Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19830606_regular1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE JUNE 6, 1983 EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL Answering rollcall were Members Richards, Schmidt, Turner and Mayor Courtney. BOY SCOUT TROOP NO. 4 RECOGNIZED. Members of Boy Scout Troop 114 from Edina Morningside Community Congregational Church conducted a Flag Ceremony, were welcomed by Mayor Courtney and presented with a certificate of commendation. NATIONAL FLAG DAY RESOLUTION ADOPTED. resolution which was unanimously adopted: Mayor Courtney read the following RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR NATIONAL FLAG DAY, JUNE 14 WHEREAS, the Continental Congress of the United States adopted a national flag on June 14, 1777; and WHEREAS, the U.S. Congress officially designated June 14 as National Flag Day in 1949; and WHEREAS, the Star-Spangled Banner Flag House has officially sponsored Flag Week since 1952; and WHEREAS, the National Flag Day Foundation, in Baltimore, Maryland, was created in 1982 to plan National Flag Day ceremonies and to encourage patriotism by promoting the PAUSE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE and WHEREAS, this year on June 14, 1983, at 7 pm (EDT) Americans everywhere in the nation, led by President Reagan and Governors of the 50 states, are asked to pause to.say the pledge of allegiance to the FLAG of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: BE IT NOW RESOLVED, That the Edina City Council urge the citizens of Edina to join in this effort. . MINUTES of the Regular Meeting of May 2, 1983, and the Special Meeting of May 9, 1983, were approved as submitted by motion of Member Schmidt, seconded by Member Turner. Ayes: Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Nays: None Motion carried. PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR NORMANDALE BLUFF CONTINUED TO 6/20/83 FOR FINDINGS & FACTS. Affadavits of Notice were presented by the.Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file. Mr. Hughes recalled that-this property is generally located West of Rolf Avenue and South of W. 64th Street and that several subdivision proposals have been considered by Council. At the last meeting Council referred the matter back to the Community Development and Planning Commission and asked that it consider a two lot subdivision rather than a.three lot subdivision which had previously been requested. a revised plan illustrating one new lot measuring 10,125 square feet'in area to I be created on the northerly side of the existing dwelling. The garage which is presently a three stall garage would be remodeled to a two stall garage to provide the required 5 foot setback from the new lot line. in width. dwelling is no longer under consideration and, thus, no new building site south of the existing dwelling is proposed. a setback variance by the Board of Appeals and Adjustments. Mr. Hughes advised that Lhe Planning Commission considered the request on June 1, 1983, and at .the meeting a motion for approval of the two lot s'ubdivision as presented failed by a 5 to 4 vote and no further motions were offered. Louis Oberhauser, representing the proponent, stated that the subdivision proposal now presented fully meets the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Edina and no variance from setback require- ments is requested.. Member Richards asked if Mr. Wallace would agree to a deed restriction limiting the number of dwellings on the subject property to two. Mr. Oberhauser replied that they were not aware of any requirement regarding the giving of deed restrictions and could not agree to that. that Council should now take action to approve or deny the proposed subdivision. Member Richards pointed out that Council should consider the character of the surrounding neighborhood and unless there was some assurance that there would 3e only two homes on the property in the future he could not support the proposed subdivision now presented. Commission had been for consideration of a two lot proposal. motion was.seconded by Member Turner to refer the matter to staff to prepare Findings, Decisions and Reasons, reflectfng'Counci2'sr.viewpoint for a two lot subdivision and to continue the matter to June 20, 1983. The proponent then returned to the Planning Commission and'Tsubmitted The new lot would be 75 feet The proponent state4 that the remodeling on the south side of the The southerly lot relies only on a grant of Mayor Courtney stated He reminded Council that the directive to the Planning Member Richards's Ayes: Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Nays: None Motion carried. _.._. 2 _--. ORDINANCE NO. 6/6/83 11-A172 ("CHIP" GLASER) OFFERED FOR 1ST EADING. Affidavits of . Notice-were presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file.. - J Mr. Hughes presented the-request of Kenneth "Chip" Glaser for rezoning from PID Planned Industrial District to C-1 Commercial District for property generally Road 18, stating that the site measures approximately 40,000 square feet. site is vacant and was recently the subject of a right-of-way acquisition by Hennepin County for Valley View Road improvements. The request is to allow the construction of a Dairy Queen restaurant and a detailed site 2lan has been su'bmirted. The plan illustrates a restaurant with the required parking as well as a drive aisle on fhe southerly and easterly sides of the buiIding. '.The site is presently al.non-conforming PID site because it is smaller than the two acre minimum requirement and if developed with the present PID zoning would require several setback variances. variances. which is only allowed in the C-4 Commercial District. the Zoning Ordinance under revision will likely provide for such drive-through facility in the C-1 Commercial District. Community Redevelopment and Planning Commission on March 30, 1983, and the Planning Commission recommended denial of the request based upon the Comprehen- sive Plan's designation for the site for office purposes. that some undesirable traffic impact may occur as well as pedestrian traffic problems due to its close proximity to the Braemar Park area. Glaser referred to three primary concerns of staff and the Planning Commission: 1)'site plan setback violation, 2) the land use issue and 3) the traffic consider- ation issue. redrawn so that it meets the setback requirement. ington Avenue at the most southerly portion of the property. out that the concept is unique in the fast food industry as the site would be surrounding with a number of trees with a totally enclosed &foot high patio so that patrons would be shielded from the traffic. Regarding the land use issue, development as an office is not economically practical and would require exten- sive variances. Mr. Glaser added that he had contacted the business owners and tenants in the surrounding area and that they were in support of this proposal. and that they would gain in rental opportunities, it would satisfy the need for food service in the area and would reduce some of the outside trips by some of their tenants, and would aid in recruiting potential employees. He stated -:- that the rssfdents he had contacted in the surrounding area were also in favor the project because of the potential convenience this would provide for fast food service. Mr. Glaser pointed out that many of the sports events are family oriented and it would provide families and teams with a convenient fast food service. He offered a number of letters in support of the project, including a letter from Chris Enger, Planner for the City of Eden Prairie, stating that their primary concern of adverse traffic impact has been alleviated after reviewing the traffic study prepared by BRW, Inc. Dick Wolsfeld of BRW, Inc. then presented the results of the traffic study which, in-summary, stated that the-proposed Dairy Queen restaurant would not have a negative impact on traffic conditions in the area; it would serve as a complementary land use by diverting many of the trips into and out of the area and that the major traffic generation would occur during the off-peak hours of the adjacent roadway,system. concerns about the land use and safety for the young pedestrian traffic that would be coming from the Braemar Park area. In response, Mr. Glaser pointed out that there are presently a number of commercial type users on Washington Avenue, and that there are sidewalks on both sides of the bridge, street lights and with the traffic signal there should be adequate safety keeping measures. Richards recalled that when plans for the development of Southwest Edina were under consideration a number of years ago a commitment was made that there would be no commercial development in Edina on the West side of Co. Rd. 18 and there- fore we see the road pattern as it exists today. at that time and that he would concur with the recommendation of the staff and the Planning Commission that the proposed rezoning should be denied. Courtney commented that the only public reaction to the rezoning request has been favorable and asked if adequate publicity was given to which Mr. Hughes stated that it had been publicized. The Mayor stated he would like to have some input from the residents in the surrounding area of the proposed Dairy Queen restaurant to determine what opposition, if any, they would have before Council would vote on the rezoning request. Mr. Erickson clarified that the action at this meeting would be for offering First Reading of the rezoning ordinance only and that approval or denial would be made at the time of Second Reading and would require a 4/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass. No. 811-A172 for First Reading as follows: located South of Valley View Road, East of Washington Avenue and West of County L The -4 I I : The plan submitted may require several minor setback Mr..Hughes explained that As noted, the plan illustrates a drive-through carry-out facility The request was considered by the They also commented Kenneth "Chip" Regarding the site plan issue, he stated that the plan has been The access will be from Wash- Mr. Glaser pointed . 'there is a very limited utility of the parcel as it presently exists so that I -. With reference to the proximity of the Braemar Park complex, Member Turner expressed her Member He said those were good decisions Mayor Member Schmidt thereupon offered Ordinance 6/6/83 3 ORDINANCE NO. 811-A172 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE (NO. 811) BY ADDING TO THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT C-1 THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA,.MINNESOTA, OKDAINS:. Section 1. "The extent of the Commercial District (Sub-District C-1) is enlarged bydhe Lot 1, Block 1, Lois 7th Addition;" Sec. 2. Paragraph 2 of Section 10 of Ordinance No. 811 of the City is Paragraph 3 of-Section 9 of Ordinance No. 811 of the City is amended by adding the following thereto : addition of the following praperty: amended by adding the following thereto: following property: The extent of the Planned Industrial District is reduced by removing the 11 Lot 1, Block 1, Lois 7th Addition" Sec. 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and publication. HEARING DATE SET FOR VERNON DEVELOPMENT 'COMPANY. Member Richard's motion was seconded by Member Turner, setting June 20, 1983, for hearing date for Vernon Development Company - R-2 Two Family District to PRD-3 Planned Residential District (Generally located west of Cahill Road and south of Braemar Oaks Apartments) As recommended by Mr. Hughes, Ayes: Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Nays: None Motion carried. Member Richards excused himself from the Council Meeting. REPORT GIVEN ON CONCERh OF WATERMAN AVENUE RESIDENTS. that the residents on Waterman Avenue had appeared on several occasions to voice their concerns about the tenants occupying 6309 Waterman Avenue. that Mr. Coyne has been advertising the property for sale as a lot and to date has received one offer from people wanting to remodel the house and then resell it, but Mr. Coyne prefers to sell the property as a lot only. advised that the tenants will be evicted as of July 1, 1983, if they have not vacated the premises by that time. In response to an inquiry from a.resident as to why the house has not been demolished, Mr. Rosland explained that as long as the building meets code requirements, the City cannot force Mr. Coyne to take the house down. A complaint was made that there is constant drum playing so that neighbors cannot open windows or use their patios. explained that the decibel reading of the drums is below the threshold maximum in the noise ordinance and therefore according to the ordinance would not be an obtrusive sound even though it may be irrif-ating and that the patrol officers have been asking the tenants to cease this activity on complaint by neighbors. __ He reminded the residents that they h.ave the option of filing a formal complaint. Mr. Rosland assured the residents that the City staff will continue to follow and report on the progress and asked for their patience. Mr. Rosland recalled He reported Mr. Coyne has Chief Swanson RUTH PLOTNICKY/DRIVEWAY AT 5521 KELLOGG AVENUE DISCUSSED. Mrs. Ruth Plotnicky again appeared before Council and reiterated her contention that the City ordi- nance requires a 5-foot setback for sideyards and that even though the ordinance does not speak as to allowing driveways within that setback, the spirit and intention of the ordinance would prohibit the expansion of the driveway to the lot line at 5521 Kellogg Avenue. She indicated that she has incurred costs and suffered damages because of the driveway construction which she should not have to bear and that she is asking the City of Edha to pay these costs because unrestricted consent was given by the City for the driveway expansion. Attorney Erickson stated that the claim seems to be based on the fact that the City gave . unrestricted approval for a driveway. The City gives a permit for a driveway when it fits within the ordinance and the driveway the,neighbor wishes to construct does fit within the ordinance. The fact that the City did not tell the neighbor of Mrs. Plotnicky's objection or that there must be a survey does Rot raise a question of liability on the part of the City. The driveway must be located on the owner's property and if it encroaches on the property of Mrs. Plotnicky she can force its removal. Also, any costs for damages to her property can be recovered from the neighbor. they could not spend public money to build a private fence. Mrs. Plotnicky that if she thinks she has a claim against the City she should file a claim which would be submitted to the City's insurance company for their consideration, but stated that her remedy is against her neighbor if he has trespassed on her property and urged her to consult her legal counsel. Council took no action on this matter. I\ Mr. Erickson advised Council that He also advised HIGH WATER CONCERN OF CASCADE LANE RESIDENTSDISCUSSED. Mrs. Sharon Libby, 4612 Cascade Lane, presented her concern over the high water in Minnehaha Creek ' 6/ 6/83 this spring, advising that it had been necessary for the City to sandbag three homes on Cascade Lane, and that flooding had caused considerable damage to her property. stated that it is now just a concrete hill with a lot of silt and debris making it unsightly and that canoeists have difficulty in maneuvering around it. said her neighbors concur that the creek should be dredged and they have sent letters to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District stating their concerns. Mrs. Holly Johnson, 4617 Cascade Lane, summarized a petition dated May 18, 1983, to the Edina City Council and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed from the residents of the Cascade Lane area in which they prpposed: 1) that further dredging be continued from the 44th Street bridge through the Highway 100 bridge, 2) clearance around the Cascade or removal of the structure be done, effect to the creek flow, and 4) the creek's carrying capacity should be re- evaluated with the maximum discharge from Gray's Bay Dam set at 175 C.F.S. response, Engineer Hoffman recalled that at the last Council meeting he had re- viewed the report of E. A. Hickok and Associates, Engineer for the Watershed Dis- trict, and that further study is being made with reference to the Hwy. 100 bridge, the-Cascade and the Browndale Avenue Dam. about the sediment under the Hwy. 100 bridge. Department of Health wanted the City to cap the well at the Cascade but there was a lack of funds. The Watershed District has indicated now that funds would be available to the City to cooperatively abandon the Cascade well and repair the creek channel. Mr. Hoffman stated that when the Watershed District makes its report after the study, the City will check the recommendations to determine how they will affect the area involved in Edina. suggestions made in the resident's petition may prove to have little effect on the high water problems. Mr. Rosland summarized that at the last Councii meeting the Council formally petitioned the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to further investigate possitle-solutions to the high water conditions. When the report is received the Engineering staff will review it and may )recommend to Council that if staff does not agree with the study the City may want another hydrologist's opinion, or if the staff concurrs with the Watershed District's study we would then recommend Council petition the Watershed District for the work to be done. Mrs. Elizabeth Keller, 4604 Cascade Lane, asked that the record show that the water has come into their home this year for the first time in the ten years they have lived there and asked that a solution be expedited. Member Turner moved that a letter be sent from the Council to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District urging a prompt report as to the results of the study so that the City will know its options. She showed a photograph of the Cascade as it appeared in 1934 and .I b She I - ' 3) thorough assessment of the.Hwy. 100 bridge be made to determine its inhibiting . In "/DOT has been contacted He advised that last year the He added that some of the . I Motion was seconded by Member Schmidt. Ayes: Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Nays: None Motion carried. Member Richards returned to the Council Neeting at this point. 50TH STREET IMPROVEMENT/REPORT NO. 2 GIVEN. Mr. Hoffman recalled that Council had discussed the 50th Street Improvement in February with reference to seeking a variance from the State at the present 40 foot width to allow use of Municipal State Aid Funds for this improvement and reported that a hearing on the variance request will be held the latter part of June. with MN/DOT,officials recently, if the State grants any city a-large variance from their geometric standards they may request the city to pass a resolution holding the State harmless in the event of any lawsuits due to accidents on that street. estimates for removal of the overlay on 50th Street which needs to be done in He advised.that, in a conversation Mr. Hoffman further reported that the engineering staff is getting any event and which will eliminate the irregular surface. No action was taken. I ORNAMENTAL STREET LIGHTING PETITION ACCEPTED. for an ornamental street light to be installed on Comanche Court had been received on May 22, 1983, by the City Engineer, signed by all property owners on Comanche Court. tion to the Engineering Department for processing. Mr. Rosland reported that a petition I Member Schmidt's motion was seconded by Member Turner referring the peti- Ayes : Nays: None Motion carried. Richards, Schmidt , Turner, Courtney RESPONSIBLE AUTHORITY FOR DATA PRIVACY APPOINTED. 'Mr. Rosland recommended the appointment of Cicy Clerk Marcella Daehn as the Responsible Authority to:adcn- ister the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act for the City of Edina to fill the vacancy resulting from the retirement of Florence Norback. thereupon offered the following resolution aDd moved its adoption: Member Schmidt 6/6/83 ,.. .. 5 EG3SOLUTION APPOINTING RESPONSIBLE AUTHORITY - MINNESOTA GOVERNMENT DATA PRACTICES ACT BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City. of Edina, Minnesota that the Council appoints Marcella M. Daehn as the Responsible Authority for the purpose of meeting all requirements of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 15.1611 through 15.1698, as amended. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall : Ayes: Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Nays: None 6 Resolution adopted. CLAIM OF JEFFREY W. ASCHENBECK NOTED. Mr. Rosland called Council's attention to a Notice of Claim filed by Jeffrey W. Aschenbeck, advising that the matter had been referred to the insurance company and to the City Attorney. was taken. CABLE TV AWARDS TO ERIC FELTON NOTED. Mr. Rosland advised that Minnesota Cable- systems-Southwest had presented Eric Felton with awards for his work on the "Neighbors Home Watch" and "Edina Police Report" programs and that he continues doing excellent work on the cable TV programs for public information. CITY INSURANCE RENEWAL BIDS APPROVED. Mr. Rosland recalled that in 1980 the City invited competitive quotations for those insurance policies that had renewal dates of July 1 and as part of the process, it was indicated that the City would remain with that agent for a period of three years. present the seeking of new quotations for the next three years. tions represent a net reduction of $98,000 based on estimated dividends over 1982. These reductions are based on excellent experience in worker compensation and general liability,. a reduction of high interest rates and a competitive market. It is recommended that the City renew insurance coverage with the following No formal action d- ffl I\ cp m a The renewals for July 1, 1983 re- The 1983 quota- 1 companies for 1983-1984: Coverage General Liability Workers Compensation Liquor Liability Auto Liability & Auto Physical Property (Buildings and Contents) & Business Interruption, Transit Boiler Machinery Money & Securities Mobile Equipment Umbrella Ambulance Attendants Company 1982-83 Home $ 66,873 (53,498) * 184 , 200 (147,360) * Home Home 19,227 (15,382) A Home 17,698 (14,198) * Sayre & Toso 10,481 1983-84 (29 , 880) 99,768. $ 35,153 6,512 14,064 (11,954) f; 9,796 Hartford Boiler 4,367 4,540 Home 1,104 . 1,298 Home 5,076 2 , 096 St. Paul Surplus 13,075 6,000 Northbrook 900 900 $336,464 $188,023 (278,789)** (180,723)fcf; * For the period July 1, 1982-June 30, 1983, the premium for Home is subject to ** Includes cost of Police Professional and Public Officials Liability not being Member Turner moved award of bid for insurance coverage to recommended bidder in all cases. Motion was seconded by Member Richards. ' Nays: None about a 20% dividend to be paid from 1983-1984 (approximately $57,500.) renewed at this time. Ayes: Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Coureney Motion carried. LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID CUTS FOR CITY DISCUSSED. In resonse to Member Turner's question regarding the Legislative cuts for local government aid for Edina, Mr. Rosland responded that loss for the City will be between one-half and three- quarters mill or $300,000 to $500,000 and that as soon as official figures are available he will report to Council. He stated that Mr. Dalen and he will be attending a Metropolitan Loser's Group meeting on Tuesday and will try to get more information as to the direction'for that group and also the relationship with the League of Cities. SOUTH HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL QUESTIONNAIRE NOTED. Council to complete the questionnaire which the South Hennepin Human Services Member Turner reminded 6/6/83 6 Council had mailed out recently which included information regarding affordable housing which may be helpful regarding the Laukka-Winfield Project. ISSUE OF HANDICAPPED PARKING AT POST OFFICE DISCUSSED, Member Turner explained that the Edina Human Relations Commission will consider the issue of handicapped parking at the Post 0ffice.in response to a letter in the Edina Sun and asked if the City has explored the matter. control over the Post Office whatsoever and that a person in a wheelchair cannot get into the building because of the steps. ment applies only to new or substantially remodeled buildings, and that the City has no legal requirement, but that Mr. Bahneman is working with Post Office officials on this matter. No action was taken. REQUIREMENTS FOR REMODELING OF NON-CONFORMING HOMES DISCUSSED. Member Schmidt asked that publicity be given again so that residents would be aware that any remodeling of a home that is non-conforming as to set-back requirements should contact City officials regarding any variances that may be needed before con- tracting for any remodeling work. It was noted that there is a 10-day period necessary for notice to affected property owners. Mr. Rosland pointed out that the Board of Appeals now meets twice a month to hear variance requests and that staff will try to remind residents of this periodically. Mr. Bernhardson stated that the City has no He added that the Federal require- I . No action was taken. DOG INCIDENT AT NORMANDUE PARK DISCUSSED. had been made to the letter from Deborah Koval, 6613 Paiute Pass, concerning the encounter of her son and another child with an aggressive unleashed dog at Norman- dale Park on May 23, 1983. informed her that the dog would be picked up by the Animal Control Officer if it was se.en and that the Animal Control Officer would try to patrol the park on a more frequent schedule. No formal action was taken. Member Schmidt asked if a response Mayor Courtney said he had called Mrs. Koval and 1 MEETING WITH LEGISLATORS DISCUSSED. Mr. Rosland advised that the Legislative Session in 1984 would only be for approximately six weeks and recommended that Council meet with the legislators to discuss concerns for the City so that action could be taken early for proposed.legis1ation. with the legislators, the meeting date to be arranged by Mr. Rosland. LONG RANGE PLANNING SESSION SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 13, 1983. Mr. Rosland reminded the Council Members that the next Long Range Planning Session is scheduled for Monday, June 13, 1983, at 7:OO p.m. It was informally agreed to meet I CITY MANAGER'S SECRETARY NAMED. Mr. Rosland advised that Mrs. Jeri Marty, who is employed as his secretary, would be Acting City Clerk during any absence from duty of the City Clerk and in that capacity would be taking Council Minutes as needed. ORDINANCE NO. 1116 GRANTING GASTRANCHISE TO MINNEGASCO GIVEN FIRST READING. Mr. Rosland advised that a committee of the Suburban Rate Authority has been work- ing with Minnegasco to produce a revision of the SRA Uniform Gas Franchise and that at its April 20 Board meeting a model ordinance was approved and it was recom- mended that each city in which Minnesgaco requ2res a franchise adopt same. upon Member Turner offered Ordinance No. 1116 for First Reading as follows: . There- ORDINANCE NO. 1116 AN ORDINANCE GRANTING MINNEGASCO, INC., A MINNESOTA CORPORATION, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, A NONEXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO CONSTRUCT, OPmTE, REPAIR AND MAINTAIN FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT FOR THE TRANSPORTATION, DISTRIBUTION, MANUFACTURE AND SALE OF GAS ENERGY FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE USE AND TO USE TIIE PUBLIC GROUND OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA FOR SUCH PURPOSES; AND PRESCRIBING CERTAIN TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF. i THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA ORDAINS: 1.1. Company. Minnegasco, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, its SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS. The following terms shall mean: successors and assigns. and manufactured gas or other forms of gas energy. terms mean respectively, the City of Edina, the Council of the City of Edina and the Clerk of the City of Edina. easements and public grounds of the Municipality as to which it has the right to grant the use to the Company. 1.2. Gas. Natural gas, manufactured gas, mixture of natural gas 1.3. Municipality, Municipal Council, Municipal Clerk. These - 1.4. Public Ground. All streets, alleys, public ways, utility 6/6/83 7 SECTION 2. FRANCHISE GENERALLY. from the effective date hereof through June 30, 2003, the right to import, manufacture, transport, distribute and sell gas for public and private use in the Municipality, and for these purposes to construct, operate, repair and maintain in, on, over, under and across the Public Ground of the Municipality, all facilities and equipment used in connection therewith, and to do all things which are necessary or customary in the accomplishment of these objectives, subject to zoning ordinances, other applicable ordinances, permit procedures, customary practices, and the provisions of this franchise. be in force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and its acceptance by the Company in writing filed with the Municipal Clerk within 60 days after publication. 2.1. Grant of Franchise. There is hereby granted to the Company, 2.2. Effective Date; Written Acceptance. This franchise shall 2.3. Nonexclusive Franchise. This is not an exclusive franchise. 2.4. Franchise Fee. The Company may be required to pay to the Municipality, in the manner and at a rate prescribed by a separate ordinance, a fee determined by collections from sales of Gas, but not to exceed 5% of the Company's gross revenues from the sale of Gas within the Municipality. Such ordinance may be adopted, amended, repealed or readopted at any time during the term of this franchise. required, shall be effective 90 days after written notice of the ordinance to the Company. January 1, 1984. The fee,shall be separately stated on gas bills rendered .- to customers within the Municipality. 2.5. Publication Expense. The expense of publication of this ordinance shall be paid by the company. 2.6. Default. If the Company is in default in the performance of any material part of this franchise for more than 90 days after receiving written - notice from the Municipality of such default, the Municipal Council may, by ordinance, terminate all rights granted hereunder to the Company. The notice of default shall be in writing and shall specify the provisions of this franchise under which the default is claimed and state the basis therefor. Such notice shall be served on the Company.by personally delivering it to an officer thereof at its principal place of business in Minnesota. If the Company is in default as to any part of this franchise, the Muni- cipality may, after reasonable notice to the Company and the failure of the Company to cure the default within a reasonable time, take such action as may be reasonably necessary to abate the condition caused by the default, and the Company agrees to reimburse the Municipality for all its reasonable costs and for its costs of collection, including attorney fees. Nothing in this section shall bar the Company from challenging the Muni- cipality's claim that a default has occurred. In the event of a disagreement over the existence of a default, the burden of proving the default shall be on the Municipality. SECTION 3. CCNDITIONS OF USE. Company shall be located, constructed, installed and maintained so as not to endanger or unnecessarily interfere with the usual and customary traffic, travel, and use of public ground, and shall be subject to permit conditions of the Municipality. spection by the Municipality, and the Company agrees to make its facilities and equipment available for inspection at all 'reasonable times and places. of any public ground for any purpose without first having obtained a permit from the Municipality, for which the Municipality may impose a reasonable fee to be paid by the Company. The permit conditions imposed on the Company shall not be more burdensome than those imposed on other utilities for similar facil- ities or work. The mains, services and other property placed pursuant to such permit shall be located- as shall be designated by the Muhicipality. The Company may, however, open and disturb the surface of any public ground without a permit where an emergency exists requiring the immediate re- pair of its facilities. The Company in such event shall request a permit not later than the second working day thereafter. Upon completion of any work requiring the opening of any Public Ground, the Company shall restore the same, including paving and its foundations, to as good condition as formerly, and shall exercise reason- able care to maintain the same for two years thereafter in good condition. Said work shall be completed as promptly as weather permits, and if the Company shall not promptly perform and complete the work, remove all dirt, rubbish, equipment and material, and put the Public Ground in good condition, the The fee, if No such fee shall be effective as to sales made before 3.1. Use of Public Ground. All utility facilities and equipment of the The permit conditions may provide for the right of in- 3.2. Permit Required. The Company shall not open or disturb the surface 3.3. Restoration. 6/6/83 8 Municipality shall have the right to put it in good condition at the expense of the Company; and the Company shall, upon demand, pay to the Municipality the cost of such work done for or performed by the Municipality, including its administrative expense and overhead, together with ten percent additional as liquidated damages. available to the Municipality. 3.4. Relocation of Utility Facilities. The Company shall promptly , with due regard for seasonal working conditions, permanently relocate its facilities or equipment whenever the Municipal,ity orders such relocation. If the relocation is a result of the proper exercise of the police power in grading, regarding, changing the location or shape of or otherwise improving any Public Ground or constructing or reconstructing any sewer or water system therein, the relocation shall be at the expense of the Company. If the relocation is.not a result of the proper exercise of the police power, the relocation shall be at the expense of the Municipality. If such relocation is done without an agree- ment first being made as to who shall pay the relocation cost, such relocation of the facilities by the Company shall not be construed as a waiver of its right to be reimbursed for the relocation cost. If the Company claims that it should be reimbursed for such relocation costs, it shall notify the Municipality within thirty days after receipt of such order. The Municipality shall give the Company reasonable notice of plans requiring such relocation. and replace its mains or to cut and reconnect its service pipe running from the main to a customer's premises at its own expense where the removal and replace- ment or cutting and reconnecting is made for the purpose of a more expeditious operation for the construction or reconstruction of underground facilities; nor shall anything contained herein relieve any person from liability ari-sing out of the failure to exercise reasonable care to avoid damaging the Company's facilities while performing any work in any Public Ground. Ground shall not operate to deprive the Company of the right to operate and maintain its facilities therein. need not relocate until the reasonable cost of relocating and the loss and expense resulting from such relocation are first paid to the Company. vacation is for the benefit of the Municipality in the furtherance 'of a public purpose, the Company shall relocate at its own expense. 3.6. Street Improvements , Paving or Resurfacing. The Municipality shall give the Company reasonable written notice of plans for street improvements where paving or resurfacing of a permanent nature is involved. shall contain the nature and character of the improvements, the streets upon which the improvements are to be made, the extent of the improvements and the time when the Municipality will start the work, and, if more than one street is involved, the order in which this work is to proceed. The notice shall be given to the Company a sufficient length of time, considering seasonable work- ing conditions, in advance of the actual commencement oE the work to permit the Company to make any additions, alterations or repairs to its facilities the Company deems necessary. has installed underground sewer and water mains and service connections to the property line abutting the streets prior to a permanent paving or resur- facing of such streets, and the Company's main is located under such street, the Company may be required to install gas service connections prior to such paving or resurfacing, whenever it is apparent that gas service will be re- quired during the five years following the paving or resurfacing. SECTION 4. INDEMNIFICATION. The Company shall indemnify, keep and hold the Municipality, its elected officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any and all claims and actions on account of injury or death of persons or damage to property occasioned by the construction, maintenance, repair, removal, or operation of the Company's property located in, on, over, under, or across the public ground of the Municipality unless such injury or damage is the result of the negligence of the Municipality, its elected offi- cials, employees, officers, ur agents. The Municipality shall not be entitled to reimbursement for its costs incurred prior to notification to the Company of claims or actions and a reasonable opportunity for the Company to accept and undertake the defense. cumstances where indemnification applies, the Company, at its sole cost and expense, shall defend the Municipality if written notice of the claim or action is promptly given to the Company within a period wherein the Company is not prejudiced by lack of such notice. The Company shall have complete control of kuch claim or action, but it may not settle without the consent of the Municipality, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. This remedy shall be in addition to any other remedy I . Nothing contained in this subsection shall require the Company to remove - . 3.5. Relocation When Public Ground Vacated-. The vacation of any Public Unless ordered under Section 3.4, the Company When the I The notice In cases where streets are at final width and grade, and the Municipality If a claim or action shall be brought against the Municipality under cir- This section is not, 6/6/83 I. 9 as to third parties, a waiver of any defense or immunity otherwise available to the Municipality, and the Company in defending any action on behalf of the Municipality shall be entitled to assert .every defense or immunity that the Municipality could assert in its own behalf. SECTION 5. ASSIGNMENT. The Company, upon notice to the Municipality, shall have the right and authority to assign all rights conferred upon it by this franchise to any person. assignment, shall become subject to the terms and provisions of this franchise. SECTION 6. CHANGE IN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. Any change in the form of govern- ment of the Municipality shall not affect the validity of this franchise. Any governmental unit succeeding the Municipality shall, without the consent of the Company, automatically succeed to all of the rights and obligations of the Municipality provided in this franchise. SECTION 7. invalid for any reason whatsoever, the validity of the rest of this franchise shall not be affected. SECTION 8. NOTICES. if, in the case of notice to the Company, it is delivered to Minnegasco, Inc., attention Vice President, Minnesota Operations, 201 South Seventh Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402, and in the case of the Municipality, it is de- livered to City of Edina, attention City Manager, 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota 55424. SECTION 9. PREVIOUS FRANCHISES SUPERCEDED. This franchise supercedes all previous franchises granted to the Company or its predecessors. The assignee of such rights, by accepting such SEVERABILITY. If any portion of this franchise is found to be Any notice required by this franchise shall be sufficient I ORDINANCE NO. 1213 PROVIDING FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS GIVEN FIRST READING. As explained by Mr. Rosland, this ordinance is to implement Chapter 59, being the special legislation for Edina relative to the doing of certain work and assessing unpaid costs against property benefitted. Member Schmidt offered Ordinance 1 No. 1213 for First Reading as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 1213 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE REMOVAL OF SNOW, ICE AND RUBBISH FROM PUBLIC SIDEWALKS AND STREETS AND PUBLIC PARKING FACILITIES, WEED ELIMINATION FROM PUBLIC STREETS AND SIDEWALKS AND OTHER PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PROPERTY, REMOVAL AND ELIMINATION OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY HAZARDS FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY, INSTALLATION AND REPAIR OF WATER SERVICE LINES, PUBLIC STREET SPRINKLING AND OTHER DUST TREATMENT OF PUBLIC STREETS OR ALLEYS, TRIMMING AND CARE OF TREES, REMOVAL OF UNSOUND TREES FROM PUBLIC INFESTED OR DISEASED TREES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, REPAIR OF PUBLIC SIDEWALKS AND ALLEYS, OPERATION OF A LIGHTING SYSTEM FOR PUBLIC STREETS, SIDEWALKS OR PARKING FACILITIES, AND OPERATION OF PUBLIC PARKING FACILITIES, PUBLIC PARKS AND RELATED FACILITIES; PROVIDING FOR THE COLLECTION OF THE COST OF SUCH WORK AS A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGAINST PROPERTY BENEFITTED. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Chapter 59, Minnesota Laws of 1983, the City Manager may from time to time order the following items of work to be done: RIGHTS-OF-WAY, BOULEVARDS OR SIDEWALKS, TREATMENT AND REMOVAL OF INSECT Section 1. Manager May Order Certain Work Done. Pursuant to Removal of snow, ice and rubbish,. including litter, from public sidewalks and streets and public parking facilities; Elimination of weeds, including aquatic weeds, from public streets and sidewalks and other public or private property; Remoyal or elimination of public health or safety hazards from private property, excluding any structure included under the provisions of Section 463.15 to 463.26 of the Minnesota Statutes; Installation and repair of water service lines; Sweeping, oiling, sprinkling or other dust treatment of public streets or alleys, including incidental maintenance work; Trimming and care of trees and the removal of unsound trees within public rights-of-way, boulevards or sidewalks; Treatment and removal of insect infested or diseased trees on private property; Repair of public sidewalks and alleys; Operation, including maintenance and repair, of lighting systems for public streets, sidewalks or parking facilities; and; Operation, including maintenance and repair, of public parking facilities, public parks and related facilities. The order shall state the location and type of work to be done. Manager shall transmit a copy of such order to the Director of Public Works and Engineering, or in the case of trimming, care or removal of The 6/6/83 _... _._. IO trees to the City Forester. or City Forester shall then have such work done by directly purchasing the necessary materials and employing day labor, or by entering into contracts for such work with private parties. other treatment of a street which is divided down the center line thereof between the City and a neighboring municipality, the work may be.done and the cost apportioned as may be provided by a cooperative agreement with the neighboring municipality. Engineering or the City Forester shall keep records of and report to the City Clerk the actual cost of such work, and, in the case of costs to be charged prior to the incurrence thereof pursuant to Section 3 hereof, the estimated cost of such work. In either case, such records and reports shall include the cost of all such work done or to be done on any streets or portions thereof situated beyond the City boundaries pursuant to a cooperative agreement with a neighboring municipality. costs incurred or to be incurred for such work, or such portion thereof as the Council by resolution from time to time shall determine to charge pursuant hereto, shall be charged with such frequency as the Council by resolution from time to time shall determine, to each owner of each separate lot or-parcel of land benefitted by such work, in proportion to the benefits conferred upon such lots or parcels. If any charge is made for a cost to be incurred and, based upon subsequent actual costs, is found to be excessive, subsequent charges shall be reduced by such excess, and, if deficient, subsequent charges shall be increased by such deficiency. . shall be levied as a special assessment against the lot or parcel of land benefitted. against detached, single-family housing for the operation, maintenance or repair of public parks and related facilities. See. 4. Levy of Assessment. On or before September 15 of each year, the City Clerk shall prepare an assessment roll assessing all costs of such work reported to him against each separate lot or parcel of land benefitted by such work, in proportion to the benefits conferred upon such lots or parcels, subject, however, to the provision in Section 3 hereof. In the case of such work done pursuant to a cooperative agreement as set forth in Section 1 hereof, the cost of the work done by the City shall be spread against all lots or parcels of land abutting on the Cigy side of the streets covered by the cooperative agreement. Council shall thereupon examine such assessment roll submitted by the City Clerk, and if satisfactory, shall call a pubiic hearing and levy special assessments for such work in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.061. All such special assessments shall be payable in a single installment, or such additional annual installments not to exceed the maximum number allowed by law, as may be fixed by the resolution approving the special assessments, with interest thereon at the rate fixed in the resolution approving the special assessments, but not to exceed the highest rate allowed by law. authorized by this ordinance are in addition to any other methods or remedies available -to City by state statute or City ordinance. upon its passage and publication. The Director of Public Works and Engineering In the case of oiling or Sec. 2. Record of Cost. The Director of Public Works and Sec. 3. Collection Before Levy as a Special Assessment. All Any charge not paid in full by September 10 of each year Provided, that such charges shall not be made or levied The Sec. 5. Other Ordinances and Remedies. The methods and remedies Sec. 6. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately ORDINANCE NO. 1120-Al AMENDING CABLE TV FRANCHISE ORDINANCE GRANTED 2NI2,R.EADING. Mr. Rosland recalled that Council had given Ordinance No. 1120-Al, amending the Cable TV Franchise Ordinance, First Reading on March 21, 1983. Since then the attorneys for the five municipalities under the Franchise have met to review and revise the ordinance amendment with regard to the line extentfon provisions and would recommend Second Reading. offered Ordinance No. 1120-Al for Second Reading and moved its adoption as follows : No objections being heard, Member Schmidt ORDINANCE NO. 1120-81 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1120 SETTING FORTH A DESCRIPTION OF THE FACILITIES TO BE PROVIDED BY GRANTEE; MODIFYING THE INITIAL SERVICE AREA; AMENDING THE LINE EXTENSION POLICY OF GRANTEE; PRESCRIBING INSTALLATIONS CHARGES AS SET FORTH HEREIN; AND &ENDING THE EXHIBITS. The City Council SECTION 1. That to read as follows: of the City of Edina, Minnesota ordains: Article I, Section 2, of Ordinance No. 1120 be amended I .. i I i 1 6/6/83 11 V. "Public Building" is any building owned or operated by the United States government or any subdivision thereof, or the state of Minnesota or any subdivision thereof, or the City or any other governmental subdivision, or school district or educational institutions. SECTION 2. That Article 111, Section 4, of said Ordinance be amended to read as follows: SECTION 4. FACILITIES The Grantee shall construct, maintain and continue to provide all facilities and equipment set forth in the Offering or as otherwise provided in Article V, Section 2 and Exhibits A and B hereto, including, but not limited, to, the headend, hubs, distribution system, studios, equipment and other facilities. Grantee's plan, as set forth in the Offering, for implementing the construction, utilization and maintenance of these facili- ties, including its plans for accommodating future growth and changing needs and desires, shall be fully and timely performed. I SECTION 3. That Article 111, Section 7 of said Ordinance be amended to . read as follows: SECTION 7. SERVICE TO PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS Grantee shall initially provide subscriber and institutional network service, upon request , to,;,public buildings which may reasonably utilize such service in the Initial Service Area or within an kxtended area pursuant to Part 11. A. of Exhibit B to said Ordinance, as hereby amended. Service to public buildings outside the Initial Service Area or an extended area shall be provided pursuant to Article V, Section 2, paragraph D of said Ordinance. SECTION 4. That Article V, Section 2, of said Ordinance be amended to read as follows: SECTION 2. MODIFICATION OF INITIAL SERVICE AREA; EXPANSION OF SERVICE AREA; AND LINE EXTENSION POLICY. A. Service will be provided to dwelling and nonresidential units . of the City in areas with an average density less than forty (40) dwelling units per street mile or cable mile whichever, as determined by City, provides the greater benefit to the subscribers , (the "extended area") , and not within the Initial Service Area, upon payment of a construc- tion charge based upon the cost contribution formula defined below. Dwelling and nonresidential units in areas with an average density bf at least forty (40) dwelling units per street mile or cable mile whichever, as determined by City, provides the greater benefit to the subscribers, and those within the Initial Service Area, will not be required to make a cost contribution pursuant to the cost contribution formula below in order to receive service; but the install- ation charges set out in Part I. A. of Exhibit B to said Ordinance, units. be the same as elsewhere in the system. .as hereby amended, shall apply to such dwelling and nonresidential The monthly charge for cable service in the extended area shall B. The cost contribution for construction charges to be allocated to each dwelling and nonresidential unit in the extended area whose occupants petition pursuant to Section 2.C.1. hereof will be determined as follows: 1. Grantee shall estimate the total cost of constructing and maintaining for three (3) years from the date service is available, the line extension to be constructed in the extended areas. Total construction cost is defined as including plant make ready and all labor and material costs necessary to construct and activate that part of the system commencing at the nearest point of existing plant and running to and within the extended area. ' 2.. The standard cost per dwelling and nonresidential unit in the extended area shall be determined by dividing the total from (1) above by 40, being the standard minimum dwelling unit density. 6/6/83 3. Grantee's contribution to the cost of the line extension shall be determined by dividing the total number of dwelling units in the extended area, as designated by the City Council pursuant to Section 2.C.2 below, by the number of cable miles or street miles in the extended area whichever, as determined by City, produces the greater benefit to the subscribers, and multiplying the resulting number by the standard cost per dwelling unit. % 4. The difference between the total costs at (I) above and the Grantee's contribution at (3) above is the total contribution of the dwelling and nonresidential units in the extended area. 5. The construction charge to be paid by each subscriber shall be determined by dividing the total contribution of the dwelling and nonresidential units from (4) above by the number of dwelling and nonresidential units whose occupants joined in the petition pursuant to Section 2.C.1 hereof. C. Extended areas shall be established and service under the line extension policy shall be provided in accordance with the following procedure. 1. Occupants of dwelling and nonresidential units in an area with an average density of less than forty (40) dwelling units per street mile or cable mile as determined above, who desire service shall petition the Council for designation as an extended area. The petition shall include a map showing the dwelling and nonresidential units proposed to be included in the designated extended area. 2. The Council shall by resolution designate the dwelling and nonresidential units to be included in the extended area. 3. Upon designation of an extended area, Grantee shall prepare a map indicating the trunk cable line that will be constructed to serve the extended area and shall estimate the combined total construction cost and three (3) year maintenance cost for service to the extended area (Section 2.B.l), the Grantee's contribution (Section 2.B.3), and the total contri- bution of the dwelling and nonresidential units (Section 2.B.4). 4. Grantee will estimate the construction charge to each dwelling and nonresidential unit according to the formula in ~ Section 2.B.5, above. Grantee will notify Council and occupants in the extended area of the construction charge estimate by U.S. mail. $ 5. Occupants within the extended area who wish to become subscribers will have thirty (30) days after mailing of such notice to commit to service, by executing 'and submitting a comm- itment form to Grantee. The commitment form shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the City prior to its use by Grantee. 6. Occupants within the same thirty (30) day period shall deposit the amount of the construction charge estimate into an escrow account to be maintained by the City. who deposit the construction charge estimate within such thirty (30) day period is less than the number who join in the petition (and the aggregate deposit made by such occupants is less than the total contribution of dwelling and nonresidential units required by Section 2.C.7), Grantee shall, within ten (10) days after the end of the thirty (30) day period, notify in writing by U. S. mail such depositing occupants of the deficiency in the escrow account, and such occupants may make additional deposits within ten (10) days of mailing of such notice. If the number of occupants 7. If the total contribution of dwelling and nonresidential units as determined by Section 2.B.4. is deposited within the time periods specified in C.6 above, Grantee shall construct the iine extension, made available to the extended area within twelve (12) months from the end of the subscriber deposit period subject to extension of said twelve (12) month period pursuant to Article V, Section 3, paragraph C of said ordinance as amended. Construction shall be comDleted--and service . 6/6/83 13 8. Upon completion of the line extension construction and activation of service to the extended area, Grantee shall submit to the City a detailed statement setting forth all actual construction expenses, including labor, and an estimate of main- tenance expense, with such supporting documentation and information as the City may request. Said statement shall be certified by an officer of Grantee. Upon receipt, review and approval by the City, the City shall pay to Grantee the actual cost of construction and projected maintenance expense, as approved by City, from the escrow account. Any excess funds in the escrow account shall be divided among and returned to the subscribers in proportion to the amounts contributed by them. In no event shall the money paid to Grantee exceed the escrow amount. 9. Any occupant in an extended area who did not participate by initial subscriber contribution under paragraphs (5) and (6) above and who wishes to hook up to the line extension within the first three (3) years after service is commenced in the extended area must deposit into an escrow account to be maintained by the City the amount of the construction charge estimate under paragraph 6 above and adjusted in accordance with paragraph 8 above. All such new contributions shall be held in escrow until the end of the third year after service is commenced in the extended area, at which time all funds in escrow shall be divided equally and returned to the then current subscribers. At the end;.of the three (3) years following the commencement of service to the extended area, all subsequent subscribers in the extended area shall be charged the same installation charge as other subscribers who are in areas with an average density of at least forty (40) dwelling units per street mile or cable mile. D. Nonresidential units and public buildings in an area not within the Initial service Area or an extended area shall be provided service upon acceptance of a quote from Grantee. The quote shall not exceed the cost to Grantee, calculated on a time and material basis, of extending the cable and necessary cable equipment to service said user. E. Grantee shall indemnify and hold the City and its respective elected officials, officers, agents, employees and representatives, harmless from and indemnified against any and all loss, costs, damage and expense, including, without limitation, attorneys' fees, now or hereafter incurred by it, and arising out of or due to, or claimed to arise out of or be due to, this Ordinance, the adoption thereof or the process followed by City in adopting this Ordinance. SECTION 5. That Paragraph C(1), Article VI, Section 4 of said Ordinance be amended to read as follows: (1) Rates and charges charged by Grantee for monthly service and other charges hereunder shall be uniform, fair and reasonable and designed to meet all necessary costs of service, including a fair rate of return on the original cost, 'less depreciation, of the proper- ties devoted to such service (without regard to any subsequent sale or transfer price or cost of such properties). Construction cost contributions shall be made pursuant to Article V, Section 2, and installation charges shall be made pursuant to Exhibit B hereto. SECTION 6. That Article XIV, Section 2, paragraph H, of said Ordinance be amended to read as follows: H. Each exhibit is a part of this Franchise and each is specifically incorporated herein by reference. as follows: The exhibits are Amended Exhibit A - The heading of Fxhibit A is amended to read as follows: Map of Construction by Area, Including Time Schedule and Initial Service Area. ' Amended Exhibit B - Rate Schedule ,(see Seetion (.7) of this amending Ordinance for the amendment to Exhibit B). 6/6/83 SECTION 7. That Exhibit B of said Ordinance be amended by deleting Article I, Section A, paragraph 5. SECTION 8. That notwithstanding any other provision of this Ordinance, if less than all of the other of the Cities of Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka and Richfield offer a similar franchise Ordinance amendment to Grantee, which is accepted by Grantee, Grantee, or City may cancel this franchise Ordinance amendment and all of their obligations hereunder by written notice given to the other not later than thirty (30) days after all the other of said Cities shall have formally acted upon their respective similar franchise Ordinance amendments; provided, that if Grantee elects to cancel this franchise Ordinance amendment pursuant hereto, it must also . cancel all other franchise Ordinance amendments granted to it by the other of said Cities effective simultaneously herewith. I SECTION 9. Grantee shall have thirty (30) days from the last date of adoption of a similar franchise Ordinance amendment by all of the Cities listed in Section 8 of this Ordinance, to accept this franchise Ordinance amendment in form and substance acceptable to City. However, in no event will acce9tance occur later than ninety (90) days after the adoption of this franchise Ordinance amendment unless the time for acceptance is extended by City. franchise Ordinance amendment for all purposes. Such acceptance by Grantee shall be deemed the grant of this SECTION 10. With its acceptance, Grantee also shall deliver to City an opinion from its legal counsel, acceptable to City, steting that this franchise Ordinance amendment has been duly accepted by Grantee, that this franchise Ordinance amendment is enforceable against Grantee and the guaran- tors of the franchise granted by the said Ordinan&e, in accordance with its terms, and which opinion shall cthemise be in form and substance acceptable to City. SECTION 11. That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon adoption and publication and acceptance in writing by Grantee. -Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall : Ayes : Schmidt , Turner , Courtney Nays: None Abstained: Richards Ordinance adopted. r- ATTEST : BbfWk3-U City Clerk I CLAIMS PAID. Motion of Member Richards was seconded by Member Schmidt for payment of the following Claims: Art Center $2,017.13; Swimming Pool $1,154.75; Golf Fund, $7,071.36; Arena Fund $1,614.90; Gun Range $20.00; Water Fund, $1,977.70; Sewer Fund $519.00; Liquor Fund $1,146.52; Construction Fund $1,410.57; Total $96,542.49; and for confirmation of payment of the following Claims: Fund $1,211.31; Art Center $108.22; Golf Course $277.70; Arena Fund $109.79; Gun Range $485.58; Water Fund $5,086.03; Sewer Fund $461.55; Liquor Fund $294,698.12; Total $431,237.67. General Fund $63,714.38; Park Fund $15,896.18; General Fund $128,799.37; Park No furcher business appearing, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 9:35 D.m.