ^••. r •- • V-* . *• . . - ■ • *♦-*>* '*-• . •♦ •••*'•'*^ . .. -5 >•' . U)e uooae^L M/^ ck> Aiie. ^ e/7yiZt/naJLy jto .yCXJU? at J ^f'^tKyMenfr Cl ... hcoLt/ffn^ ' lr\ naoatne/ A/AhAE /.Cailos C.»;i5£U01_ 2. Rvalp^<^ ^.r-Mhb /l^lKilA ^.R'\an '^ohnSeO >,jp ft\u C)6^T 7- 7. V- krt S2-"^»''ittLs\4e. ^<U/^ CT>cy*:>\o^l S-hrfuce, Of', i 7^1 c ^ui^( r\i I m.JI Sf. c-scf. /^y C^f-lMK-^ 7/it'^'AA ire r < v«w vf :c/; 6n^tif 6TV0 ***#s*.i « I *• vf'V"'* : . ' V* ^•‘ . ■. V*.v' ^ ^ ’ / *-i ' '“ ■ .:._•• '•: ■ v-v-r- ;•■?• •r.v ; v.,.....-- ., ^.v•:......... •■ /^A(nt /QpDjef ss '.r •■ .*■".■ * ; • ■ !,;.; • V* ;• Vt>p. *S^tr4J^a:^ d\o ’^ '90fen \^KCtL^\o^:- :-^ Ji'M 432 3 <:knrV S^;n^p^flk 3c>. .i{f>iU 'Z Tc ?. r4'. K ^v^< Z^C Scy^ > 1^ tb/’ 7^ ' . .♦ , ^ . '>/' ’^.CJau^Io^^ “^/fi-LOiA ) s>^Uc V -:^ 7<r 5o!{6 cc^hi/n^i^ ^• (c> vi^r) .i V1 V^t*'i'.. *■ * ? ‘ • -r,*' , . • •*4 . *• -V •■. ■• • > V ^ ■-. •• ••. :"■ ; '•■ \ , ■ • • "’V • • . : ‘ . . : . . . ■ - ‘ . . ' ■ • . .’ ■. •' ' •-•w-. ..4 ... .«■ --..... . •■ ... . . , ... ■-■ .■... ' v . I fnHresitoL ^kjCto uf Crt e/^rcno — : Oi'^ Ccundi! /Tleefiy^ lues. iTuly^^ 7y:>m 7T lcl ^ ^5, mo , LOjL M.>0.fvt Jlii ~7f^S T^OSS /77/!/^ II . A/AM£/40£>KE.SS ^33o K) Sl^cre X>r A9<?V^^? c2^<^ i/il /fy/j 3/^ . Wj\jaCrr->A , ‘ //, X ) yi. .c^^.'.s--. «3MCOCEtV:i£)-V!d\M (l Z2/ lYJau^cL J 7nf4 /c>5^ pji^Sh Ave/ /Kcy^r^J^ . 0P£n-iQit..6(Mims. ..im.. ~) /V/IM£ Oju^, I3i^'f^kr^ 4dcL. J2,, ;ff&i>^(2</4/y>“»>- .. /V. uL^ n.. ^jly4^ /f-. Sxp Itt .3S:^^£ukc^ AhDPfiS^ HSZO Shmli^hjo ?T}$ xrt^£no^M. bfe. jS s ^■^OP s>^i:S’,^^^f^./nour^^ ' lOfl/S pCYf^dC^^ p^L,jtp/L ff/*^^/97^'^ ^ndee^ LpLn^ cva/5^-1 /ft/c, 5/^A\j? fK Lk ). I ? A<y ynei^w^......... /^cA- I fS ''^■f' ■ ^ '''* <*’ ' ----- ;54DB ^ynwcSCJcS blwcit Dc /AC^OOO^ .f J"'-- '■ ‘ *•' ;.::v )I -••1 •.. - .. . . .•• ;r:V-V ^ ■ • .*■ . “• •. • •: .■ • i"-. •. , •. I .j a;- : Ob/10/90 PR: CB PRREGOR NAME ABRAHAMSON. FREDERIC ANDERSON. BRUCE L BERNHARDSON. MARK E BERNHARDSON. MARK E BOBZIEN. SUE A BOSMA. JAMIE L BOWMAN. ERIK A BRAUN, ROBERT R BRINKHAUS. JOHN F CHESWICK. GARY B CHRISTIANSON. SALLY CORNICK. JAMES L DEMBOUSKI, JAY C DENNISON. TROY A ENGLISH III. IRVING ERICKSON. KURT R FISCHENICH. DAN T FRITZLER. JOHN M GAFFRON. MICHAEL P GERHARDSON. JOHN R GREGORY. JAMES D HALLIN, DOROTHY M HANSEN. STEVEN C HANSING. CAROL J JOHNSON. BRADLEY P JOSTROM. FOREST J KARNITZ. RICKY D KILBO. MELVIN H KNUTSON. CHARLOTTE A KUEHN. THOMAS M LINDSTROM. DAVID J MABUSTH. JEANNE A MILLS JR. WALTER H MORAN. MARK F MOROWCZYNSKI. JAMES NAAB. THERESA L NELSON. DAVID D OAS. DANIEL 0 OBRIEN. RANDY L OMAN. LYLE E PALMER. GREGORY A OUAST. WAYNE A RATHBUN. BARRY J SASS. JOHN J SKREEN. DALE S STEVENS. BETTY G THOMTON. MARK R TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE TOMCZYK, MARK W VANG. BRUCE L VEE. LINDA S WALSH. KEVIN L WALTERS. LINDA Q YEAGER. DONALD C YTD CURRENT DPT GROSS GROSS ; 93 577.14 118.75 31 19670.58 1572.53 12 24971.62 450.00 12 27393.93 2422.31 31 11294.98 921.84 12 7258.46 518.91 61 336.00 336.00 93 239.89 73.63 42 17391.67 1391.12 31 17863.73 1468.00 31 2643.08 219.12 31 18339.6?1338.16 31 4609.63 1047.35 35 234.60 20.40 31 20954 77 1873 42 31 17185.87 1364.16 31 16188.03 1299.20 31 17867.62 1396.16 33 16038.93 1338.72 42 21095.89 1760 80 42 16113.33 1746 28 12 13815.28 1153 11 42 13201 72 1314 08 31 6303.96 545 58 31 17944 72 1428.12 93 351.50 194.75 31 2309 65 517.64 31 23535 04 1964 40 ^ 15 11032 81 910 31 15 22414.23 1870 88 93 204.25 61.75 33 20085.52 1676 49 93 325.00 192.50 31 16247 95 1337.28 31 20561.29 1632.73 12 11174 00 921.84 35 336 60 51.00 93 750 76 178 50 92 12381 47 1458 38 33 14107.82 1271 77 42 1458 90 1040 58 92 16138 27 1179 28 92 12800 59 1075 28 42 12620.07 1022 01 42 12901.24 1268 47 > 93 13833.51 1154 64 93 1012.00 233 75 31 16778 85 1376 63 • 31 17685 52 1455 25 3!16797 09 1364 16 33 12344 93 1095 51 12 2742 60 783 60 35 2617 03 222 34 15 10513 04 867 83 93 792 77 86 63 55.583 93 COUNCIL MEETWrc JUN 2 5f990 mOF€f#n • • ■ •«,. ■ . # .* . 6 • SC • V. V*'., ' .r-'.'V.. c o UJa<OL U> CSI <D O >2 ^ •H at ouiXu at in oo <oo oo oo Ik oo oa:o. oc< I I I I I I I I I ) I • • 0»0»0)0)0»0»0>C7>0>««0>0> roroir>in<o<ocD(Mrsif>»r»^^ ooooooo-H-^^-^t\jrvj I I I I I I I I • I • i •ooooooooooooo IMrMfMPMIMOJIMfMIMfMCMfMfM I I I I I I I I I ) I • • OOOOOOOOOOOOO lU UJ UJ UJ UJ Ui Ui Ui Ui Ui Ui Ui UJ a.a.a.CLQ.a.a.a.o.o.a.a.Q. a.a.aLCkQLO.Q.a.a.Q.a.Q.a. _j (/)(/)(/)(/> in (/) u) in (/) in (/>(/) </) HJliitklUJUJUJLiJUMlJllJUil'JUJoooooooouoooo U.U.U.I1.U.U.U.U.U.U.U.U.U. lkU.ll.li.U.U.U.U.U.U.U.U.11.ooooooooooooo <<<<<<<<<<<<< OOOOOOOOOOOOO !■ I 1. I !■ I !■ I !■ I !■ I 111 ll 1 111 llJ LlJ LlJ LUzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzI I I I I I I I I I I I IOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOUOOOOOOUOOO Nnn at at at I I • at at at lOfOiO m m in I I I fNlfMCsl ro CO ro IMMfM <<< I I Icor»r>h.r*r*. zzz UUO to u to u to u in o (Mn ~tr\t <o< I I O O) 0)< CSItM I I—»n coco CM CM << I I -H-^coco coco 0)0) I I I I I I at at at at o o atatestrjatat 00-4 •Hinm I I • I I I CO CO CO CO CO CO CM CM c«j eg <N CM I I I I I I OOOOC-C* UJzo X CL UJ —I UI t-Z UlO UJH* H-tO •-0 o;<<o OLOf OOin c BBBB oc oc ujOOOOui I—IQ.<oooo<CL u. u. u. u Q- I I • I H-OOOOI- ooo»-H i-m-H OC OC K U- UJ Xo i/ ^ i <-fcr zz oooooo H- H ►- OOO UJ UJ UJ u ootow ocec uuuuuu aeocoeatatae _l _J ^1-4 UIUI Ui UJ UJ UJ UJ UJ a.o.a.Q.Q.OLUJ UJ UJ £m oo QCOCOC oo i ZZ<<<<<<<< Q. (X a. Q. Q. Q. <<< UUA*A »-to UI Ll U.Ill 111 111 111 UI UJ IXIXIX.4 ►4 _)_J uooooo J o cc at <<<<<< _i «J _i h-o <<a. a. 0.0.0.0. <<<<<UIUJ <<<<<< o ooooooooooooo at Oi O' o) at at at o> at at at at at at o ooooooooooooo CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM IP IP IP (p lO (P IP IP IP CP CO IP CP O OOOOOOOOOOOOO in «p «o «o <o «> (o IP CP CP CP CP CP CP O OOOOOOOOOOOOO O OOOOOOOOOOOOO CP CP CP CP CP CP CP IP CP IP CP CP CP CP ooo CP CP CP c*> O CP o)cncnenoo CP IP oooooo«* ^ oooooo IP IP IP CP CO CP tn o oo 00 1 I -M»H m in CP IP I I CDO» ooicoo<< I I > I HO- z$ O I C-ll-l {ft I-IZoo 1-4 I- to -JUI=>o tn I zo. ox out tow UiUI l-l- << 1-4 l-M 88 {/tinww<< •6*9 zz oca: oDtn «««m «« 1 m iOiO oocMc«eo<cO'4CMaor^<Or-'ie< r»4»-4cocM-40<inco —i-Hcoao oooo coco CP CD CD CO CM CM CM CM <MOOOOCM^inino eo«co 183183-4«pcn-4-4CM ince-4 0ia>-4<p CM -4 CM-4 CO CD O) CM CM IP CO CO CO CO CO <<coco in in •HI O O o> ro n o p) O) cvMD (D coevj^ fSI -40CM 0-4-4 <<o» CD CD ooo o o oo O O O O O C.0 OO at o>o) at at at at at at at 0»0»\-V ■v.>. ooo o o oo OOOOOO OO <Nj r>j <Ni CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM Vu 'M. M. V. M.. ^s.'v'M iO to iO IP <D CP IP CP Ip CP IP CP IP IP CP ooo o O oo OOOOOO oo oo CD IP UJo UJ <a c/> < to O l UJZ O 4» O) 00o toid CJ too z3 Ouu< >H o in in N «imn (M ^Vh^OCOOOOOWOOOOOOOt • I I I I I I I I I I I OOOoor^r~.n«TtDf^r^o> OO^oronnrororonto I I I I I I I I I I I I ^inintnininioiDioiominoooooooooooo rororococorororooococoro I I I I ) I I I I I I I •H>^>4<9(0(o<o<o<om(oro OOOrgrsifM<M(MfM(M(Nr~ o> <NJ rororo I I I •4(0 0) f\J (N f\l ; I I mmin^« ^ ^ I I I —Iooo o-« 0 ro oo> O CMo-« 1 I -to «D-^ rviCM »^h-h~rO •-t —< -H O) I I I I o> o> o> o oroojo) ooom I I I I CO CO ro CO CO ro ro CO OOOi^ Z UJ QCI-O-II-I o -q :q :q £ <0.0.0. O' —I t-H l-H »-l 00 _J uj>-»-»-ujroo:Q£Q:ujujJ- Z-J_J-J3«kO.O.O.h-3_l ►-•333 <<< • I 3 <0000001—3 I I I aeoeto H-z z Z (O 3 ►-1-1-o. o. z uj OOOujuju OU<<0 QCU(JO*-3uJUJUJ u I O.O.O.O.Q. OO<3OpOt0t0<0t0(0C>zzzzzzzzzzzz UJUJUJIiJlvUJ>-l>-I^Ht-tt-<UJ to (/>(/> ZZZ *-<»-« l-H O.Z Ouj UO£ ococaro: UJ UJ UJ UJzzzz u. u. U.U.oooo 00 00 00 00 ozacKo; ujujujuj J-!-►-►- <<<< 3333 oe UJ o UJoe zo Xo zzzzzzr^zzzzz(n(/)(/)(/)(0(Ou'iV)(/)toio(o o;O z UJ> UJUJUJUJUJUJUJctJU. UJ iaJUJzzzzzzzzr^zz UJ UJ Ul UJ UJ UJ UJ UJ U. UJ l,tJ UJ COtOIOtOtOlOtOIOtOCOt'U''ooooooooooooa:a:ococa:a:oeaeotxocot 838888888888 OOOOOOOOOOOOIOOOOOOOOOOO I» I ^jJ QJ IjJ I i Izzzzzzzzzzzzoooooooooooo CD 00 GO 00 GO 00 00 00 00 QC 00 00 o ooo ►-ooo Xo o to to toz•8 z ZZZ S2 ►H H-1 ►-*►-« »-l oozIOozz C/1 00 z UJUJtkl 33 t-z UJ U.U.U.z -1 3 >l-l 1—11—I q :q £ 0.0.l-H CD a.333 K 3 Q.3 < 3 333 ao.ZZZZ Ui o <<<33 <<<< H-Z >-«u ►-4 3 »-<03 oooo UJ >ZZZ 3333 o Q.>-<ooo >>-3333 o <I-o 3 3. J Q.Q.33 33 3 X ►-<o ooo oo 3333 CO o o u 01*0 oo oooo H-z 3 < «««««««« OOOOiDooroooooooon OO OO OO mm Ofsir^O)mom OOOOO 0000<a><siC4(otn30eo mm oo mm <09 •H— 0<<ooaetnr)eo<<t03(u<oooo mm oo -HOJ •010 3 o>oo»<om in3(Moooor>i>-in(Din«ein OO CMfsj <<mm O)r>o<cnmcn ^ 3Ca<3{SJ«»fM33C» <«•csjrj •3« ^r>cn -4 <rsMO <o oooooooooooo OIO>OICJ>^0>OIO>OIO)dOI oooooooooooo rjrNirj(M(Ni(M<Nj<Mfsi<Njrsjcj o o o o OOO oo oooo o>o»o>o CF> Cfl o>o>O) O O (7>\\ \ ■v.*v. w». o o o O ooo oo OOOO rj CM CM CM CM CM CM cgru CM CM CM CM V.V.^ \ <o u>o CD CD CD (D OOO to to CD CD CD CD O O oo OOOO oooooooooooo O iO iO to to to to to to to to to ooo (—) O (—1 rj rj oooo •n tn in in r' o tuo<a. o o» tuo<(/) UJ (/> VCo to 5*:u (/> O to o w iCu to >c;o in CM CDo o o. m >z <«o -4-4 CO CMNM CMCMCMCO^mCOCMin -4 m 1-4 o>o •H CO CO OI III <—C-4—4-4-4—4n^CO CO ee 00 at CO 0)0 III O) O) o>c9oa>a)Oo>c7)ccra)in O)r*.odOSoCOCMCMO)CO CO CO cococo4fincof>*4»<7>CM CO CM z in at o A -4-4in oil ooo 000000-4CM CM -4 o »-1 in 1o 1 III ^ »4 »4 ooo (3 (3 C30 CD (313 0 (3 CO •4 o z •>1 CM fO in in in in CO oo 3 oo CD CM -4 -H -4 CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO in COoof <0 4f o 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 o «9 m ^ ^o-4| »H ^ ^ «-l O-H ^-4 CO<o OOf^ooo ooooooooo o CM o oeui I-(/) ►H O UJ DC O UJ Xo oto UJa T. UI oe UI UIeo UI 3 O ►-z M o 03 to to to zzz CM ''vcn CO • O eoQc-J CMt— Q >.uiO ino:< OOO u o 333zQoeoeoeoH4Qoooh-1— I— o zzzoUJ4-4I-4I-4 l-l-l- a o zzzzOXXIXXX 1-4 1-z l-l-l-UIUIUIoc(/)l-H -133 oeoeoe O <3 <<<►41-4 *-4 o CD oe o UI UI 3 l-H-l- z 1—o XXI UJUJUI UJ X Q oeoeoe>u »-2 0.0.0. ►H oe cnoe UJ 333 OOO X 1-4 «l ceaeoe uuu UI U.o OOO z zzzzzz >-l H4 l-0-( •-« M IuJUj IIIII^zzxxxzxzzzxooooooooo zzzzzzzzzxzxxrxzxx cototototototococoxxxxxxxxx •-C »-l »-l l-H I-* ►-C »-C l-< z X>-o. a ~t h- UiX 3t UI X az oe O CO>- UIne oo z X u O UI 3 O< UJ ««««««« « « OO oo mm cnoo-4CM CM-4 CM in oooooooooo C*)M OO oo mm mm 00 00 cooo<w mo-4 ID oooooooooo 0)0)oo oo corn o m -4 ID C»0)-4 0»oooooommoo CD ID oo oo oo •H ^ coro C'JCM cocn C--4-4 0) in CO (MO -4 at cow -4 ^^•Hf^<J)f*^OCMC0Om -4-4 CM CMoo -4 3 -4-4 o o CDCU o o o OOO ooo O)o>«o) o> cn O) o> CJ> •N.\ \ o o o ooo ooo CM CM CM rsi(M<M fMCMCNJ UI \V,''s* \ 1-CD CD ID i0i0\0<o o O ooo ooo ocooooooo OI Oi 0> OI 0> 0> 0> 0> ooooooooo CMCMCMCMCMCMCMfMCM CO CO CO CO CO CO CO cO cO OOOOOOOOO o CM oo» u •CM €€0 «w c mmm «ooou€o «IM m in «K.€coroenoUI«Csl «CM m CM «fMCsKM €CO com at X «U>«<o «ID «muMO «fOiOtO at u «€«r-.m rs* fs.«f*. -4 «««•4 m ^« ro r>'I o CO CO ro r» r» « coo'^nronncnn « CO CO iO CO CD CO CO CO CO « r» ^ r>> r«-« >4 -4 ^ < « r> CO l; . eeatn UJ O z a UJoe u UJ X o 3o oo (/) u (/)JCu CM rsiin-^ror*j c»> CO oo ^r>o>o CMn ft n 1 ^<\4^^^IMCMCMCMCn ro9<o0>0>0>0>(J>o>o> 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I • 1 5 CM 1 1 1 1 1 o> ^ o> OiOCMr^^ 00*^^^4 1 o o o 1 1 1 1 o> o> o o O^mm CM cn •>4• cno>O0>0>0>o>o>0>o CM4r0>«C^(0<0'0(00> -4CMCM»nir>inij^»n«J'u'* 1 1 1 1 1 1 > I 1 1 1 CM C*> CM«» 1 1 f • 1^ inmininm 4306-1 CM 00 CM 1 1 1 1 CNJCgCMCM CO ro CO fo n •-4341CMCMCMCM^-^fJCMOCM ocncoococMoo^o CMCMCMCMCMCM.MlMCOfM ^ 4» ^ 4* « « ^ « 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 O 1 1 1 1 « ooooo -TO73-^-^fMCO oo^•^^ -4 O TO«-4-H»4f>JCMf»C-)COO^ VU/U/ii/iiAzzzzz t-a i-i»-) t-t 1-4 33333 UJ UJ Ul UJ UJ OfCCKaea: <<<<< OCJOOO <<<<< UJ Ul UJ UJ UJ IXIIX occcoexec ooooo ooooo Ul Ul UJ UJ UJrzzzz Q.(/> Z (/)(/)(/!(/> UJUIU.UJ |-I»-II-IIM _I-J-I-J t-ai-iMM o p» (/)(/)(/>(/)(/)(/)</> OitA UJ ul ul UJ ul UJ UJ ujuJ •-4 |-« t-< •~l»H a.a a.a.a.a.a. a.o.a.a.a.a.Q.a.a.»-a.a. Uloooooootcoo zzzzzzz<zz UIUIUIUJUIUIUIUIUIUI OOOOooao OOOO UIUIUIUIzzzzzzzz zzzz 0300000300a-ocaeocKafacKoeac zzzzzzzzzz ««««««« oo iDiO oooooo (0(0 (00(0 a0 oooo mm coco eocnr^oco o>r^r^^O mm CM CM «D<D com i>>.r«.in(Meoeeo>(00>^ l^OCMeOkr>Ol'^0>(0^«' 1 oo 00 0»0>(J»(MO-4 O O O (M C^‘ 1^ oo •* ^mm ooooi^m^ io iO com corn «»CM (M (O <0 oo 0) CM OtC» -4CM-4 CM *4f»-(0«D *-4 ^ ^ O O C*4 CO W w i-Z 3 oo COCO ozo oe Ul O »- < u. O ooooo O) oi o> o> o> ooooo <D lO (O U7 OOOOO O (N o OOOO o o o»CF> D) O O at o o OOOO o O CM IMCMCsICM C^t CM V, CD CDCDOCD CO to O OOOO o O OOOOOOOOOO 0>0><J>0I0>0>0»0>W0> OOOOOOOOOO rsif>J(Mf'4<M<Mfsi<MfMCM <040«0«0(0<J3tD«J3<0«0OOOOOOOOOO lO (O 10 10 10 (0 (0 0000 01 CFI 01 oooocoasoeeoooauteaD <O<Oa0l0«0>0«0(0*OiO o Ulo<a. o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O) O) o in rsi fM (P (Oo o o ooo oo o o o o o oo o o o o oo o o o o o orsi <a z3ae uj oe A < _j 1j ^ < 3 ►-I-) O oe U ui Oz z a. < O UJz cn oe Ui H"<O z3oe UJ >—a < UJ a 3 h- Q Ks s U Ul (/) QC <Q z Ul t-U)>-tn o o < ae Ul o -J (/I Ul UJ uo> Ul ae <O O. 3 3 W I I <V I- »- Ul Ul u > Ul U4z •- U <Ul 03 ae Ul Ul u- o CO z Ul <o -< Ul < ae m ^ -jo < Ul Ul z oe O H- z Ulz U Ul Ul u- z 2 CO (/) Ul UJ O 3z z < Ul -J > < UJ 00 a: o o o zUl toz •- Ul Ul I- UJ< z u to to Oz I- a: Q. < O OL Ul Ul O U. U Ul > Uj OUl oe U o- to M H- C)z z3 Oo o U UJ o oe < u. u O Ui z U- o oe< S i (Oo oUl 8 SUl oe a: U Ula. CO OUl oe I- O < oO Uloe Ou u- Ul oe O < O u to Ulz Ulo O) ro O o oe O O Z Q. O Ui ae oe O O u. Z O Ul I- >• Z I- 3 *-«O O UO O < 0> to to lO I- Ui Ooe I- oeO < O a O u Ul a. Uloe 3 oe u u u 0 O O oe oe ae Ul ui Ul1 i I3 3 3z z z Ui Ul > > Ul Ul Ul Ul > >UJ Ul Ul> > > Ul Ul Ul <>-o oo to 3 r u.nc.t mi COUNCIL MEETING JUN 2 5 1990 CITY OF ORONO >'. WEST HENNEPIN HUMAN SEHA^H^ES PLANNINC; BOARD Infcu > , YOL ARK CORDIALLY INVI I KI) WW 1 4 1990 TO JOIN L:S for OCR SUMMER CELEBRATI " N AM) ANNUAL MEETING. • I'ucsday, June 26, 1990 French Regional Park Plymouth, MN (Please see other side for map) • 6:15 p.ra. Social Hour V*Jt ■ r. V 4 -S'- t / - i 5 «>n ~i <^;lpTi5r:^:55i^-5r,- “ ■ ^ ' hnd a very brie *“■ a l4iSV V..t> .» iA^.;r M >V ' r^- :' iCt.* r.<i*'tk Ah S«SES5®S'J r VYHIUM k ‘ ^ >. if- “ > v" - r‘f ;'-V>'.. . . „. \^-';''^EIm.Creek_ ........ .. ....V >i#iS ^pspi tiokA.cquNTYi Coon Rapids Dam Regional Park mSMSM ■Vc\. \ ■ ■ v;A-.;>r;TiVi- .->•. i-.' •i^. r. mmm§^ i|® t mm^m isiiHHi®i si]a ANNUAL MEETING Please return by June 21, 1990 Name Address Phone # Attending The menu will include: Walleye, Wild Rice Salad, Fry Bread, Blueberry Wojapi, Iced Peppermint Tea The cost will be S 11.00 per person Amount enclosed S__________ Please return top portion to: West Hennepin Human Ser\dces 4100 Vernon Ave South St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416 --------------------------------------------Please detach Please cut out permit below and place it on your dash to receive free parking for the picnic. -mjv mrL» mj-.» «ltlm ■=-" tUT-S ■=---= riTj: —=---= =---= =-~— Z." . permit for use of - CLIFTON E FRENCH REGIONAL PORK______ area in park to be used FPFQMOl________________0AKWO,OI) R.QQM- lelephone (000)920—553 3 ________|____________ 6/2 6/90 - 6/26/90 tune arrive __6 ; 00 PM time depart 9:00 PM number in party purpose of visit ANNUAL MEETING fee __________S12 5.00 PAID condition/equipment ?’jE T-UP 5:30-6:00 ------------------------------- COMMENTS: DATLY PAPKTNO FFF IS INAfVCD S1QQ DAMAOF OEP-PFCUD 6/7 COPY PFPMTT FOR ALL VEHICLES COULD BE UP TO 60 CARS N/GROUP NON-PROEIT GROUP_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ LH/BGF BEV/TERPY/t TNDA DATE: 06/07/90 This permit must be earned while m the park and made available to park personnel upon reouest. Reservation fees are not refundable if cancellation is made m less than M days prior to use date ispeciat relunds for weddmgs/buildingsi. A cancellation lee will be assessed VIOLATIONS OF PARK ORDINANCES ARE MISDEAMEANORS AND CAN RESULT IN REVOCATION OF PERMIT OR ARREST PERMIT HOLDER RESPONSIBLE FOR ORDINANCE VIOLATIONS AND DAMAGE TO PARK PROPFRTY (COPY OF COMMON PARK RULES INCLUDED ORDINANCES AVAILABLE ON REQUEST) SE.. I'm s 1990 association of>sociaTion c metropolitan municipalities June 4, 1990 Dear Chief Administrative Official: I NEED YOUR HELP NOW! 'The AMM must become more proactive, more collaborative, more focused and more assertive. The AMM provides the only roeaninaful vehicle for the cities of the metropolitan area to express in a united voice this important perspective of local government.' The 2d)ove quote, perhaps more than any other statement, capsulizes the major conclusior of the 12 member AMM Mission and Membership Services Task Fu * v v-.h just completed a year long evaluation and assesment Df the A^l. *' rsion, focus and general operations. The Task Force, in its fina. report, concluded that the AMM has been a very effective 'voice' and provides many benefits for the cities in the 7- county metropolitan area. However, the Task Force feels that we (The AMM) are at a crossroads and must not rest on our laurels as the problems and challenges facing us in the 90's are likely to be even more complex and difficult than the problems of the last decade. The enclosed Task Force report contains a 'blueprint for action' which if implemented should enable the AMM to remain a reliable and relevant tool for member cities as we enter the 90's. The bottom line, however, is that to follow this 'blueprint' we must hire an additional staff member which could result in a dues increase of 20 to 25%. The current three member staff does an outstanding job but the work load has increased so dramatically in recent years that to maintain current programs and increase our effectiveness at the Legislature and to become more proactive at the metropolitan level as recommended in the report, an additional staff member is mandatory. The Board would like to implement the Task Force recommendations and have the additional person on board by early 1991 but will not do so unless there is strong membership support for such action. Here is how your help is needed as asked for in the opening sentence of this letter; 1. Please provide copies of this letter and report to your Mayors and Councilmembers. -1- 183 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 227-4008 2. Please place the report on your Council's Agenda for discussion and action prior to August 1, 1990. (If you would like an AMM board member to attend your council meeting when this item is discussed, please contact an AMM staff member to make the arrangements.) 3. Fi-^ase inform the AMM Office by no later than August 15th. as to whether your city supports or opposes adding a staff member and the resultant dues increase. (You will be notified as to the exact amount of such increase by no later than July 6th.) 4. Please have a representative from your city attend the special AMM Membership Meetj»' p^e-scheduled for Thursday evening, September 20th. to consid id vote on this matter. I thank you in advance for your help and thoughtful consideration of this proposal. Sincerely, LarrycBakken, President Golden Valley CounciImember -2- association of metropolitan municipalities ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIES REPORT OF THE 1990 MISSION AND MEMBERSHIP SERVICES TASK FORCE TASK FORCE MEMBERS Kevin Frazell, City Administrator, Cottage Grove, Task Force Chair Mentor ''Duke'' Addicks, Legislative Liaison, Minneapolis Bob Benke, Mayor, New Brighton Gary Jackson, City Manager, Coon Rapids James D. Prosser, City Manager, Richfield Marilyn Corcoran, Mayor, Dayton Nancy Jorgenson, CounciImember, Fridley Tom Spies, CounciImember, Bloomington Katherine Trummer, Mayor, South St. Paul Larry Bakken, CounciImember, Golden Valley Bob Long, CounciImember, St. Paul Lu Stoffel, Mayor, Hastings 183 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 227-4008 INTRODUCTION The League of Metropolitan Municipalities (LMM) was originally created in 1967, as a subsection and affiliate organization of the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC). The impetus for forming the LMM was the creation of the Metropolitan Council, and the growth in importance and power of the regional operating agen cies. It was felt that the cities of the seven-county metropolitan area needed an organization, separate from but complementary to the LMC, to interact with those agencies. In 1974, the LMM merged with the Suburban League of Municipali ties to become the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities (AMM). As the needs of AMM member cities have changed over the years, the Board of Directors has strived to keep the organization relevant. During the late 1970's and throughout the 1980's, the Association's focus has broadened from strictly "metropolitan" affairs, to protecting the interests of member cities in state wide issues with unique impacts for the metropolitan area. The most prominent recent example is the distribution of state aids to local governments. In 1984, the Association convened its first Mission and Membership Services Task Force to do an in depth study of the AMM and recommend needed changes. The major concern of that Task Force was the proliferation of splinter municipal lobbying groups within the metropolitan area. The 1984 Task Force was concerned that the AMM could lose its viability as an umbrella organization for all metro politan cities in the face of a growing number of smaller groups with differ ences of opinion on the allocation of state aid resources. The group made 13 recommendations, all of which have since been implemented, with the exception of expanding t'he staff. The final recommendation of the 1984 report was that the Mission and Membership Services review process should be revisited every five years. Fortunately, predictions of any demise of the Association were il1-founded. Since the 1984 report was issued, five additional communities (West St. Paul, South St. Paul, Arden Hills, Blaine and Shoreview) have joined AMM. The Member ship now includes 68 metropolitan cities, covering over 90 percent of the popu lation in the seven-county area. This is an all-time high for the Association. Ironically, one of the splinter groups which existed in 1984, the Municipal Caucus, has since gone out of existence after concluding that its aims and purposes were not that different from those of AMM. The meetings of this year's Mission and Membership Services Task Force, however, have taken place within the context of an increasing split between the metropo litan area and Greater Minnesota over taxation, local government aid, and other state fiscal policies. The Task Force has studied carefully how the AMM might be a more effective and united voice at the legislature on behaif of all cities in the seven-county metropolitan area. The Task Force has also considered the Association's relationship to the League of Minnesota Cities, and how it might help strengthen that organization in serving the interests of all cities throughout Minnesota. At the same time, the Task Force has not neglected the original focus of AMM, which was to monitor and work with the metropolitan agencies. Of particular - 1 - concern is the observation that as AMM has become involved in more and more statewide issues, the staff has had a very noticeable decrease in the amount of time available to be spent in the area of metropolitan affairs. The Task Force feels strongly that the AMM should not only correct its decreased activity in metropolitan oversight, but should actually become proactive in helping set the regional agenda. Richfield City Manager Jim Prosser and Golden Valley CounciImember Larry Bakken have drafted a revised "PURPOSES" Statement for incorporation in the Association bylaws. This document, attached as Appendix A, has been adopted by the Task Force as a recommended mission statement for the Association. In a nutshell, the recommended mission is well-sunmarized in the first item of that Purposes Statement: To serve as the exclusive and primary representative of the collec tive interests of a11 meTropolitan cities on metropolitan-wide and statewide issues with unique metropolitan significance. To further that goal, the Task Force has made several observations and numerous recommendations for specific actions to enhance the success and performance of the Association. Those are set forth by topical area as follows, and prefaced by brief background material. During its deliberations the Task Force received input and advice from a number of resource persons. They are listed in Appendix B. The Task Force wishes to express its gratitude for their time and counsel. - 2 - RELATIONSHIP TO THE LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES As indicated in the introduction, the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities was originally created as a subsection of the League of Minnesota Cities and remains in that status today. As such, we are the only organization entitled to an ex officio (with voting privileges) seat on the League Board of Directors. We are considered an "affiliate organization" of the League for the purposes of adopting legislative policy. The Association offices are located on the first floor of the LMC building. Cities in the seven-county metropolitan area comprise approximately 15 percent of the LMC membership, but because of their size pay about one-half of the LMC dues. The Task Force met with LHC President Millie McCloud, as well as Executive Director Don Slater. A member of the Task Force, New Brighton Mayor Bob Benke, currently serves as vice president of the League. The Task Force observations are that the League of Minnesota Cities and the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities have maintained a very positive working relationship. Despite the split in the lMC membership over local government aid policies, the AMM has never taken a ’eS'slative position in direct opposition to any adopted policy of the League. In fact, LHC lobbying staffs work cooperatively in many areas of policy agreement (such as pay equity, labor relations law and tax increment financing). Officials from Greater Minnesota have raised concerns about the j°"ship between the League and AMM. Specifically, it has been questioned whether the AMM should have the ex officio seat on the Board, and whether ^he relationship between the staffs of the two organizations has been to these concerns, as well as our own concerns about the a subsection of the League, the Task Force considered carefully whether the AMh Should be injcorporated as a separate entity. RECOMMENDATIONS means that the AMM must become more vocal and assertive on behalf of its member cities in these policy areas. At the same time, we wish to support the ef^rts « S^’^S^^^^ether its membership on divisive issues, and recommend that the LMC , effective consensus building and dispute '■esolution it to adopt policy positions that have credibility with the egislature. wl encourage AMM member city officials to become more actively n the LMC, creating a metropolitan constituency group and perspective within the LMC. 2 We recommend that the Association not be incorporated as a legal entity seoarate from the League of Minnesota Cities. We wish to be supportive of “^IMC' and to encourage AMM member city officials to become more active in the League. We feel that this goal can be best accomplished m our current status as subsection of the League. - 3 - We recommend that the AMM reject any requests that it give up the ex officio (i.e. not talcing contrary lobbying positions). We recommend that, as long as possible, the AMM offices remain in the LMC building. We feel that to move from the building would undermine much of the cooperative working relationship that exists between the staffs of the two organizations. It would also be expensive for the AMM to acquire the overhead and support services that it currently purchases from LMC. However, expansion of the AMM staff may make a move from the existing LMC building unavoidable. We recommend that the AMM Board and Membership focus rino more of the non-divisive statewide issues to the LMC for lobbying on behalf of all member cities, both metropolitan and Greater Minnesota. - 4 - LOBBYING Legislative policy adoption and lobbying have become the major focus for the Association, growing steadily over the years. When the Association was formed in 1974, it had two standing policy committees and 35 legislative policies. Today the Association has five standing committees, and the membership has adopted over 100 legislative policies for the current biennium. In addition, several ad hoc study conmittees for specialized topics (i.e. land use legisla tion, metropolitan significance rules, group homes) have been formed in the past few years. Intrusion by the legislature into local affairs has increased dramatically in recent years. At the same time, other municipal lobbying groups, most notably the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities, have aggressively promoted tax poli cies that are detrimental to the collective interests of the metropolitan area. Consequently, the AMM lobbyists have been challenged to accomplish more and more at the legislature, without any significant increase in resources. Legislators with whom the Task Force met described our lobbying staff as com petent and well respected. At the same time, the legislators admitted that the aggressive, and sometimes even abrasive tactics used by other municipal l<^bbying groups have probably led to more success in accomplishing their agendas. In response to these concerns, the AMM for the first time hired contract lobbyists during the 1990 session. Legislators expressed their frustration with the increasing regionalism of city lobbying groups, and urged us to show a concern for the entire State at the same time we more actively pursue the interests of the metropolitan cities. It was also suggested that having a better data base for lobbying would be helpful in pressing the AMM position. RECOMMENDATIONS The AMM should seek to be seen as the organization with the authority and credibility to speakr on behalf of ITT cities in the seven-county metropoli tan area. The AMM has become "spread too thin" in the number of policy issues it is lobbying, and needs to limit active involvement to three types of issues: a) Issues of concern only to metropolitan cities - i.e. interaction with Metropolitan Council and operating agencies. Chapter 509 Watershed Management Organizations, etc. b) Statewide legislation with unique impacts in the metropolitan area - i.e. land use, solid waste, tax increment financing, etc. C) Statewide issues where the interests of the metropolitan area may be different than, and at times even contrary to, those in the remainder of the State - i.e. local government aid formulas Specific suggestions for limiting our most active legislative agenda items to these topics are included in the section on committees and the policy adoption process. - 5 - 3. The AMM's lobbying efforts in the property tax area have been hindered by lack of immediate access to a computerized property tax model. The Task Force recommends that the AMM Board of Directors closely monitor the progress of the League of Minnesota Cities in developing a property tax model that is useable and immediately accessible to all cities. If this proves inadequate to meet our needs, the AMM membership should be prepared to bear the expense of developing its own property tax modeling system. 4. The AMM should be proactive, and not just reactive in its legislative posi tions. For example, the AMM has never produced its own recommended formula for distribution of local government aids, and should consider doing so. 5. At the same time we become more proactive, we should also stay on the high road, adopting positions that reflect responsible public policy for the entire State of Minnesota. 6. AMM member city officials should become more active and involved in the League of Minnesota Cities and its policy study committees. In some cases, we may find ourselves lobbying the LMC, rather than the State legislature, to pursue particular policy positions that are of common interest to all cities in the metroplitan area. 7. The AMM should increase the amount of time it spends one-on-one with legislators explaining AMM positions. We should also hold metropolitan legislators more accountable to the AMM agenda by developing and publish ing a "scorecard” following each legislative session. 8. In pursuing our legislative agenda, we should "pace ourselves", realizing that lobbying is an ongoing process. Policy positions should be pursued not only for immediate gains, but for maintaining a long-term positive relationship with the State government and with the League of Minnesota Cities. - 6 - COMMITTEE STRUCTURE AND POLICY ADOPTION PROCESS The Association currently follows a procedure whereby potential legislative policies are brought forth and considered for adoption in the five standing policy committees (revenues, metropolitan agencies, transportation, housing and economic development, general legislation). As indicated earlier, the Associ ation currently has over 100 adopted legislative policies. The policies nave been divided into categories as to level of effort in lobbying. The AMM now finds itself actively involved in issues that are not limited in interest to the metropolitan area, even where our positions are similar to those of cities in Greater Minnesota. The best recent example is pay equity, where the AMM position is almost identical to that of the League of Minnesota Cities. Yet because of the high visibility and strong feelings surrounding this issue, many member cities expected the AMM staff to be active in lobbying on this issue. There is also the dilemma of issues that are of interest to a single city, or a limited number o? cities. The AMM Board and staff have attempted to be respon sive to the needs of each member city, but a question is raised as to whether it is fair to take time and resources away from issues that are of more importance to the broader membership. The Task Force discussed at length what to do about issues that are divisive imong our own members, for example fiscal disparities or funding for combined sewer overflow abatement. A majority of the committee concluded that the AMM should not avoid taking definitive positions on these issues, as it would be left neutralized on issues of high importance to a large number of city offi cials and thereby foster the growth of still more splinter groups. Finally, the Task Force examined the five standing policy committees, concluding that they ar.e working well and that none should be eliminated. In fact, it was speculated'that as new social and legislative problems appear (i.e. the drug crisis) there will likely br« a need for additional standing or ad hoc committees. The Task Force further suggests that there may be utility in having a broad- based "futures" committee to simply help the organization anticipate and be prepared for pending issues. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The Association needs to focus most of its resou-xes and effort on the few issues of very highest priority to the entire membership. At the same time, the AMM should not narrow its agenda to the point that it loses the interest and support of its broad base of cities. 2. In order to accommodate the legitimate interests of all member cities, we recommend that AMM create an "endorsed" category of policies. These would be policies of interest to a limited number of cities, or those where the League of Minnesota Cities or some other group might reasonably be expected to adequately represent the interests of metrop>:’itan c iiei. With the AMM "endorsement", the AMM would be officially on record as Jfipporting these policies, but not actively involved in lobbying or init at.'.ig legislation. - 7 - 5. 1The existing Legislative Coordinating Committee (LCC) should be the "screening and dividing" group for determining lobbying priorities and deciding which policies will be "endorsed" and referred to other groups (i.e. LMC) for lobbying. We recommend that the Association strive to achieve real consensus on divisive issues, and not merely concurrence through a majority vote. Committee chairs as well as Board members mighc benefit from professional training in dispute resolution. The AMM should not avoid taking definitive positions on issues that are controversial among its own membership. While such avoidance may "buy peace" in the short term, in the long term it neutralizes the effec tiveness of the organization, undermining its credibility with legislators and causing the proliferation of splinter groups surrounding special issues. The AMM should make use of dispute resolution services, such as the Office of Dispute Resolution in the State Planning Agency and the Mediation Center, a private non-profit community mediation service based in St. Paul. The two-thirds majority vote requirement for adoption of legislative policies should be retained. - 8 - OTHER METROPOLITAN LOBBYING GROUPS The Task Force met with Minnetonka City Manager Jim Miller, regarding the Muni cipal Legislative Commission, ind Brooklyn Park Mayor Jim Krautkramer repre senting the Northern Mayors' Association. The Ta-^k Force observation is that the AMM has been able to form effective and cooperative relationships with these specialized groups, and that they should not be seen as a threat to the AMM. As indicated in the introduction, an additional splinter group which existed in 1984, the Municipal Caucus, has since gone out of existence. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. 2. 3. We recommend that the AMM strive to be the organization seen as legiti mate voice to speak on behalf of all cities in the seven-county metropoli tan area, while recognizing the ligTtimate need of some breakoff groups for special purposes. The AMM should not perceive existing specialized groups as threat, but attempt to maintain a cooperative and mutually supportive "’anship. We recownend that the AMM maintain its openness to all citi.. in the seven- county metropolitan area, resisting any impetus to limit membership to a more limited group (i.e. suburban caucus). - 9 - r RELATIONSHIP TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AND OPERATING AGENCIES As indicdled in the Introduction, monitoring and oversig: . of the Metropolitan Council and regional operating agencies was the original focus of the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities. Yet in recent years, involvement with the Council and agencies has suffered appreciably as the AMM staff has had to spend more and more time supporting the work of its own committees and lobbying on statewide issues. In fact, the staff indicated that it now has almost no time for any involvement with the Metropolitan Council during the legislative session. The AMM currently nominates to the Metropolitan Council eight names for appoint ment to tne Transportation Advisory Board. The Association actually appoints ten to the Transportation Advisory Committee. That system seems to be working well. In contrast, the AMM, along with several other metropolitan area asso ciations, was recently given legislative responsibility for suggesting appoin tees to the Regional Transit Board. That process did not go well. The Board of Directors did not limit the number of people recommended for appointment to the vacant seats, and the Metropolitan Council heeded very few of its recommen dations in making their selections. During its background work, the Task Force discussed the Metropolitan Council at some length with several legislators, as well as the current Chair of the Metropolitan Council and a former executive director of the Citizens League. There was a general feeling among the legislators that the Council has not been effective in performing its functions well. At the s<jme time, it was suggested that the CounciImembers are frustrated due to their lack of a "real clout” and constant legislative undercutting of their authority to accomplish the work for which they are responsible. With no consensus in the legislature or in the metropolitan area as to the appropriate amount of authority that should be vested in the Council, many metropolitan regional issues get resolved vis-a-vis the political process of the legislature. The shortcoming of this approach is that the metropolitan area is giving up some of the authority to set its own agenda. There is also some con fusion and ambiguity over the relationship of the Council to the Governor, who is responsible by law for appointing its members. It was suggested that the AMM could very definitely be of help in defining the proper role for the Council and the operating agencies, and in mustering legislative support to enact ne led changes. RECOMMENDATIONS The AMM should become more proactive in helping set the metropolitan agenda, Historically we have placed ourselves in somewhat of a watchdog or adver sarial role with the Council and operating agencies, merely reacting to the proposals put forward. We should become more positive in identifying areas of legitimate regional involvement, and, help to set the goals and objec tives to be pursued by regional government, as well as the parameters within which that work will be carried out. We need to "be there". It is estimated that an AMM sta^f member should be at the Metropolitan Council and agencies from eight tc sixteen hours per - 10 - week, interacting with the Counci 1members and the staff, and keeping affected cities informed and up-to-date as to what is happening in regional government. Other responsibilities have kept the staff from a full commitment to this vital role, and this shortcoming should be corrected expeditiously. 3. The appointment of members to the Transportation Advisory Board and Technical Advisory Committee seems to be functioning well, and should continue as present. 4. The AMM should continue to support its legislative responsibility to nomi nate persons for appointment to the Regional Transit Board. The AMM Board of Directors should do a better job of screening the applications which are received, so as to indicate to the Metropolitan Council those people that it truly wants appointed to the RTB. 5. The Task Force recommends that the AMM pursue the possibility of the creation of a metropolitan appointments review committee for the merit review of persons being considered for appointment to the Metropolitan Council and other regional agencies. The selection board would include representatives appointed by the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities, the Metropolitan Intercounty Association, the Citizens League, the League of Women Voters, etc. 6. Finally, the Task Force recommends that the AMM be the impetus for creation of a blue ribbon committee to study and better define the mission, role and purposes of the Council and regional agencies. While AMM would be the host, it would be important to involve other government associations and "good government" groups. Also, the the task should be approached in a spirit of cooperation with the Metropolitan Council members. The study of the blue ribbon committee should include alternatives for the selection and appointment of Metropolitan Council members. - 11 - PUBLIC RELATIONS If as suggested in the revised Purposes statement, the AMM is to be the Ulusive representative of the collective interests of the metropolitan cities then it is important that the Association increase its visibiliy in the eyes of the legislature and the general public. The Task Force reviewed and endorsed the work of the AMM's Legislative Coordinating Committee Public Relations Subcomnittee to establish a public relations system to inform the public, including media, legislators, and AMM legislative contacts about metropolitan city issues. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Media contacts should be identified in each AMM-member city vis-a-yis a legislative contact response form. Legislative contacts in each city should be responsible for interaction with local newspapers, radio, city newsletters, cable television, etc. The AMM staff should identify and establish relationships with contacts within the major metropolitan area media, both print and electronic. A delegation of the AMM staff and Legislative Coordinating Committee should During legislative sessions, we should issue specific press releases on '‘MM priori-ties, and response to important issues (i.e. tax policy) as changes are proposed. At the conclusion of each legislative session, we should issue press releases on the AMM's legislative agenda, and how well we believe the legislature met the needs of metropolitan area municipalities. We recommend that AMM develop a "report card" of P'-iority ’”ues with ratings for each legislator. These should be distributed to member cities with suggestions for potential local use. We need to identify potential allies on important issues, i.e. Chambers of Commerce, League of Women Voters, etc. - 12 - .... j COMMUNICATIONS WITH MEMBER CITY OKFICIALS The Task Force feels that the AMM needs to develop a metropolitan "conscious ness” among member city officials, so that they will buy into and promote the AMM's agenda. Unfortunately, Councilmember time is scarce, making it difficult to insure that each and every member city official is well-informed and aware of AMM activities, policies and priorities. The first recommendation of the 1984 Task Force report was that the AMM should expand its effort to communicate directly with all elected officials in member cities, as opposed to only mayors and city managers. Since that time, the AMM has had differing distribution lists for different types of communications. Apparently, this is causing a great deal of confusion, and may actually be causing a decrease in consistent corrmunications. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The AMM should strive to publish a short executive summary of legislative positions that could be quickly read by member city officials who don't want the "full shot". 2. An AMM contact person, preferably the City Manager/Administrator, should be developed in each city. All communications should be sent to that one con tact person, plus the Mayor, with the contact person taking responsibility for seeing that the material is duplicated and sent to all members of the governing body. The AMM contact person will also be responsible for reporting on AMM activities at the Council meeting. AMM should work with the Metropolitan Area Managers Association (MAMA) to enlist the support of Managers/Administrators for reproduction and distribution of these'communications. 3. Member cities should be encouraged to place discussion of AMM policies and issues on regular City Council agendas to ensure that all elected officials are kept aware of AMM activities, as well as to increase the Association's visibility with local media. 4. Each member of the AMM Board of Directors should commit to make a brief presentation at four or five surrounding City Council meetings once each year on AMM policies and activities. - 13 - WORKLOAD AND STAFFING When originally formed, the AMM had four full-time staff members. Shortly thereafter, in response to a financial shortfall, the staff was cut to three and has remained at that number since. During that time, the number of legislative policies has increased from 35 to over 100, and the number of legislative study committees from two to five. The Association has taken on other responsibilities including the license and permit survey, and coordination and administration of the Metropolitan Salary Survey. With more time being spent on lobbying of statewide issues and support for committees, there has been a decided time shift away from interaction with the Metropolitan Council and operating agencies. Yet the AMM is the only organiza tion providing any real oversight of these agencies. For example, we are usually the only commentor on the Metropolitan Council's annual work program and budget. The AMM Membership has come to expect more involvement by the Association, not only in metropolitan issues, but in tax policy, pay equity, tax increment financing, and other areas of statewide concern and involvement. The 1984 Mission and Membership Services Task Force report recommended very strongly that the Board of Directors seek ways to add a staff member. Yet this is the only one of the 1984 recommendations that has yet to be implemented. To quote that report, "the present staff simply cannot adequately cover all the critical issues, agencies, committees and the legislature." The present Task Force report, if ultimately adopted and implemented by the Board and membership, will only serve to increase the workload significantly. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The Task Force strongly recommends that the Board of Directors add a staff person. We further recommend that this person have responsibilities in: a. communicating with member cities and maintaining the legislative contact system b. public relations, including media contacts c. staffing some of the standing and ad hoc legislative committees d. some monitoring of Metropolitan Council and agency activities, particularly during the legislative session. 2. With regard to lobbying at the Capitol, the Task Force observes that this effort will fluctuate from time to time. Therefore, it is recommended that increased efforts in this area be handled through use of contract lobbyists. - 14 - The membership dues for the Association are currently set at 46 percent of a member's dues for the League of Minnesota Cities. Since the League dues a»"e set in part on a per capita basis, this works out to AMM dues ranging from a high of 30 cents per capita for Woodland to a low of 4 cents for Minneapolis. The dues for an average sized city of 30,000 population are $5,100, or about 17 cents per capita. Comoared to other city lobbying organizations, the AMM is a bargain! For examole, the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities charges its members 40 cents oer capita, plus from time to time, an additional 20 cents per capita for "special projects". Dues for the Municipal Legislative Commission are approxi mately 35 cents per capita, to a maximum of $12,500. If the AMM Board of Directors and membership are to implement our recommendation to add a staff person, a dues increase beyond the rate of inflation is inevi- table In addition, the cost of developing the computerized property tax model, if determined necessary, will be a considerable initial expense, and require ongoing personnel and data gathering costs. RECOMMENDATION 1. 2. In order to implement the other recommendations in this report, the AMM Board of Directors and membership should be prepared to adopt a dues increase in the range of 20 to 25 percent above the rate of inflation. The Board may wish to look at ways of phasing the dues increase over a two to three year period. The Board and membership should also be prepared to provide financial sup port for development and maintenance of a property tax modeling system if the LMC system fails to materialize or is determined inadequate to meet the lobbying needs of the AMM. - 15 - SUMMARY ANj LuNt'.u:)iUiN::> The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities is now in its 16th year. During its relatively short existence, the Association has experienced many diffi culties and challenges. Examples include the 1976 Metropolitan Land Planning Act and the more recent debates over local government aid. Despite predictions for the demise for general purpose organizations like the Association, the AMM is now at an all-time high of 68 member cities, repre senting over 90 percent of the population in the seven-county metropolitan area. The cities of the region apparently believe that they are getting a good value for their membership dollars. However, despite the successes of the past, the twelve members of this years Mission and Membership Services Task Force have concluded that this is no time to rest on our laurels. We face challenges from other city lobbying groups whose interests are contrary to those of the metropolitan area, as well as a generally hostile attitude by the State legislature toward cities. At the same time, the complexity of governing the metropolitan area is increasing geometri cally meaning that it is more important than ever to work together if we are to effectively serve the citizens of our respective communities. The Task Force concludes that in order to remain viable and relevant, the AMM must become more proactive, more collaborative, more focused and more assertive. The AMM provides the only meaningful vehicle for the cities of the metropoli tan area to express in a united voice the important perspective of local govern ment. The issues at stake are simply too important to abandon the playing field and leave all the important decisions to others. The Association was originally formed out of several metropolitan area splinter groups who had originally felt that they had little in common but came to realize that the things they did have in common were far more than those that divided them. The challenges of today are certainly no less than those that faced our cities in the past. Our test will be whether we can continue to be an effective voice for the collective interests of the cities in this metropolitan area, and to pass that test will reguire two things: 1 A renewed ability and commitment to come together through our com mittees and 19-member Board of Directors to reach a consensus on the critical issues that face us. 2. The ability to effectively, and with a united front, promote the policies we do adopt to the Governor, the legislature, the Metropolitan Council and the regional operating agencies. The Mission and Membership Services Committee feels that the recommendations set forth in this report will set us well on a course to accomplishing just that. We commend it for your consideration and thoughtful action. - 16 - APPENDIX A PURPOSES The purpose of the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities shall be to: 1.Serve as the exclusive and primary representative of the collective interests of all metropolitan cities on metropolitan wide issues and state wide issues with unique metropolitan significance. Promote collaborative problem solving efforts between and among cities, the State, the Legislature, private interests and other public interests. Effectively express in a unified voice, policies concerning the structure, powers and other matters relating to municipal government for the municipalities in the metropolitan area to the Legislature, Metropolitan Council and agencies, IMC, media and cities. Serve as a forum through which all municipalities or groups of municipalities may develop and propose policies and positions on matters on concern to the metropolitan municipalities and develop strategies for advocating those policies and positions. Serve as a forum for the interchange of ideas and information among municipalities in the metropolitan area and to foster intermunicipal cooperation. Assist member cities resolve disputes with other cities and agencies. Develop and provide, either alone or in concert with League of Minnesota Cities or other organizations or agencies, programs of technical assistance to member municipalities. Establish specific prioritized agenda, including Legislative p]^oposals to address member community needs. Foster, generate and promote information and data concerning the problems and issues and proposed solutions affecting municipal government in the metropolitan area to the State Legislature, in particular, and to the public at large. 10. Enhance the effectiveness of municipal government in the metropolitan area by holding conferences and by fostering pertinent research projects. 11. Coordinate the efforts of A«M members to promote their interests within the League of Minnesota Cities. 12. Enhance the quality of life in the metropolitan area and its cities by promoting efficient and progressive service delivery sysbems for our residenbs. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. APPENDIX B List of resource persons who consulted with the Task Force: Vern Peterson, Executive Director, Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Roger Peterson, Director of Legislative Affairs, Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Donald Slater, Executive Director, League of Minnesota Cities Jim Miller, Minnetonka City Manager and Representative of Municipal Legislative Commission Jim Krautkramer, Brooklyn Park Mayor, President of Northern Mayors' Association Millie McCloud, President, League of Minnesota Cities State Representative Phil Carruthers (DFL-47B), Chair of Metro Affairs Subcommittee of House Local Government and Metropolitan Affairs Committee State Representative Alice Johnson (DFL-51A), Vice Chair of House Local Government and Metropolitan Affairs Committee A1 Loehr, Legislative -Administrative Assistant to Senator Bob Schmitz (DFL-36), Chair of Senate Local and Urban Affairs Committee Steve Keefe, Chair, Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Ted Kolderie, Former Executive Director, Citizens League of the Twin Cities fT/O?on r3!fi MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 HELD ON MAY 23, 1990 JUM 1 4 1990 A special meeting of the School Board of Orono Independent School District No. 278 was held on Wednesday, May 23, 1990 at 7:00 a.m. Present: Dave McKown Don Anderson Kitty Crosby James Franklin John Maresh Lucie Taylor Thomas Mich William Fenholt UPON MOTION by Jim Franklin, seconded by Kitty Crosby, the consent agenda was unanimously approved as follows: - approved the appointment of Christine Bruce as a part-time science teacher at the high school for the 1990-91 school year; - approved the appointment of Donald Krubsack as music teacher at the high school for the 1990-91 school year; - approved the appointment of Lynn Middleton-Koller as English teacher at the high school for the 1990-91 school year; - approved the Treasurer's Report for April, 1990; - accepted the resignation of John Julsrud, middle school math teacher, effective at the close of the 1989-90 school year. Dr. Mich reported that in the Consent Agenda the Board approved some fine can didates and he provided the Board with background information on each of them; that the Retirement Recognition Brunch will be held on June 8 at the Lafayette Club; that he wanted to express appreciation to Gertie Corpe, the PTA officers and Evy Zacher for their work/efforts on Marvel Bongart's reception which was held on May 20; that he will be meeting with J ^f Brown and a representation of teachers regarding practices with respect to probationary teachers. Kitty Crosby informed the Board that leadership/direction regarding the Scholarship Fund needs to reviewed/studied. Following a brief discussion by the Board, it was agreed that the Board will study/review this issue and a decision will be made at a later date. John Maresh stated that he had visited with Dr. Thomas Fish, consultant for Community Education, regarding the Community Education program at Orono. By way of explanation. Dr. Mich stated that a brief study of the strengths/weaknesses of the Community Education program has been conducted by Dr. Fish to aid Mrs. Berglund and her committee in a review of the overall program. Or. Mich informed the Board that administration has engaged the services of Roy Anderson Associates, Inc., for the purposes of providing the district with a topographical study and a site plan of the entire campus. The demographic study, which the Board had previously discussed, will be postponed until next year primarily due to cost. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by John Maresh, the Board of Education adopted the following policy for extended season payment for coaches: Policy for extended season payment on file in District Office. Lucie Taylor MOVED, Kitty Crosby seconded, tnat the Board of Education adopt the following policy regarding recognition for teacher supervision of the Wolfridge activity: It is agreed to allow, annually, one day of compensa' ^or each teacher involved in supervising Wolfridge, not to be !ng the month of May, adjacent to school breaks or holiday pcrioos or on con ference or workshop days. If the day is not used during the year earned, the teacher may opt to "bank" the day and use it the following year. The particular school days taken will be as mutually agreed between the prin cipal and the teacher. Lucie Taylor provided background information on the process (negotiation/discussion) followed in preparing this policy for recommendation to the Board of Education. Dr. Mich stated that this iss-je is an outgrowth of the negotiations agreement with the teachers and that the distinction is that the Wolfridge program is district initiated and considered a part of the curriculum whereas programs in other areas are Initiated by the teachers involved. Board members expressed a desire for more time to study/evaluate this issue before reaching a decision. Jim Franklin MOVED, Kitty Crosby seconded, to table the motion, unanimously. Carried The Board adjourned to executive session. The meeting was reconvened by Chairman Dave McKown. Member Jim Franklin introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: Resolution regarding personnel matter on file in district office. Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Jim Franklin, adjourned. the meeting was Dave McKown, Chairman MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 HELD ON MAY 29, 1990 The regular meeting of the School Board of Orono Independent School District No. 278 was held on Tuesday, May 29, 1990. Present: Dave McKowr. Don Anderson Kitty Crosby James Franklin John Maresh Lucie Taylor Thomas Mich Wi1liam Fenholt UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by John Maresh, the consent agenda was approved as follows: - approved the minutes of the May 15, 1990 regular meeting; - approved the Media Learner Outcomes for the Orono Schools as follows: Media Learner Outcomes on file in district office. - approved the bills as covered by vouchers 066102 through 066240. Dr. Mich reported that construction on the new building is approximately two weeks behind schedule mainly due to the amount of rain we have received; that he wanted to publicly thank all of the people who volunteer for our district and that i.i recognition of volunteers the following activities have/are taking place: Orono Primary served a tea on May 24, Schumann Elementary will serve lunch on May 31 and the Intermediate/Middle School will have a hamburger fry on June 6; that the Retirement Recognition Brunch will be held on Jj^e 8 beginning at 8:15 a.m. at the Lafayette Club; that he had the opportunity to speak to the Edina Realtors on May 24 regarding our school system; that a letter has been sent to all the service agencies in our area stating that administration is available to meet with their respective groups to answer questions, provide an update on the construction, etc.; that a committee has been formed for the pur pose of reviewing the supervision and evaluation of teachers, recognition of non-tenured teachers and the development of a policy in this area, and proce dures to be followed with respect to non-renewal of contracts of non-tenured teachers; that Marvel Bongart expresses appreciation to the Board for her recep tion; that Marvel Bongart has an article in the MESPA magazine regarding project self-esteem and that her efforts on behalf of our district are appreciated; that congratulations are in order to Pat Jones, teacher at the middle school, as she is one of 56 teachers in Minnesota to receive the Golden Apple Achievement Award from the National Oil Company. Kitty Crosby expressed appreciation to Marge Gasch and Evy Zacher for their work with the School Board election. Mrs. Crosby also statpd that she had attended the Senior Athletic Awards Banquet and thought it w- , and a very com memorative evening. Kitty Crosby provided the Board with a brief report on tne Teacher Meet and Confer meeting stating that most of the items have already been addressed but are as follows: 1) different timing for elementary report card, 2) committee for evaluation forms for teachers and non-tenured teachers, eventually allowing for review of some of the policies in this area, 3) communication committee at the high school headed by Don Boylan, 4) alert item - concerning class size in next year's second grade. Don Anderson expressed congratulations to all of the teams Involved with spring sports. Dave McKown stated that the American Legion Post In Maple Plain presented Frank Schulz with an award and a letter of commendation for his twenty-seven years of Involvement with the Memorial Day activities through the participation of his band at the parade as well as the cemetery services. UPON MOTION by Jim Franklin, seconded by Lucie Taylor, the Wolfridge activity motion was removed from the table. Lucie Taylor MOVED, John Maresh seconded, that the Board of Education adopt the following policy regarding recognition for teacher supervision of the Wolfridge activity: U Is agreed to allow, annually, one day of compensatory time for each teacher Involved In supervising Wolfridge, not to be taken during the month of May, adjacent to school breaks or holiday periods or on conference or workshop days. If the day is not used during the year earned, the teacher may opt to "bank" the day and use it the following year. The part’ ular school days taken will be as mutually agreed between the principal and the ^eacher. Concern regarding the setting of a precedent was expressed by various Board mem bers but at the same time they acknowledged their faith In the Negotiation Team and the study/process followed In arriving at this recommendation. It was suggested that additional parent training/involvement be Implemented by admin istration In order to alleviate some of the responsibility of the teachers for the program. Motion carried unanimously. The Board heard a report from Connie Fladeland on the multi-cultural gender fair plan which was mandated by the State Board of Education and she informed the Board that the name of the plan was changed to the Plan for Inclusive Educational Program. She provided each Board member with a copy of the plan stating that the plan is very general but that the committee plans to do a district wide needs assessment next year in terms of an Inclusive educational program. The committee will then continue to meet In order to develop more specific plans and objectives. Ms. Fladeland stated that she would be available at the next Board meeting to answer questions the Board might have. Warren Nelson provided the Board with background Information on the Middle School Study which has recently been completed. He stated that a committee con sisting of patents, teachers and school board members reviewed recent research, surveyed parents and developed recommendations which ti.e Board Is being > ^ to consider as a first reading. The recommendations can be viewed as • and objectives and provide a direction for the middle school for the nek. : - 5 years and the study can be viewed as a means to make some changes with evaluation/continual updating as a part of the process. Appreciation was expressed to Warren Nelson and to the members of the committee for their work/compilation of this study and the development of a positive/forward looking plan. Dr, Sue Sjecklocha, Staff Development Coordinator, updated the Board regarding the planning/on-going programs of the Staff Developme Committee. Dr. SJeklocha presented the staff development plan on behalf of the staff develop ment committee which Includes the following: I Irma Kelley, Barb Keen Sarah Lutz Mary La gford Sue Kueppers Jan Jacobson Ken Jensen Kev^n Armstrong Warren Nelson KAthy Henningsen Orono Primary teacher Schumann Elementary teacher Intei..5ed<ate School teacher Middle School teacher Middle School teacher Middle School teacher High School teacher High School teacher Administ»*ation Parent Luc^a Taylor Tom Mich Sue Sjeklocha School Board Member Coordinator Ex-Officio UPON MOTION Kitty Crosby, seconded by Lucie Taylor, the Board of Education approved the staff development plan as follows: Staff development plan on file in district office. Appreciation was expressed to Or. Sjeklocha and her committee for the work that they do in order to provide the excellent staff development program that is now In place in Orono. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Lucie Taylor, the School Board adopted the following prices for the lunch program for 1990-^1: primary/elementary $1.40, middle school $1.50, high school 1.65, adults $2.25. Bill Fenholt provided the Board with information on the compilation of the budget and the process flowed. Mr. Fenholt expressed appreciation to his office staff ' -''ir v efforts in putting the budget together. Appreciation the budget, I the district. ressed to Bill Fenholt, not only for his work in compiling the diligence with which he manages the fiscal affairs of UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by K'tty Crosby, the Beard of Education gave final approval to the 1989-90 bi»'Jo?t and preliminary approval to the 1990-91 budget. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Jim Franklin, the Board of Education approved the contractual agreement with the Superintendent. With regard to the Orono Scholarship Program which was discussed at the last Board meeting. Dr. Mich stated that he fel’ ♦he most effective way to the issue would be to form a committee thu. *'uld study/review the iss* then present a recommendation to the Board .jucation at the June 11 meet^.ig. Dave McKown, Jim Franklin and Dr. Mich w irve on the committee. The Board was in agreement with this suggestion. The Board expressed appreciation to Kitty Crosby for her years of faithful ser-* vice in leading/directing the scholarship program for the district. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Jim Franklin, the meeting was adjourned. ive McKown, Chairman R egent C andidate A dvisory C ouncil 85 State Office Building Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 (6l June 15, 1990 ^,v U i990 Dear Council members: In 1988, the Minnesota Legislature created the Regent Candidate Advisory Council to recommend qualified candidates for election by the Legislature to the University of Minnesota Board of Regents. The Council has recently begun its second round of recruitment activities for the four upcoming vacancies on the Board of Regents. As part of our comprehensive recruitment drive, Council members will be in Anoka on Friday, June 29, 1990 to give people the opportunity to learn more about the Council and its work. We hope ‘ ’■irit *'ou can join us for a luncheon meeting at the Anoka-Hennepin Schools Staff Development Center to help us in our efforts to find the best possible candidates for the Board of Regents. As you may know, four terms on the Board of Regents will expire in 1991. These upcoming vacancies will be in Congressional Districts 14 6 and 7. The Council will be holding meetings throughout the summer and fall in these four districts to "get the word out" about our work and the process we have developed to recruit, interview and recommend regent candidates to the Minnesota Legislature. Because of your own interest and knowledge about your community, we hope that you will come to meet with us over lunch on June 29th to learn more about this most important task. Again, the luncheon will be held at the Staff Development Center, 2727 North Ferry, Anoka at 12:00 noon on Friday, June 29, 1990. The luncheon will be hosted by ABC newspapers and it is open to the public. Please R.S.V.P. to Mary Ryan at 296-1121. Thank you for your interest. On behalf of the Regent Candidate Advisory Council, we look forward to seeing you on June 29th. Sincerely Kenneth Dayton, Chair Regent Candidate Advisory Council A//. Elmer L. Andersen, Member Regent Candidate Advisory Council Office of the Chair, 419 Peavey Building, Minneapolis, Mii...ww.«t 55402, (612) 340-0668 o.C:-: . ''r- .,.., -' ............................................’..................................... ---■■■•-----------------------------------------------—........................... ............................................................................... ■'' ■ ■' ’ •••■ ■■ •■ ■ ■'•• ■ ■■ * ■ ■ ■- »^ -f-'.^■ The Regent Candidate Advisory Council cordially invites you to attend a Luncheon Meeting to discuss the recruitment of candidates for the University of Minnesota Board of Regents upcoming vacancies in Congressional Districts 1,4, 6 & 7 Friday, June 29,1990 12:00 Noon Staff Development Center Anoka-Hennepin Schools 2727 North Feriy' Anoka, Minnesota Hosted by ABC Newspapers R.S.V. P. to Mary Ryan at 612/296-1121 -• ,*• • •. ... • ; •• .■ : . Vi..,. 1Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission 443 OAK STREET • EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 • (612)474-5539 [Q DATE: TO: FROM: RE: June 11, 1990 LMCCC COMMISSIONERS AND MEMBER CITIES ^ - Jennifer Watts, Administrator \ 5 UPCOMING EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING This month's Executive Committee meeting, scheduled for Tuesday, June 19, at 5 p.m. will be the first meeting for our new officers and at-large members. On behalf of the Commission, I'd like to thank David Stahr for his service to the Executive Committee as an at-large member. Elected as at-large member was Jimmie Wright, whom we welcome and look forward to working with on the committee. Jim Olds leaves the office of Treasurer after two years of overseeing the financial responsibi1ities of the Commission. His service to that office has been constant and of great benefit to us. Jim will remain on the Executive Committee as a newly elected at-large member. We welcome Otto Wilczek to the office of Treasurer for 1990-91. I look forward to working with him on the many tasks of that office. Enclosed are the materials for the Executive Committee meeting, along with a complete list of 1990 Commissioners and Executive Committee members. I have also included copies of articles relating to tiering, which we have been told Triax is considering, and recent activity on cable regulation. Finally, our new production coordinator, Jim Schindler, will be officially on staff June 13. I think Jim will be a valuable asset to our staff and to the organization as a whole. I look forward to meeting with the 1990-91 Executive Committee members next Tuesday and ask that if a member is unable to attend the meeting to please call the .MCCC office by noon on Tuesday. And, if you have any comments or questions regarding any of the material enclosed, please give me a call. Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission 443 OAK STREET • EXCELSIOR. MINNESOTA 55331 • (612)474-5539 LAKE HINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY, JUNE 19, 1990 5t00 P.M. EXCELSIOR COMMUNITY TV STUDIO EXCELSIOR COMMUNITY CENTER 443 OAK STREET EXCELSIOR AGENDA I. Call to Order II. Approval of May minute?^ III. Reports: a) Officers b) AdmlniatroLor c) Triax IV. Presentation of 1989 Financial Review V. 1991 Budget Planning Committee Selection VI. Unfinished Business VII. New Business 4 VIII. Adjournment I. 5tOS P.H. MINUTES LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMISSION FULL COMMISSION MEETING MAY 15« 1990 SiOO P.M. EXCELSIOR CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER Chairman Andaraon callad tha maating to order at DIRECTORS PRESENT Tom Anderaon/M^dina Barb Brancal/Shorawood Howard Bennia/Daaphaven Jim Clda/Excelaior Jimmie Wright/Greanwood Bobbi Abdo/Minnatonka Beach Jim Hillia/ Greenwood Laaley Hughaa-Saaroana/Tonka Bay Otto Wilosak/Minnatriata Tim Salasar/Minnatriata Jim Swartwood/Long Lake Dave Stahr/ Excelaior OTHERS PRESENT Jennifer Watta/Admin. Rio Hanaon/Triax Katha Ehlert/Ad. Aaat II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chairman Anderaun aakad for diacuaaion of the April minutaa ox a motion to approve. Motion S.15.90.1I Brancal moved to approve the minutea# Olds seconded. The motion paaaed unanimoualy. III. REPORTS Treaaurer*a Report Commiaaioner Olda praaantad the Juat Claima for May (attachment 1). Anderson aaked for comments or a motion to approve. Motion 5-lS.90.2i Olda moved to approve the Juat Claima for the period 4/18/90 through 5/15/90, Branoel seconded. Motion passed unanimously. * fg^m^niatrator*a Report Administrator Watts referred the commiaaionera to the studio report included in the Triax report for an update on access use. She indicated that she expected an even greater level of usage once the production coordinator was in place. Admin. Watts said that she had received over 100 applications for that position and was in the process of conducting inter views with 12 of thOi«e people. Of those 12, two or three could be selected to interview again with two members of the Executive Committee. Admin. Watts reported that the Regional NFLCP annual spring CQf)f0]^0nce that she attended the weekend of May 4-6 in Milwaukee was well worth the time. She had also spoken to a uomber of the conference planning organisation for the national conference and felt they have done a much better Job at organizing and coor- LMCCC MINUTES May 15, 1990 Page two dinatlng this year's conference and anticipated the conference would also be well worth the time and expense. rOMMISSION NEWS Admin. Watts provided copies of the recent reports on activity in Washington regarding the re-regulation of cable and telco entry into the marketplace. The recent NATQA newsletter was also available and contained written statements presented at a number of hearings on the issue. Other items of*- interest j 1. There was no news on the space relocation issue. The Commission had been notified to be prepared to move by September 1. „ -i2. The financial review from W.F. Denny was complete but unavailable because a document from the attorney had not yet been received. Mr. Creighton had recently moved to another law firm and his files were in transit. Watts noted the document would be available by the June 1 deadline. 3. Admin. Watts thanked Ric Hanson for his response to calls to the Triax office regarding the Comedy Relief special that HBO was making available at no coat to c*ble operators, Ric had responded by making the program available on Channel 19. TRIAX REPORT Ric Hanson provided the monthly report! Homes passed Basic Subs 5,798 Total Pay Units 3,83/ Total A/O's 5,460 Total Remotes 2,646 Hanson explained that paid subs usually decline Ho su. mer months, therefore he had several promotions plant ..or summer and early fall, such as HBO, Disney and Showtime installation specials. Some of this promotion would be done over cable and some through direct mall, both to subscribers and non-sub- soribers. He mentioned that Triax was still the area to continue to carry Midwest Sports and thanked Roger Erioson of WCCO Radio for his unsolicited comments on that Hanion^reported that the fiber-link negotiations are in the final stages. He also stated that he was considering providing a life-line^service, consisting of 18 basic channels, for a lower rit^ ?l!e premiui channels could be added on in a tiered sys- t«m The advantage of this system would be a reduction of copyright fees to Triax. The fees would be reduced because they woSld be based on gross revenues off the hoped to have this proposal ready by the «nd of Commissioner Hughes-Seamans commented that Chan, si 6 has looking better Recently. Hanson explained that one reason was the main line coming in had not been cut in over two months. LMCCC MINUTES May 15, 1990 Page threa Admin. Watta inquired about the atatua of the plant mapa. Hanaon replied that they were being reduced down now, and would be bound in a book. They would be ready aoon. IV. BUDGET REVISION Treaaurer Olda preaented the budget reviaiona, ex plaining that the budget waa prepared aix montha before the revenuea were V:nown, ao member oitiea could approve the budget by the end of Ootober. The original eatimate had been conaer- vative. The franchiae feea for the period were greater than an ticipated, and there had been a aubatantial carryover from 1989. He atated that the reviaed budget accounted for all ftinda. Olda alao explained that additional funda have gone into equipment and relocation expenaea. According to the franchiae agreement, Triax providea atudio apace, but not office apace for ataff. When aaked if the relocation allocation waa auffioient, Olda pointed to the contingency fund and the office equipment fund. There waa aome diacuaaion aa to whether the atudio would be moving or not. Olda indicated that he thought not; Hanaon thought maybe two more montha after Sept. 1., Wright indicated he attended Community Service meetinga and the feeling he had from them waa that we ahould be prepared to move by Sept. 1. Motion 5.15.90.3: Wright moved that the 1990 Budget Reviaion Propoaal be approved, Hughea-Soamana aeconded. Motion paaaed un- animoualy. V. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Nominationa Committee Chair Hughea-Seamana preaented the propoaed alate of officera for 1990-1991t CHAIRPERSON VICE-CHAIR SECRETARY TREASURER ASST. TREASURER/MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER At-Large Tom Anderaon Jim Swartwood Barb Brancel Otto Wilosek Lealey Hughea-Seamana Jxffl Olda (vacant) She aaked for nominationa from the floor for the vacant member- at-large aeat. Tim Salacar aaked what waa involved in that poaition. Chairman Anderaon explained that the full commiaaion meeta quarterly, and the Executive Committee meeta monthly to conduct routine buaineaa. Motion 5.15.90.41 Olda moved to nominate Jiemie Wright, from Greenwood to the member-at large poaition, Jim Hillia aeconded. Motion paaaed unanimoualy. Motion 5.15.90.St Olda moved that nominationa be cloaed and that the nominationa alate be approved, Stahr aecondad. Motion paaaed unanimoualy. LMCCC MINUTES May 15« 1990 Page four VI. REQUEST TO SPONSOR ATTENDANCE TO THE NFLCP NATIONAL CONVENTION Admin. Watts recommended sponsorship for two peopl'e to attend the NFLCP National Conference in Washington D.C. in July. She suggested the newly hired production coordinator and one commissioner attend this conference. She estimated the cost for attendance would be $102£.00 per person^ and noted the budget for conferences had be^n prepared to include the costa for two people to attend this jonference. Anderson asked if anyone was interested in going, and Otto Wilczek expressed Interest. Motion 3.15.90.6: Olds moved to approve attendance at the NFLCP National conference by two people, Brancel seconded. Motion passed unanimously. VII.UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was none. VIII. NEW BUSINESS Chairman Anderson explained that LMCCC attorney Tom Creighton had changed law firms and recommended that the LMCCC continue to use him, since he wrote the franchise and had writ ten others around the area. There was discussion about a pos sible increase in fees. Watts said Creighton had not indicated an increase and had always bean cognizant of LMCCC budget restraints. She said his billing practices had been reasonable and pointed out that there had been an 4800 carryover in legal fees from last year. Motion S.15.90.7» Wilczek moved to retain Mr. Creighton at the firm of Bernick and Lifson, P.A. as LMCCC attorney, provided his fees do not inorease more than IbS as a result of this move. Swartwood seconded. Motion passed unanimously. IX. ADJOURNMENT Motion 5.15.90.81 Swartwood moved to adjourn the meet ing; Hu<^hes-Searaans seconded and the meeting adjourned at 5:45 P.M. Respectfully submitted. Kathe Ehlert Administrative Asst. LMCCC JUST CLAIMS 4/18/90 TO 5/15/90 CHECK • 2C99 2100 2101 2102 2103 2104 2105 2106 2107 10215 10216 2108 2109 2110 10217 10218 10219 2111 2112 2113 2114 2115 2116 DATE 5/1 5/1 5/1 5/1 5/2 5/2 5/2 VOID 5/2 4/30 4/30 5/2 5/2 5/2 5/15 5/15 5/15 5/15 5/15 5/15 5/15 5/15 5./15 BANK EXCELSIOR Baginning balanoa Claim* Intarmmt Sarvica Charga Miao. Vidao and Tapa Stock Funda EBA Rafund SCCU ACCOUNTS Balanoa Shara Ac'/t Balanca Praferred Certificataa of Dapoait PAYABLE PERA Poatmaatar Bank Exoalaior Payohax MATA Millar/Holbrooka DaWolfa Muaio VOID Skada Traval Aaron Blachert Jennifar Watta MATA The Aator Hotel Jennifer Watta Aaron Blachart Jennifer Watta Katha Ehlart U.S. Waat Aaron Blaohart PERA PERA Jennifer Watta U.S. Poatmaatar AMOUNT/ACCOUNT $ 104.52 PERA ben 50.00 Poatage 744.12 Fad w/h 35.10 Secy arv 45.00 Conf exp 300.00 Subacrpt 279.00 Subacrpt VOID 167.00 Conf exp 159.12 Payroll 808.15 Payroll 10.00 Conf exp 122.10 Conf exp 50.00 Conf adv 189.36 Payroll 799.15 Payroll 88.69 Payroll 57.35 Telephon 27.30 Mileage 9.00 Life ina 104.52 PERA ben 107.03 varioua SQtPO 8 4«326.71 843,269.66 (4,326.71) 194.28 14.43) 3,000.00 121.00 842,243.82 8 927.06 1,250.49 26,000.00 (6/10) 20,000.00 (6/23) 20.000. 00 (9/23) 10.000. 00 (9/23) EMDIMO BALANCE TOTAL FUNDS 878,177.55 8120.421.37 LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 1900 REVISED BUDGET APPROVED MAY 15. 1990 INC >ME Trlax Franchise Fees Interest Carryover (from 1989) REVISED 1990 $ 34,773.79 4,000.00 16.628.82 0 10.>,402.61 OPERATING EXPENSES Cable Administrator Access Employees Secretarial Services Payroll Taxes Employee Mileage Medical Insurance Legal Fees Insurance/Bonds Financial Review/LMCCC Conferences/Schools Office Supplies Dues/Subscriptions Telephone Postage Miscellaneous(inc. bank chrgs) Advertising/Promotions Office Equipment Office Space OPERATING BUDGET TOTAL :oHCIAL FUND APPROPRIATIONS 28,800.00 20,000.00 2,000.00 7.000. 00 500.00 2,880.00 2.000. 00 3.500.00 2.300.00 5,000.00 2,000.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 650.00 450.00 750.0 1,000.00 6.000.00 0 86,830.00 . nnical Audit - Triax Financial Review - Trla>^ Studio Equipment Legal fund Office Equipment Fund Access Equlr>men Contingency FUND TOTAL BUDGET TOTAL 1,000.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 5.000. 00 7.000. 00 3.572.61 0 18,572.61 0 105,402.61 LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ELECTED OFFICERS 1990-1991 CHAIRPERSON Tom Anderson 100 E Navajo Hamel, MN 55340 470-6500 VICE-CHAIRPERSON Jim Swartwood 310 Russell Lane Long Lake, MN 55356 473- 4663 SECRETARY Barb Brancel 25785 Sunnyvale Ln. Shorewood, MN 55331 931-6731 474- 3824 TREASURER Otto Wilczek 5905 Game Farm Rd. E. Minnetrista, MN 55364 472-6091 493-1948 AgST. TRFASURER/KEMBER-AT-LARGE_ Lesley Hughes-Secimans 5090 Manitou Rd Tonka Bay, MN 55331 474-6018 member-at-l^rge Jim O’ds 100 reet Excelsior 35331 474-4139 WEMBER-AT-LARGE Jimmie Wright 5990 Maple ' '•* Rd. Greenwood, MJ 331 474-7J9. LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION CITY APPOINTMENTS FOR 1990 DEEPHAVEN Howard Bennis 3449 Hamilton Ave. Deephaven^ MN 55391 475-2490 EXCELSIOR Jim Olds 100 Lake Street Excelsior, MN 55331 474-4139 David Stahr 142 First ST Excelsior, MN 478-9407 55331 GREENWOOD James Hillis 5480 Maple Hgts. Rd Greenwood, MN 55331 542-9122 474-5101 Jimmie Wright 5990 Maple Hgts. Rd Greenwood, MN 55331 474- ’393 Marietta Jacobsen 5530 Maple Hgts. Rd. Greenwood, MN 55331 474-8718 LONG LAKE Jim Swartwood 310 Russell Lane Long Lake, MN 55356 473-4663 David Sawyer 231 Glenmore Lane Long Lake, MN 55356 475-2269 MEDINA Tom Anderson 100 E Navajo Hamel, MN 55340 478-6500 MINNETONKA BEACH Bobbi Abdo 3126 Old Cty. Rd. 15 Wayzata, MN 55391 471-0063 Thomas Markle 2508 Areola Lane Wayzata, MN 55391 471-9777 MINNETRISTA Otto Wilczek 5985 Game Farm Rd E. Minnetrista, MN 55364 472-6091 493-1948 Tim Salazar 3605 Tuxedo Rd Minnetrista,MN 55364 472-5191 ORONO Barbara Peterson 1261 Arbor St. Crystal Bay# MN 55323 927-0997 475-2506 Alan Nettles 1940 Shoreline Dr. Wayzata MN 55391 473-4684 >«a.'3r James '*rabek r >. Box 66 Ci^-3taa Bay# MN 55323 476-0444 ST. BONIFACIUS Andrew Weinzierl Jr. 9125 State Hwy. 7 PO Box 26 St. Bonifacius# MN 55357 446-1100 Shirley Logelin 4025 Tower PO Box 191 St.Bonifacius#MN 55357 446-1129 SHOREWOOD Barbara Brancel 25705 Sunnyvale Ln. Shorewood# MN 55331 931-6731 474-3024 Dean Johnson 5075 Cathcart Dr. Shorewood# MN 55331 474-3091 SPRING PARK Donald Dill PO Box 172 Spring Pk# MN 471-0105 55304 Carl Rosen 4540 West Arm Rd. Spring Park# MN 55304 471-9617 Ronald Kraemer 3910 Del Otero Ave. Spring Park# MN 553Q4 471-7339 TONKA BAY Ralph Bendjebar 75 West Point Dr. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 470-0094 Lesley Hughes-Seamans 5090 Manitou Rd. Tonka Bay# MN 55331 474-6018 VICTORIA Gerald Schmieg 1975 Trillium Ct. PO Box 6 Victoria# MN 55306 443-2123 Carol Deaner 5631 Zumbra Drive Excelsior# MN 55331 474-3605 WOODLAND Andrea Bassett 2670 Woolsey Lane Wayzata# MN 55391 475-2440 Richard Henry 17960 Shavers Lane Wayzata# MN 55391 473-9022 R R ip^Eli li • ■ -T.v*'- 1 im gilllipiPi^iliii« ipp P^VI ^ §?S^plSF®2^ mHi Mitp l|lilii’|liij,|il |Sp f|i S.f.a®:22J ci;S.g-& s§g-g|Si»'^ Si -glsSi^aS^Slg .9_§.Siga.l° GOO .5^ ^ ^ CO ^ 4,= s.'- 6 *■ I f felTiJ® s’ I «j 2 “S ®ico«-2-o = .U}L^<V « £ 0)o •a-g^tlg^ •aSspSg.E .EEsi&si o£.!2: £o3 o.tiStnSjso 1511:1; ill!* Ilfii«I ttg*S ^M :> o V KA A% 2“g o| c -2 oj ® .&llli I ||iL§3|'§ll I l| «si “-SS|a5fefe£-5i« as :le2i&2^|g|ga|s2 :•§ '-3o5 ^o. w >»r S o 2. aefae-iiSfeS|a Ill"3| E|=^ ?5 q«5 s l|6?,p IS ■| C.2 «- S « VO ^isuo-sa^s^ii-ii5ss-a|S i^i=E3|l> = ^ sags Si is.? ^ .5 w O S .52 o* 4> > 52-5 1|ll^ rt 3 "?|2&iU isss §1^5 51 = -“..S-=5 0.^*0 o'’^ ^vh-u i'lo§l2"" ®:5 E.s «23*£ > o;:o u |'|S?52S = ^ w 5 o ^ = ^£-5 « £*e-o 2 |5 ^ o 4> feb *" o-D^ 2 O.S:. - >,':-Q.C -9 h -C "oo ^ o» - «p „'sa;3= ^ w ^.. J3 >;•§ *3 rt -o ‘O ii■^•§§°og2:^2^c2. I O e £ S O 0^5 g Cc...o^-5 Q. li ^olli * c" I "2| £ t| o.^ “•-s■§.s £ I 8 .s J § tr-o 2 O I“ g 5. : 5j=asg-gs fc5SP“ lsi|i|fiii|=^IC=i‘»o3 3^P-o 5S §w£c^-w^?.S W Vo c P3: = : JSS IS-.-?-"•3 5 « o . 3-0 ^ re oQ c . „ Vi CL-q o25fr-a.5.S<y s<-^ Q.^CJ >*S.O C <u § 5r i§-sic re SSo 8g| ■'c’8.2sgi|:p|i 1 CITY* : OF rORON€^ CITYof ORONO Post Office Box 66•Crystal Bay,.Minnesota 55323• Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka June 13, 1990 Mario Peterson, Governmental Operations Representative Northern States Power Box 10 Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: City of Orono - NSP/Wright Hennepin Territorial Boundaries Dear Mario: As discussed at the Council meeting on Monday, June 11, 1990, there was an indication by both NSP and Wright Hennepin of their willingness to meet and discuss the possibility of changing boundaries so that NSP would serve all of Orono. In addition, it was requested that rate schedule be supplied to the City to have a better understanding of the regular rates and discounts, and off-peak charges. Please let me know when it would be convenient for you and Wright Hennepin to meet and discuss this issue. Sincerely Mark E. Beftrhardson, City Administrator MEB/tln cc: Mayor Grabek and Orono Council Members John Gerhardson, Public Works Director BUILDING A ZONING - 473-7357 ASSESSING ADMINISTRATION A RNANCE - 473-735« FAX-473-0510 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 CITY OF ORONO CITY of ORONO Post Office Box 66•Crystal Bay. Minnesota 55323• Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka June 13, 1990 Wright Hennepin Power Company Attn; Dick Malachek P.O. Box 330 Birch Avenue South Maple Lake, MN 5535C Re: City of Orono - NSP/Wright Hennepin Territorial Boundaries Dear Mr. Malachek; As discussed at the Council meeting on Monday, June 11, 1990, there was an indication by both NSP and Wright Hennepin of their willingness to meet and discuss the possibility of changing boundaries so that NSP would serve all of Orono. In addition, it was requested that rate schedule be supplied to the City to have a better understanding of the regular rates and discounts, and and off-peak charges. Please let me know when it would be convenient for you and Wright Hennepin to meet and discuss this issue. MEB/tln cc; Mayor Grabek and Orono Council Members John Gerhardson, Public Works Director Robert Wurm, Wright Hennepin BUILDING Sl zoning - 473-7357 ASSESSING administration a finance - 473-7358 FAX -4734)510 PI BLIC WORKS - 473-7359 Ehleps and Associates, tnc. LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE NEWSLETTER OFFICES IN MINNEAPOLIS. MN • WAUKESHA. Wl • JAMESTOWN. NO VOLUME_35^NUMBER,2 HLE: Rnandal Spedalsts: EMers and Associates, Inc. Please distribute to governing body members JUME.199Q The direction of Interest rates appears downward with the 30-year treasuries yielding 3.66% and the BBI (20-year) tax-exempt yields at 7.39%. The treasury just completed the sale of 3-year a; d 10-year paper that was met with good reception. The $10 billion thirty-year notes sold did not slon il a different direction In rates. However the second straight decline in wholesale prices for fer sparked a decline In rates. Overall tax-exempt rates have dsare still very attractive for your financing needs. Ight decline in wholesale prices for Apr been Inching upward since December bi TAX-EXEMPT REGULATIONS TO BE EXPANDED? On April 20, the House Ways and Means Committee heard from thirteen public sector associations to: Increase the small user exemption from $10M to $25M for bank interest deductabllity, raise the small Issuer exemption from $5 to $25M under the arbitrage provisions, Increase the private use test from 10% to the pre-1986 level of 25%, and to remove the tax-exempt and private activity bond Interest from the corporate alternative minimum tax. Let your federal representatives know of your support for these measures. Any or all of these changes will make It easier and less costly to Issue tax-exempt debt. WISCONSIN LEGISLATIVE CHANGES The legislature eliminated the $90 per member limit on debt service shared costs for school districts. This Is an opportunity for schooi districts to move ahead with their building programs. This Is also an opportunity for school districts to examine the structure of existing debt even without a building program. An accelerated repayment schedule of existing debt could keep the same local properly tax impact, reduce long term interest costs and put the school district in a better financial position to consider a building program. Another change affecting school districts is the expansion of supplemental aids associated with TIP regardless of when ttie TIP was created. Cities, on the other hand, could benefit from TIP law changes, which Include; limiting the creation of TIP's if all existing TIP’s exceed 7% of equalized values Instead of 5%. tightening the blight definition, expanding the expenditure period from five to seven years or, lengthening the maximum life of the district from 20 to 23 years. MINNESOTA TIP LEGISLATiyE CHANGES The legislature has just completed major TIP legislation that substantially affects the ability of to establish TIP districts. Highlights of the changes include; financial penalties on cities fo; using TIP. reduces percentage of housing projects that Includes commercial property from 1/3 to i/5, restricts economic development districts to manufacturing, warehousing, research and development, and telemarketing and tourism outside the metro area, restricts pooling between districts, allows the Commissioner of Revenue to enforce the TIP laws in court. ?95U Norwest Center • 90 South Seventh Street • Minneapolis MN 55402 4100 • 612-339-8291 • FAX 612-339-0854 NEW NORTH DAKOTA PRESENCE Meet Becky Miller who has joined the firm as an Account Executive. Becky comes to us from Jamestown, North Dakota where she formerly served with NoDak Bonds for five years. Becky will open our third office In Jamestown. Our other offices are in Minneapolis and Waukesha. Becky is very conversant with effective representation of communities in their borrowings, whether it Is the commercial market, bond bank or local bank. Alii^yP LINEFIBM Ehlers and Associates, Inc. Is In its 36th year serving state and local government. Now art employee owned firm, the company with a staff of 22 has become a leader in the independent fiscal consulting field. Because it is truly Independent, offering no service and owing no allegiance to any In the bond urderwriting field, we are uniquely positioned to serve communities seeking funding. .^s usual, we expect all you local officials will roll up your sleeves and keep local government running along. EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. • •ii iJit «•iifIf■iI a laa,,a laa. :«as::tt aijja ,, attti a a •a « . a j«•j4•« «aj|ll mm HnfM«M£SS££ ££££££ SS5S 5SSSSSS5 S5??5 H SMSS S SgJ-MMMMM I !:!■ !:!??! !!!? lliillll !?=!! !! mi : !;?!?? Ml yiyH^y yy ini lyiiii yii ii Uh i mmm yy Hl\ UMU 5MI HMH5I U IMH I IHSHMHIM UMM n.i i ||! fiL zzzz zzzizzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzi zzzi zzzzzzlz zzizz zzzzz : zzzzzz HH HliHIHIHIH SHin fHf IHHIII ilSH U ||!i! 1 iillHHlIlilinn 5 « , » i sil saa I 3 111 ii 3 u iiiii.a ??!??!??: smssmh liin £ £fSSS iila IIIIIIHI ii!il L. \h\ ! a « a Hi S£25 ?5! m Hii Hii I i,1i “• • \z’::Zmnissaa M iji ijii ill liil :i: thi f!i M i\\W\ M,Hi IH iiHiiy; ss = M*«M i i!!il III Hi! I ! !!!s! !!! '!!! .IIIIHII IIIIIHI! ■■! 1. Ill liiii zzzlzzlzz s S !i Ji 5 sillaaJ a<«.a:ss«..............aiia ia«;l essmm ssssisssssssMSSiM SMM IMSISISE MSMM S£Mi^ MM Ml I ?!MMM ! M[iiiiin ifiiiitiniiMifIII iiiit MMli? ilii!!llilli! 1 I iif, ii'^1 il jiiii»1 ««ee poboo«o»*« illLnl il HlUjlllill ini* :: iHlI!! flHliyyiH!!!!!! 111!! I IllllliiJiirniinUi, !!| Hi!ii i iiijjliijii 1 11 j . j < 1 j I ■ • i ; 4 j !!!!!!!5?:::?::!?::? ?! ?????!!? ?????????? mmimmmni ?? ?!??!?!! ?!?!??!!!? ?!????????????!! ; I 4 • < ssssss i L ES SS ?!???! ?it iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii 11 iiiiiiii mm iiiiiiyiiiiin iiiiii i II II m mm\ imhimmumm J H 1 I I. I i .1 J i.l.l!......J. I* I mm!?!tl f I iLKfUU I nhiHfif}|tf {| ,in( fi IflUlnn jU nrifS* JiffS V‘ ffsHnui HiMrlfSi Jffff fi MSiifHSI IHhII IJIIliil llllHiill 111 i i ijiiiinisiinpliillli! mlulli 1 hiihiizhiiiiiiiilhi iizzziti zzzzz illHIlHlllllllilH H llilflll 1111111111 llllliiliiiiilli nililli I:ii niiiii iiiiiiiI!II ii ‘ils H i I 111 i j I.{. sS liiiliiiliiliiiiilij iliji}iyiiiiiii!iiii]iiiiSiiii!:i^ ihini J^s \i S'j ills i tUif ni 1 1 liii 8 8 85££ i I I ll • i j i 4 i « « ^ i Ii Iijl4i44lli44f «litl I 8 5 !SH« • • » • « M i!li I \!!» !*!!!!! Mf:5 : I M M HIM I MIM MMIMMM IM MM IMM | I I MM; I HtiHii! fiiiiii ffHiniiniitiii riiniiMHMi iitd liiii I mmm mummiimu m »mi t fiU I \ mHipnil! 5 zzzi ijir!, I I ijli I i } i I - I iiifi il ? ifijiljil liiliiumii 11, . IIH 8 8 8^88 mi St list .. I il I! ■ Iltl S£££££££8 iziiui iiJr.iiznzzzmm sssssssssssssh nni hhe i 3« « 11 !! 11 sss:s5s»2:hs:::ssuss:ssss:sJs!;s: ;522lsss::2in ttszi-zzzzzh II it U zz II i iiiii i 1 111 i i n •*. .*• ' *.' ■ami^I 'T' - J V.V '•W'^’x" -■ .;V../ *' . • ''•‘.r'‘t ..* < ■•^. . •‘I'Z ' •^vv .»•>«.',' c- : ■^■S/r:.' ^ ‘W' ” - ^oJU j » , 7-<^* tc^zs- ,<i* /--J " X /r^ JS^ C^-4^ ^ ^ Zr ->Z ^ ^ .Zu.^ , 2 ' C’t€jity%A^\y.jc:'CHe-^ *^‘3vt^t zUf^O UciCci V-wy^*-T’-»-^.r/•-^:^-< -<5Cr ^<f{i< Cc^UA^<d^ -^7^ 2 ^ xtMxt^'tS' k..^5ir CM^^Ct ^ 0^A^,Ae •A^kJ^ - : -"Xf^;- ...ji -i--. ■■'•ii i t» ■■■1 .:f xS = ■ '‘'V': ^1 .1 1 r>Yv^ '*’•• ''■ > •- '— V V.' •Ti’ fc. m 62290.1 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato DATS: June 22, 1990 SUBJECT: West Hennepin Traffic Stop/Long Lake On June 16, 1990 about 5 o'clock in the afternoon Rick Denneson, West Hennepin Public Safety Officer, while engaged on patrol noted a car with a cracked windshield. He proceeded to follow this car, he determined that the car was registered to a driver who had a license suspended several days earlier. As a result of this he initiated a stop which occurred at Larry's Lounge in Long Lake. In addition to the car he stopped, two other cars that were apparently in company with that vehicle choose also to stop. Officer Denneson requested assistance from Otono and Officer James Morowczynski assisted him. Officer Morowczynski was involved with the stop for approximately 40 minutes, at which time Officer Denneson having determined that there was a possible felony warrant out for one of the individuals, took the party to the West Hennepin Public Safety building. The person was sent to the Hennepin County Jail to determine identity and was subsequently released. On Tuesday, June 19th, Lt. Mark Moran was approached regarding the complaint and shown a letter from one of the occupants of one of the vehicles involved in the stop. He immediately reviewed the file and determine that Orono was acting in an assistance role only and requested that Officer Morowczynski prepare a written statement of his recall of the events. On Tuesday and Wednesday, Officer Moran initiated calls t^ three of the parties involved to determine what complaints, if any, they may have against the Orono Officer and also if, in fact, there were complaints to make available to give them an opportunity to follow an internal affairs complaint with the police department. At this point the complainants are apparently choosing to pursue whatever complaints they have through the State Department of Human Rights rather than through the local police agency. We will continue to monitor to determine what action, if any, is appropriate. During the week of June 18th Chief Kilbo has been on vacation and I do appreciate Lt. Moran's prompt and effective handling of the matter to date. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. ose th iting a place of one^s own riir iM-ltM tic 'iylinj: uf \ ii torian ar- , ma> liavt* Ihmh in .' iinii> Bi itain. Imt ils «irnal«* • iciaitiiiu aUo iia> iuiin«l a rumlort- uitli* plact* oil the laiul- -ram*. For Koliorl Dumas, rrtiml |in<lmast(‘r ami purt-tiim* orriianl- :nuui*r. tlir ^ran* of Mctoriun lixin*: ronu'** in timf-qiiarter srale. Nisihlr from Hwy, 12 just oulsiilr Loim I.akr. till* pearhy-roloml Mrloriaii pi, iiptist' he Iniilt for his p amlrhil- I. \i'iel ami Fvan. \>ho live Just ai ri.*« the orehanl. stands in •harp—anil vertieal—eontrast to hi' white, suhiirhan style rainhler. "I have ahvavs wanteii to live in a \irtorian house." says Dumas, who foiimi desi^iin^ ami huildin^ a piav- liiMise less prieey than the real thini:. He Used a elassie .i-story \ietorian li...... in >t. Paul's historie Mill dis- whieh he found featureil in a !i* IN. as the prototype for his rhil- dren"' playhouse, a "Fairv Prineess Fastle." as announeed on a stepping 'tone hehue the hark stoop. No stran;ier to the world of « on- 'Iriietion. Dumas hud built five Nietoriun dollhouses before staiiinu on the larfier-seale model. His own livMi:: room. too. is testament to his •rity us well us his |iredilertion lo; the offlieal. He eonstriieted a tram set that eneireles the livinn room at eeiliii}: hei<£ht. and he installed and rebuilt a eoUeetion of pianos and pipe o'-^ans —ineludin^ a '‘ejiarate ehumber for all the or*;an pipes—that have turned the room into a eoneert hull, with a stuffed Iroji pounding on a set of keyboards • main act. :• the playhouse, which he be- {iiin imilding three years ago. Dumas included all the details one expects from \ietorian exlravajianee. \ ilis- tinetive turret topped with a witch’s ‘■ap marks the house from the street. A poirh vsith white railing wraps the front and side of the house, a white m —Is r FI W S’S'.-S.J a. 11 ■0\!m J-JAbMMwI ^ ' ' r* trellis outlines a secoml-noor bal cony. and a stained-jilass window Iwhicb Dumas also designed and built himself) peeks out from the third level. Inside is a child's fantasy in miniature, in which the grandchil dren cun host tea parties amidst tiny furniture. Fli^hts of stuiis lead from the main room to the second floor, which has access to a balcony, and up even hiiiher to the third lev el. tiny |)orthole on the upper lev el leads into the turret, a perfect hide-out within a witch's cup. \ ictorian-'lyle floral wallpaper and ,'tained-filass tran'oiiis set the .'ta^e L- r^ r li lor a "real" house, but ceilings— much too low for ailults to stand ii|i- right—make it clear this is a kid's world, a place to play the domestic game in fanciful Mctoriun garb. E.K. JULV'AUGUST 1990 21 I NEWSLETTER ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 INDEPENDENCE LONG LAKE MAPLE PLAIN MEDINA MINNETONKA ORONO 686 OLD CRYSTAL ROAD LONG LAKE, MINNESOTA 6M56 473-7313 ORONO SCHOOL BOARD David McKown. Chairman 479-1692 Don Anderson. Vice Chairman 479-1810 Lucie Tavlor, Trea.surer 473-1189 Kitty Crosby. Clerk 478-6037 Jim Franklin. Director 479-2130 John Maresh. Director 475-3197 JUNE, 1990 ISSUE NO, 10 Superintendent's Notes Congratulations to Peg Swanson and Don Anderson. Both were elected to three year terms on the Board of Education. Peg Swanson is an Orono graduate and longtime school volunteer. Don .Andetson is an incumbent Board Member who has most recently been a member of the Facilities Committee overseeing the construction of the classroom and p>ool building. Congratulations also to the other community members whose names appeared on the May 15 ballot. They deserve congratulations because of their obvious sense of civic responsibility and interest in education: Ann Co.sgrove, Katie Dayton, Julie Erickson and Maryanna Massey. As the school year ends the school community is feeling anxiety. Long time Board Member Kitty Crosby did not seek re-election and her term expires on June 30th. Our anxiety is caused by the realization that Kitty Crosby’s twelve years of service on the Board is more than we have a right to expx?ct. At the same time, however, we know she is an able Board Member dedicated to the Orono Schools. It would be easy to chronicle Kitty Crosby's good work on the Board of Education. It would include her stalwart efforts on behalf of the Orono Scholarship program, her leadership on the District's Negotiations Committee, her support for improved curriculum and program coordination, her keen interest in the fiscal affairs of the District, and her responsiveness to community and staff members. All of this and much more has been undertaken in the spirit of what is best for students. Well beyond meetings and programs, Kitty Crosby is an ambassador for Orono schools, i.e., for students. She has represented the community in her role as Board member with enthusiasm, integrity, and, always, a gracious disposition. We salute Kitty Crosby - Orono High School alumna, former Orono Elementary School teacher, Orono School District parent, and twelve year member of the Board of Educahon. Thank you, Kitty, for all your good work. Dr. Thomas B. Mich Superintendent r.; Brandon Loomis, Kirsten Hokanson, Lori Hoppe, Mike Brindley, Jim Bellingham Special Olympics The Area 11 Track and Field Special Olympics was held May 4th, at Totino Grace High ^hool. A warm beautiful day helped the Orono team do very well. Head coach Bev Ebbecke did a great job organizing everything and was assisted at the meet by Middle School coach Connie Priesz. Placing for Orono in different age groups were: Softball Throw - Kirsten Hokanson, Lori Hoppe, Brandon Loomis, Mike Brindley, Jim Bellingham. Tennis Ball Throw - Sadie Merz. 400 Meter Dash - Jim Bellingham. 200 Meter Dash - Mike Brindley. 100 Meter Dash - Brandon Loomis, Lori Hoppe, Kirsten Hokanson. 50 Meter Dash - Sadie Merz. The students arc looking forward to the State Meet which will be held at St. Goud Sate University June 5,6, and 7. Anyone wishing to donate money for a banner for the Orono Athletes to carry at the State games should contact Orono Schools at 473-7301. Congratulations Orono Athletes! Guidance at a Glance First Test Dates Next Fall: SAT: Nov. 3,1990 Registration Deadline 9/28/90 ACT: Oct. 27,1990 Registration Deadline 9/28/90 Tuniors: PSAT DATE SET The Preliminary Scholastic Aptitude Test (PSAT/NMSQT) for juniors is scheduled for Saturday, October 20,1990. This spring sophomores were asked to consider whether they would like to take this test next fall and to reserve a test by signing up in the Guidance Office. The Educational Testing Service requires high schools to place their order by June 26. Please check with your son or daughter to see if they have signed up. If not, you may phone in a reservation by calling the high school at 473-5472 up until the June 26 deadline. The PSAT is a national test given only once a year to juniors. It is the qualifying test for National Merit Scholarship Competition, the largest of its kind in the country. It is also a useful opportunity to take a college entrance test in the junior year. High School Summer School Orono High School again will cooperate with Wayzata High School on their make-up summer school program. The high school counselors have the necessary information. All students who io take *5 ivantage of this opportunity must have pre-approval trom an Orono counselor. Registration deadline is June 15 and must be done by mail. Qasses will run for six weeks starting June 18. Cost is $120 per 1/2 credit course and is offered in the areas of English, social studies and general math. Counselors may also have summer make-up opportunities from other school districts as they come in. Guidance Office - Summer Hours The Guidance office will be open June 11 through June 15 and also on Tuesday June 19 and 26. They will lx closed the month of July. The office will reopen again on August 7 and be open on August 14. Starting August 21 the office will be open full time. High School Counselors 473-5472 CALL WITH YOUR QUESTIONS Ms. Woyteke - all students with last names A-K Mn Wasbotten - all students with last names L-Z Orono School District Awards Night The following students were awarded Scholastic Honorariums at the Orono High School Annual Awards Night on May 15, 1990. Minnetonka FVuit Growers Assn. Awards Katherine Crosby, Craig Gardner Tri>y Hughes Paul Schumann Award Sean Jenkins Orono Middle School Service Award Kirk Peterson JoAnn Walmslev Award Alejandra Gimenez Orono Lions Club Awards Brent Anderson, Michael Danielson, Michael Diehl, Andrew Hayes E.L. "Bud* .Shniiphnpggy Award Jennifer Barfknecht Orono Education Association Award Yan Qiu Wavzata Masonic I^dge Awards Brian Diehl, Michelle Schmidt Bank of Manle Plain Award Georgina Fields Orono Music Awards Paige Scalf, Sara Veilleux Orono Coaches Association Award Bryce Blanski Gordon David Alston Award Jay Hopia Mound Medical Clinic Award Brenda Welch Maple Plain American Legion Auxiliary Award Laura Cook Diane Susan Gronberg Award KeUi Lynch Steve Senesac Award Cynthia Lanars Maple Plain Lions Club Awards Shannon Baker, Michael Hardin, Paula Schliinz Orono Hockey Boosters Award David Knudsen Orono P.T.A. Award Amy Eckhardt G.T. Shaughnessy Award Sandra Thurk Hamel Lions Club Awards Jennifer Knudson, Lynn Wieezorek Lind Family Foundation Award Eleanor Winston Daniel R. Johnson Memorial Award Christopher Flint Northwest Suburban Chamber of Commerce Award Richard Elsenpeter Gullixson Awards Jennifer Brickley, Stephen Capp, Thomas Dorrel, Rachel Fulkerson, Timothy H^tmann, Amy Leintz, Jill Theis, Orono District Awards Theresa Abdo, Theodore Adams, Cheryl Bower, Erin King, Dimity McDowell, Melissa McMahill, Jason Micke, Paige Scalf, Kathleen Seuntjens, Joshua Smith, Amy Stretmater, Sara Veilleux, Jeri Wahlfors, David Wittmer, Jeannie Wong I-i . . 'S Senior Members for 1989-1990 11 V iv ^'y'* New Senior Members ''' 'S® jffySi J New Junior Members The Orono High School Chapter of the National Honor Society 1989 - 1990 Seniors Brent Anderson Jennifer Barfknccht Jennifer Brickley Alejandra Gimenez Heather Kitzinann Jason Micke Paige R]lizabeth Scalf Kathleen Scuntjens Sara Veilleux Kleanor Winston Shannon Baker Bryce Blanski Brian Diehl Erin King Dimity McDowell Yan Qiu Michelle Schmidt Joshua Smith Jeri Wahl fors Jeannie Wong Juniors Heather Brown Angci . Gawron Jeffrey MaiT Jill Salo Cory Cederberg Laurie Hite Stephanie Morrissette Notes from the High School High School Parents Group An official parent group was formed at the last Parent Forum. The group is to be called Spartan Parent Association. The following parents agreed to act as officers: Co-Chairperson(s) Renee Olsten Gail Gabbert Sharon Griffiths Carol Roland Marianne Dudley Kathy Wenger Kathy Mayes Teacher Representative: Jeff Brown Secretary Treasurer Membership Information on Measles Immunization The Minnesota Department of Health has sent information in regard to Measles immunizations because of the recent outbreaks of Red Measles (Rubeola) m the Metropolitan area. The American Academy of PeMiatnes and the Minnesota Department of Health recommends that children rcHreive their first dose of measles vaccine as MMR (Mumps, Measles and Rubella) at 15 months of age. They also recommend all children should receive a second dose of measles vaccine, preferably MMR at about 12 years of age. I would urge vou to contact your family physician to see if your child should be re-immunized. If your child does receive another measles immunization please notify the nurses office in the school your child attends, so that their immunization record can be updated. Any questions please call JoAnn Rce, 473*5472, Ext. 227. Board Review Regular Meeting - April 9,1990 • Accepted the resignation of Nancy Thayer Tomlinson, secretary to the Schumann Elementary principal. • Approved the appointment of Sue Kueppers to the position ofOrono Middle School Assistant to the Principal beginning July 1, 1990. • Agreed to contribute $200 to the Orono Education Association to offset costs of the recognition/retire- rnent breakfast. • Set a special Board meeting for Thursday, April 12 at 7:00 a.m. to accept the recommended electrical bid. • Approved the payment of $1,000 in settlement of the claims of a school district employee. • Approved the resolution relating to the termination and non-renewal of the teaching contract for the following teachers; Dawn Berg, Kathleen A Hiniker, Kristen Peterson Michael J. Preble Denise A Roth, Agnes A Thomas and Rachael Raz. • Accepted the low bids and awarded the contracts for new construction as recommended by the construction manager. • Approved the resolution relating to the election of School Board Members and calling the School District General Election with the following people filing: Don A Anderson, Ann A. Cosgrove, Katie Da>lon, Julie A. Erickson, Maryanna Massey, Peg Swanson. • Directed Administration to develop a day care program to be operated under the auspices of the Community Education Program. Special Meeting - April 12,1990 • Approved the convening of a special school district meeting under special circumstances for the purpose of approving a construction bid. • Approved the acceptance of the bid of Medina Electric Company for electrical work on the proposed new construction as presented by administration. Regular Meeting - May 15,1990 • Approved the follow ing coaches for sprmg sports: Eric Han.son, head baseball coach; Brian Bergstrom, assistant baseball coach; Kevin Sharpe, assistant baseball coach; Scott Zeidler, assistant softball coach; Tracy Nordstrom, assistant softball coach; Jane Schleisman, assistant tennis coach; Kevin Rose, assistant track coach; Matthew Laue, assistant track coach. Bill Greenwood, assistant track coach. • Accepted the resignation of Fran Engstrom, Schumann Elementary teacher, effective at the end of the 1991-1992 school year. • Accepted the resignation of Robert Neumann, high school foreign language teacher, effective at the end of the 1991-1992 school year. • Approved a shared time position for Fran Engstrom, September, 1990 - January 1991. • Accepted the resignation of La Von Determan, high school cook, effective June 7, 1990. • Accepted the resignation of Mary Eisinger, Schumann Elementary health clerk, effective June 7, 1990. • Accepted the resignation of Alvin Felt, high school custodian, effective July 1, 1990. • Approved the appointment of Steve Fedie as Athletic Director. • Approved the hiring of a child care p-ogram coordinator. • Accepted the second low bid of Northland Mechanical Contractors for building construction. • Approved the sumn er projects as follows: Middle School roof repair. Middle School tennis court refurbishment, air condition High School auditorium and replacement of gas-oil burner at O.P.S. • Approved the final vote count of the School Board Election with Don Anderson and Peg Swanson receiving the highest number of votes. SCHOOL SUPPLIES - SCHUMANN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1990 -1991 The teachers have compiled a list of supplies by grade level which we hope will guide you in purchasing supplies you wish to furnish for your child's school year. PT.EASE PITT NAMES ON ALL ITEMS KINDERGARTEN School bag with name Old socks Tennis Shoes 1 large box of tissues Name on outer clothing Grade 1 1 piece of oil cloth (18" x 24") 1 small box of tissues Tennis shoes for gym use Paint shirt - an old shirt with sleeves cut short - name across shoulder 10 No. 2 pencils (only send 2 at a time) Crayons 1 covered plastic container - pint size for clay 1 - 8oz. bottle of white glue School box - cigar box size - plastic if possible 2 pocket folders (NO TRAPPERS) 1 old T-shirt with name in large letters on front & back (for gym & music teacher to learn names) Magic markers - WATER SOLUBLE ONLY - optional 1 old sock (to use as an eraser) 1 glue stick Scissor - pointed 2 sticks of modeling clay 1 box 1/2" paper fasteners 1 spiral notcbwk - wide ruled 1 ball of knitted worsted yarn - any color 1 school bag or back pack Grade 2 Crayons - 24 count Scissor - pointed 10 No. 2 pencils 1 roll scotch tape 2 soft erasers 3 spiral notebooks-wide ruled NO TRAPPERS Box of tissues 1 - 6" ruler 1 glue stick 2 red felt tip pens School box - sturdy one please Tennis shoes for gym use 4 folders with pockets 1 - 4oz. bottle of white glue Old T-shirt with name in large letters on front & back for gym and music 1 button-down long sleeve shirt with name on back, for art 1 set markers - WATER SOLUBLE ONLY Simple hand held calculator with four functions 2 old clean white socks Grade 3 10 No. 2 pencils 1 red pencil, 1 blue pen Soft erasers 3 ringed wide-lined paper 5 pocket folders Tennis shoes for gym use Paint shirt with name written across back shoulder Plastic zipper pocket for pen & pencils 1 - 4oz. bottle of white glue Crayons - 24 count Scissor - pointed 1 spiral notebook for Journal Writing Colored pencils Magic markers - WATER SOLUBLE ONLY - optional Old T-shirt with name in large letters on front & back (for gym & music >eacher to learn names) 1 ruler NO TRAPPERS OR RINGED NOTEBOOKS (These are too large to keep in desks or lockers) Ungraded Name on each individual item Large durable plastic school box 2 pocket folders to carry papers 10 No. 2 j?endls in Sept. & January 1 large box of tissues for classroom use 1 - 4oz. bottle of white glue Erasers Tennis shoes for gym use Crayons Markers - WATER SOLUBLE ONLY - Sept. & Jan. Wide-lined spiral notebook - Gr. 1 after Winter Break 2 wide-lined spiral notebooks - GR 2 3 wide-lined spiral notebooks - GR 3 1 red felt tip pen Scissor - pointed 2 old socks - GR 1 & 2 Art shirt with name across back shoulder in marker Old T-shirt w'ith name in large letters on front & back ( for gym & music) 1 three subject notebook - GR 3 for health. Science & Social Studies Please check with your child mid-year about their supplies. Mike Deihl Receives Awards Michael Diehl received two Awards at the Annual Awards Convocation Ceremony at Hennepin Technical College North Campus, on May 22,1990. For the second year in a row Mike was awarded recognition for perfect attendance, an award achieved by only a few students. As a two-year student in the Commercial Greenhouse Program, Mike has been active in competitive events in horticulture and has participated at the National level. In reco‘»nition for his expertise in the program, he was presented with the DeKalb Agricultural Accomplishment Award. Mike will continue his education, in horticulture, at the University of Minnesota, Crookston. Congratulations, Mike, on a job well-done! A special thank you to April Wysocki for tallying all the Intermediate/Middle Schools Lund*s receipts and delivering them to Lund's Corporate Headquarters. The Intermediate/Middle Schools received two computers. Thanks to all who supported this program. Summer Time Activities Orono Community Education has plenty of offerings still available for those looking for something to do this summer. Listed below are some the events and progrmams. To register for any of these, please call the Community Ed. Office at 473-4879. Tennis Lessons Summer P laygrounJ Day Camp Trip to Twins Game Football Camp Karate Boys & Girls Basketball Camps Dog Obedience Trip to zoo Adult Co-Rec Softball League Riverfest Kidstock Day g NEWSLETTER ADMINISTRATION OFTICI SaS OLD CRYSTAL BAT ROAD NORTH LONO LAMB. MINNESOTA SS3M Non.^rolii 0>9. U S fOSIACl PAID I.WQ I.L., M»». niMITNO 17 errvoF •^RONO J JUN 2 1 1990 °<-ono Box 66 Boy. 333^3 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA Regular Meeting, 7:30 p.m., Wednesday, June 28, 1990 Tonka Bay City Hall 4901 Manitou Road (County Road 19)JUN 2 5 1990 7:00 p.m.: Meeting preceded by Public Information Meeting on Inter-Agency Dredging Agreement 7:30 p.m.: 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Reading of Minutes: 5-23-90 Regular Meeting 4. Public Conments - from persons in attendance not on agenda 5. Reports A. Chair Cochran 1) Consideration for amending LMCD By Laws or administrative prerogative to change the order of business for Board agenda 2) Announcements: * Public Officials Lake Inspection Tour, 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m., Saturday, August 4, from Lafayette Club B. Financial Reports, Treasurer Lewman 1) Statement of Cash Transactions, month ending 5-31-90 2) Audit of vouchers for payment 3) Annual Budget proposal for Fiscal Year 1991, 1-1-91 to 12-31-91 C. Standing Committees 1) WATER STRUCTURES, Chair Grathwol (no minutes) a) Temporary Dock Extension requests for: * Hary T. Kreslins, Greenwood, St. Alban's Bay, for 8 feet * St. Alban's Bay Marina, Inc., four foot dock platform for gas dock access from boats * Shorewood Marina & Yacht Club, Inc., eight foot dock platform for gas dock access from boats * Tonka Bay Marina & Yacht Club, Inc., four foot dock platform for gas dock access from boats Recommending approval as requested, no navigation interference b) Additional business recommended by the committee 2) LAKE USE COMMITTEE, Chair Pillsbury a) Approval of minutes, meeting of 6-18-90 (over) LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT LMCD Board Agenda June 28, 1990 Page 2 5. C. 2) 5. C. 3) 5. C. 4) 5. D. b) Wayzata Chamber of Commerce July 4 Special Event Permit recommending approval for fireworks shoot from barge in Wayzata Bay c) Deposit refunds, recommending approval for Westonka M.D.A. Fishing Contest; Lord Fletchers Canoe Race, application denied d) Water level reference point for Water Patrol public inquiry response, recommending use of 928.6* elevation e) Recommendation to rescind Board action of 5-23-90 denying Code change to modify waterskl observer rule for certain low-use days, with a further recommendation for staff to develop a waterski-observer rule modification under certain low lake-use conditions including require ment that operator be 18 years of age or older f) Personal Watercraft information and education program request by Kawasaki jet ski dealers, recommending denial g) Additional business recommended by the committee * Charter boat liquor license requirements ADVISORY COMMITTEE, Chair Raseop a) Progress on public review comment through close of comment period of June 18, 1990 b) Reschedule of Advisory Committee review of consultant's response to public comments, set for 7:00 p.m. Thursday, June 28, 1990, Tonka Bay City Hall ENVIRONMENT, Chair Reese a) Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force progress b) Weed harvesting update * Progress on permit of 1,550 acres * Equipment condition and operation * Research progress on alternate treatment methods * Funding progress Executive Director's Report, Strommen 1) Staff vacation plans; temporary clerical assistant Aimee Meyer 2) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers meeting 7-25-90, 2:00 p.m. to 10 p.m., regarding Federal Manual Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands 6. Unfinished Business 7. New Business 8. Adjournment 6-21-90 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS Regular Meeting. 7:30 p.m., May 23, 1990 Tonka Bay City Hall 1. Call to Order. Cochran at 7:30 p.m. 2. Roll Call. The meeting was called to order by Chair Members Present: Douglas Babcock, Spring Park; Marvin Bjorlin, Tonka Bay; Jan Boswinkel, Secretary, Minnetonka Beach; David Cochran, Chair, Greenwood; Bert Foster, Vice Chair, Deephaven; JoEllen Hurr, Orono; John Lewman, Treasurer, Minnetrista; Thomas Martinson, Wayzata; Robert Rascop, Shorewood; Thomas Reese, Mound. Also present: Charles LeFevere, Counsel; Sgt. Wm. Chandler, Sheriff's Water Patrol; DuWayne Schibilla, Auditor; Eugene Strommen, Executive Director. ii Members Absent: James Grathwol, Excelsior; John Malinka, Victoria; Robert Pillsbury, Minnetonka. Robert Slocum, Woodland. 3 Reading of Minutes: Hurr moved, Bjorlin seconded, approval of the minutes of the April 25, 1990 meeting as submitted. Motion carried, Rascop abstaining. 4. Public Comments: There were no requests to be heard from persons in attendance not on the agenda. 5. Reports A. Chair Cochran 1) MN DNR Shoreland Grant Contract. Cochran reported the MN DNR Shoreland Grant Contract is ready for the fourteen member cities approval. 2) MN DNR Management Plan Reimbursement Contract Status. Cochran reported the contract for ">anagement plan partial fund reimbursement is being signed by the MN DNR and the funds should be available before the next Board $40,000. will be recorded as a reimbursemen,- to the Managemen Plan contract expense. 3) Management Plan Public Review. Public hearings on the Management Plan will be held June 6, 1990. sneciai at the Minnetonka City Hall. Each member is to ® effort to invite the elected officials and staff of the city s/he represents to the public hearing. B. Financial.Reports, Treasurer Lewman 1) Statement of Cash Transactions Lewman submitted the statement of cash transactions as of April 30, 1990. It was accepted by the Board and ordered filed. LMCD Board of Directors May 23, 1990 2) Audit of Vouchers for Payment Lewman moved, Hurr seconded, approval of bills amount of $22,740.85, checks numbered 6078 through 6145. carried unanimously. in the Motion 3) Annual Audit, Year Ending 12/31/90 Lewman presented the 1989 annu , audit and management letter prepared by DuWayne Schibilla. He noted the variance from the budget in the income and expenditures. This results because there was no budget in 1989 for the Eurasian Water Milfoil program included in the administrative budget. Schibilla reviewed the two recommendations in the management letter. He recommends changing the chart of accounts to correspond to the budgeting process. Rascop recommended using the state uniform chart of accounts. Staff will review the current method and state chart of accounts and report to the Board with a recommendation. He also stated claims for payment should be accompanied by a disclaimer that the claim is just and correct and that no part of it has been paid. He suggested this be conveniently handled by having the disclaimer imprinted above the endorsement section on the reverse of the check. This is a statutory requirement. Staff will order a stamp for this purpose until the new supply of checks is exhausted. 4. First Quarter 1990 Balance Sheet. The Board received the first quarter balance sheet ordered it filed. and C. Standing Committees 1) a) minutes of unanimously. WATER STRUCTURES, Babcock for Chair Grathwol Boswinkel moved, Rascop seconded, approval of the the 5-12-90 meeting as submitted. Motion carried the low b) Temporary Low Water Variances Babcock moved, Boswinkel seconded, approval of committee recommendation to approve the following temporary water variances: ^ ^ r>* Smithtown Bay Association, Smithtown Bay, Victoria * Baycliffe Property Owners Assn., South Upper Lake, Victoria (The dock will be r.oved so there is no encroachment within the 15 foot setback to the southwest) ^ Jennings Cove Dock Owners Assn., Jennings Bay, Minnetrista * Lafayette Club, Crystal Bay, Minnetonka Beach * Minnetonka Yacht Club/Lake Minnetonka Sailing School, Carsons & St.,Louis Bays, Deephaven Motion carried unanimously. LMCD Board of Directors May 23, 1990 c) Dock License Renewals. Boswinkel moved, Lewman seconded, to approve the the following dock license renewals, including Orders and stipulations: ^ u * Lafayette Club,East Crystal Bay, Minnetonka Beach * Pizelli’s on the Lake, Seton Lake, Spring Park, with name change from Pizza on the Lake. Motion carried unanimously. d) Dock License Renewals (Pending City Approval) Boswinkel moved, Martinson seconded, approval of follc'Wing dock license renewals, including Orders stipulations, pending city approval of zoning certificates: * Gayle’s Marina (need $100 late fee) * Grays Bay Resort & Marina * The Harborage * Jennings Cove Dock Owners Assn. * Johnston, Adeline D. * Loring Acres Beach Assn. * Maple Crest Estates * Minnetonka Portable Dredging St. Albans Bay Marina * Smith’s Bay Marina * Smithtown Bay Association Motion carried unanimously. the and e) Dock License Bean’s Greenwood Marina - Minor Adjustment to 1990 Hurr moved, Lewman seconded, to approve a temporary change in the Bean’s Greenwood Marina 1990 dock license to move slip%101 from its location next to slip »98to a location next to slip t^6. Motion carried unanimously. City of Deephaven Environmental Assessment Worksheet The executive director reported the water surface use authorize its distribution and publication as required by the Environmental Quality Board. Motion carried unanimously. LMCD Board of Directors May 23, 1990 g.Minnehaha Creek Watershed District - Dredging Violation asked The over Woody Love, Board of Managers Member, and Jim Mahady, Consulting Engineer, representing the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) reported their findings regarding Gayle’s Marina’s dredging violation. Love requested LMCD support in bringing the marina into compliance with MCWD rules and dredging policy. He stressed that this violation has nothing to do with litigation between Gayle’s Marina and MCWD on another matter. Love explained the MCWD responded to a complaint about dredging at Gayle’s Marina, inspected the site and found a non- permitted channel was being dredged by the owner, who is not a licensed contractor. The channel is wider (30’) and deeper (921.7) than the MCWD would permit (15’x 923.6’). In addition spoil was being used to build up an embankment on shore, and some spoil was believed to be cast aside in the Lake. Love said the DNR is joining the MCWD in enforcement and Love requested LMCD support. . , Responding to a question from Rascop, Love said they the owner to cease, but by then the project was completed. DNR indicates they may ask for restoration with clean fill. Hurr stated her opinion that the LMCD has no authority dredging. Lefevere responded that the multiple dock license requires compliance with all legal state agencies. He urged the Board to proceed with caution because any action taken to revoke the marina’s license would have to be based on another agency s ordinance. He suggested resolution of support of the MCWD would be appropriate. Rascop suggested commending the MCWD for their actions and encourage them to issue citations. Babcock’s suggestion to continue the discussion in committee was accepted. Babcock asked Love to keep the LMCD informed of actions taken. h) Use of Lake Water for I.avm Sprinkling The Board received a suggested communication from Cochran to all the Lake communities suggesting they implement a requirement in their lawn sprinkling bans to include water drawn from the Foster’s opinion is that the amount of water withdrawn from the Lake has a minimal impact. He feels it is important to maintain the lawns and shrubs on the lakeshore but would discourage the use of fertilisers. Boswinkel favors the letter, stating use of lake water, dredging, and fertilisation, while individually small, all add up to an effect on the Lake. Rascop said this is a means of indicating the District is also worried about the water table. , « uRascop moved, Boswinkel seconded, to commend Cochran for the letter he has written and to authorise forwarding it o e cities. Motion carried, Foster voting nay. LMCD Board of Directors i) Priority Study Items May 23, 1990 ^Wetlands Inventory - Babcock moved, Reese seconded, approval of a letter to the cities requesting assistance in preparing a wetlands inventory, the letter to include the details in the management plan, including the scale of the maps and a definition of wetlands. Motion carried unanimously. *Code Amendment Regarding Amenities -* Hurr moved, Boswinkel seconded, approval of a Code amendment categorizing and valuating amenities required in Section 2.05, including additions to Subd. "B" and "C" as recommended by the Committee, the Code ^mlendment to be prepared and placed on the June 27 Board agenda. Motion carried unanimously. Rascop questioned the appropriateness of fees charged for amenities. Hurr noted the Code allows appropriate fees to be charged by the licensee when necessary. j) City of Wayzata EAW Findings of Fact Recommendations Tlie executive director reported the MN DNR and the Metropolitan Council found no problem with the EAW and their comments have been incorporated in the Findings of Fact. Martinson moved, Boswinkel seconded, approval and distribution of the Findings of Fact and Recommendations in the matter of the City of Wayzata EAW involving a request for the addition of 15 slips to the northerly most of two lagoons in its city marina on Wayzata Bay. Motion carried unanimously. 5.C.ENVIRONMENT, Chair Reese. a) Martinson moved, Hurr seconded, acceptance of Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force minutes of 4-22-90 submitted. Motion carried unanimously. b) Eurasian Water Milfoil Program Planning the as Reese reported as follows: trainingTwo harvesters are in the Lake for operator as of 5-23. Reese has met the personnel and is impressed by them. UMI has been training the Hennepin Parks and LMCD personnel. It also has completed warranty maintenance on the LMCD harvesters. Harvesting is to start 5-29 with media being advised. A four wheel drive truck and a trailer have not been confirmed as yet. $39,000 has been collected toward the $55,000 volunteer fund goal. LMCD Board of Directors May 23t 1990 b) Underwater Found Obstruction (UFO) Progress A sample have been Boswinkel Reese reported the UFO program is underway, buoy is on display at the LMCD office and ten raore ordered. An information flyer will be prepared, suggested a display at local shopping malls. c) Dredging iolicy Interagency Agreement Hurr moved, Foster seconded, to accept the committee recommendation to authorize an informational hearing on a Lake Minnetonka Dredging Policy Interagency Agreement among DNR, MCWD and LMCD, the meeting to be held at 7:00 p.m. before the 6-27 Board meeting. Motion carried unanimously. 5. C. 3) LAKE USE, Vice Chair Foster for Chair Pillsbury a) Foster moved, Rascop seconded, approval of the minutes of the 5-21-90 Lake Use Committee meeting. Motion carried unanimously. b) Water Ski Slalom Course Foster moved, Bjorlin seconded, continuation of the arrangement for a slalom water ski course for Carey Manson and the Westonka Water Ski Residents under the same terms and conditions as 1989. Motion carried unanimously. c) Water Ski Observer Requirement Foster moved, Reese seconded, to request the LMCD attorney draft a code amendment regarding the water ski observer rule to be changed to 1) eliminate the need for an observer on non-holiday Mondays through Friday Noon. 2) Require standard curved rear-view water skiing mirror equipment on the boat when an observer is not used. 3) Eliminate the reference to "between Memorial Day and Labor Day". 4) Include a provision which would allow the Water Patrol to require an observer when there is sufficient congestion on the lake to warrant it in their judgment. DISCUSSION: Hurr stated she would be opposed because it creates a dangerous situation. Foster noted the LMCD code is more stringent than Minnesota State law. Rascop would oppose the changes as he does not believe it would be enforceable by delegating a judgment call to the Water Patrol. Cochran stated opposition because of the danger involved. Lefevere said it could be worded in a manner to give the Water Patrol authorit> if they issued a warning. If the skier continued it would then be a - continued LMCD Board of Directors May 23, 1990 failure to follow an order of a law enforcement officer. Chandler reported there are occasions, under the current Code, when they issue citations for no observer aboard during the week when the skier is the only boat on that portion of the Lake. VOTE: Reese, Foster, Martinson and Babcock voted aye. Hurr, Rascop, Cochran, Bjorlin, Boswinkel and Lewman voted nay. Motion failed. d) Special Event Application - Canoe Races Lord Fletcher’s Restaurant has made application for a special event permit to hold canoe races in their dock use area to the edge of the channel and back. Foster moved, Bjorlin seconded, to deny a special event permit for canoe races at Lord Fletcher’s. Hurr moved, Cochran seconded, to table the application for additional information. Reese, Cochran, Martinson and Hurr voted aye. Babcock, Bjorlin, Boswinkel, Lewman, Foster and Rascop voted nay. Motion failed. VOTE ON MOTION TO DENY: voting nay. Motion carried, Hurr and Martinson d) Personal Watercraft Ordinance The committee recommends two changes to the draft Ordinance regarding Personal Watercraft: 1) Delete the first sentence of Subd. 8 regarding age of operator and 2) Add to Subd. 11 Prolonged Operation. Person in control of such personal watercraft shall be subject to citation. Foster reported Minnesota Statutes require an operator of a personal water craft of more than 25 hp and under age 13 must be accompanied by an adult in the watercraft. At the suggestion of counsel the entire Subd. 8 could be eliminated and Subd. lOA changed to read Operator Permit required by law. Foster moved, Rascop seconded, to approve the third reading of An Ordinance Relating to Personal Watercraft be apnrcv d and order.-ed published accepting the following amendments: 1 ,-slete Subd. 8 of Section 3.041 and re-number 2) Change Subd. iU (a) of Section 3.041 to read Operator Permit as required by law. 3) Add to Subs. 11 of Section 3.041 the word Person in control of such personal watercraft shall be subject to citation. Motion carried unanimously. e) Pontoon Boat Rental - Lord Fletcher's Wm. Streeter and Bill Pearson have made application for a special event license to allow rental of small battery-operated pontoon boats from the Lord Fletcher's dock use area. LMCD Board of Directors May 23, 1990 Foster moved, Martinson seconded, approval of a special event permit to permit rental of battery powered watercraft (8*) according to the application of Wm. Streeter and Bill Pearson. DISCUSSION: Lefevere commented that without a special use permit this would not be a lawful use because the boats are being stored on the beach. The Code could be amended to take canoes and non- restricted water craft out of the ordinance. In the interim this could be tried for this season. Hurr objects to usurping the ordinance by giving a "use variance". Hurr expressed concern about this type of boat in the channel until 11 p.m. Babcock indicated concern with re-acting on a week to week basis on various requests. Responding to questions, Streeter said they would provide paddle.s on the boats, life vests in addition to the cushion type preserver, will not allow alcoholic beverages. He submitted a letter from Spring Park stating the city has no problem with the activity, but it cannot be conducted from -laegele’s adjoining residential zoned parcel. They will operate from the west end of the Lord Fletcher property where the boats will enter into a "slow" area. Chandler said he has not seen a permit application but is concerned about night operation of this type of watercraft. There were comments to the effect that the idea is a good one for giving people access to the Lake but this is not a good location. VOTE: Reese, Foster, Lewman and Martinson voted aye. Hurr, Bjorlin, Cochran and Rascop voted nay. Babcock and Boswinkel abstained. Motion failed. FURTHER DISCUSSION: Responding to a question from Foster, Lefevere stated there is reason to believe there would be a problem in setting a precedent if this were approved. Hurr spoke to the credibility of the Board if ordinances are circumvented. Martinson reminded the Board they have a commitment to add 350 parking spaces and this proposal goes a long way to give more people access to the Lake. Questions were raised about the full season special use permit. Cochran moved, Reese seconded, to reconsider the motion previously denied, provided there is wording to indicate this is an experiment. Reese, Foster, Cochran, Mari Juson and Lewman voted aye. Hurr, Bjorlin, Rascop and Bobccck voted nay. Boswinkel abstained. Motion carried. Foster moved, Martinson seconded, to approve a special use permit for rental of battery powered watercraft from Lord Fletcher’s with the restriction that the applicant have a paddle - continued LMCD Board of Directors May 23, 1990 on the boat, the operation terminate at sundown, the permit open to review by the Board at any time. This is be an experiment for the 1990 boating season, but the Board sees a potential in this type of boat for lake access. Motion carried, Hurr, Rascop and Babcock voting nay, Boswinkel abstaining. f) Water Patrol Report Chandler had no further information given to the Lake Use committee on May 21. for the report g) Lake Inspection Tour The lake inspection tour is scheduled tor 7:30 a.m., Saturday, 6-9-90. Boarding will be at Minnetonka Boat Works. If there should be priority items for consideration by the Water Structures committee a meeting will be held at 7:15 a.m. A Water Patrol representative, Denis Bailey and Commodore Roger Arendt, Lake Minnetonka Power Squadron, have been invited as special guests. h) Special Event Deposit Refund Foster moved, Bjorlin seconded, approval of a special event deposit refund of $100 to Holiday-Johnson Crappie Contest as recommended by the committee. Motion carried unanimously. 5.D.Executive Director's Report Strommen 1) The executive director reported 45 applications for the /irainistrative Technician position have been reviewed. Chair Cochran and the executive director interviewed eight candidates. Four candidates have been selected for a final interview. The executive director proposes the four officers and immediate past Chair Hurr participate in the final selection and authorize the hiring of an Administrative Technician from the four finalxsts. The annual compensation range is up to $22,000. with benefits as detailed in the personnel policy. Bjorlin moved, Babcock seconded, to approve the most qualified candidate for the Administrative Technician position as determined by the interviewing committee. Motion carried Reese asked if the Board desires to be involved in the selection process. The executive director indicated any board member would be welcome to attend the interviews. Cochran said he would want any board participants to see all candidates interviewed. The executive director assured Rascop that funds are budgeted and/or available through contract adjustments approved by the Board. LMCD Board of Directors May 23, 1990 The executive director reported temporary adjustments will be made in the office meeting room area for desk space, and additional space is needed. 2) Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCMR) The executive director re^"ed the LMCD applications for grant funds did not pass the sere \ng review. Contact was made with Senator Earl Renneke, an M . • mber. Mike Markel - MN DNR was most supportive. There was .t.,iderable competition for the funds. Continued lobbying was encouraged. 3) Presentation The executive director reported he will make a presentation on Lake User Conflict to the Centra.^ Minnesota Lake Management Conference and appear as a presenter ’ panel member on May 25 at Madden’s Lodge, Brainerd. 6. Unfinished Business 1) Babcock reported the Hennepin County Board voted to cap the last open well on Lake Minnetonka. 2) Cochran noted a letter from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources stating they will not issue a permit for diversion of water from the Mississippi or Crow Rivers for augmentation of Lake Minnetonka. 7. Other 1) Chair Cochran circulated a "Thank fou' from Joan Man-k to the Board for a birthday gift arranged by the executive director. 2) Cochran remindea the members to contact the city councils and mayors to attend the June 6 Public Hearing on the Management Plan. 8. Adjournment The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 10:45 p.m. David Cochran, Chair Jan Boswinkel, Secretary iliiis^mm»■ mi«l •/ (^ :>'. li.^L<li \’.'k' \\ \ W A |. ; iv^--. w i '<: \ ' \V A \ v1: '. ■ ■ 4-.\,•\ mm' tJii ‘i ■ i..,; :iKs4-' ttaraiM ..M mr:^^•: • ■■ ' . '■■•' .''m:: w -. ■- - V '.% ;■ ..- ,v\i;," SI'** ■ ;■■■ ■ '■ .'■ i&S»BIPBilftesiis \ ®f;rs-Si= ii ■•■■■':: »■ .. : ite : . ^ 1? • I / .; W : „v^i:# f r:''#%Me-4i, fe/:- '>Crm Kbw,!«» f... ifpii :^:gi : ii ' 3;siS^| i... ■'4 -■ ■■'^13 .X.... VI. i-1 J . ?P!iP-wm. mm «*iS‘ MiHiiBW ife ■ 1^,.: -v: f9txa. : K ' ■'-■m-':f^;- '-'iV*^ - / . ■I aaai ......... firfiHifeii HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK jone : (CIRCLE ONE) 75-250 * 250-500 ' 500-1000 Uiwwtc Hardcover in Zone B. Garage . c. Driveway _ X _ X _ X _ X _ X . S.F. . S.F. . S.F. . S.F. S.F. I-:- ^h-•: f si m: D. Sidewalk __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ X_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _X_ _ _ _ _ I_ _x__5_ _ _ _ _ X_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ X _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ X _ _ __ Patio/Deck F.Landscape AREAS UNDERLAIN BYPLASTIC SHEETING I I 2. 6. Other _ _ _ _;— x —- - - IO.S _ S.F. _ sIf. _ S.F. _ S.F. _ S.F. _ S.F. _ S.F. _ S.'. _ S.F. _ S.F. Total Hardcover in Zone - Total Property Area in Zone S.F. S.F. [a] S.F. ril m -;.[T|_J>i£±_X100 - _vl- -^ «w''- ' • ' ?■ r. - M .A •.-il mm '^wr • im- I " . f' ■ ■ ' ■.•■ ' ■ ■ ■ ;■•. '*' '■: ....'.■ ‘ - '-H' . b • * .... - ■,;;;•, • ‘ ■;• ■<■ >'ii mmm -:*: - ' ■, -.< k_ ^M/ -vf^ • ■:my’’mp^^ 'W pmm h<. " : \ 2-^:rA ;•■; '■ . • ■ ■ ■ ■■ '\* ■■■■,■’;•: .: V ■--;;''v''':-|W| ■' ■ " J wmmmmMMimm wa , ' ''» f; - **^.1 ; ;i: ■ :'% r *^'.- ■!, iSliit !»• WSSSiM Viiife:;--'.' -piUKiS : V" ...W ■ ’ 'Vl ■■■^ -V j tod C»«Cec4 Dear JaaoMt Ha haaa ravlaaad tha propoaad conitructioa of a garaga and clrcla drlvaaay at 970S lortb Sbora Dciva. Tha grading abara on tha plan provldaa for 2il alda alopaa. Ha vould iirnunl alopaa no ataapar than 3il and prafarablp 4tl. Thia *111 allow for ■aintalnlng tha alopaa proparlp. Tha toa of alopa along tha north «aat alda of tha lot ahould atart 1 foot off tha propartp llna. Tha alopa abova tha ratalnlng wall ahoald ba 6il or flattar to alio* for nalntananca. Ha would racoHwnd that daalgn datalla for tha wall and rawlaad profllaa along tha top and bottou of wall ba provlda. Tha halght of tha wall nay raqulra a fane* or railing for aafaty. Tha drlwaway proflla batwaan tha naw garaga and North Shora Drlva will ba vary ataap. Ha would axpact that thla will raault In difficulty In backing out of tha garaga In tha wlntar. Tha aabtarly antranca onto North Shore Drive allowa - -dlatance than tha waatarly entrance. thla office If you have any queatlona. INI, ANDSILIX t ASSOCIATES, INC. My 36 • St. PmH. MtoiMaoU S5tl3 • 6I2-636-M00 K ■ 'S^ ‘ > . / ■“