Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19920908_regular212 "[PPES OF THE REGULAR mTING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL SEPTEMBm 8, 1992 ROUCU Answering rollcall were Members Kelly, Paulus, Rice, and Mayor Richards. consent agenda. Member Smith entered the meeting at 7:03 P.M. after adoption of the CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ADOPTED Motion was made by Member Kelly and was seconded by Member Paulus to approve and adopt the Consent Agenda items as presented. Rollcall : Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards Motion carried. CONSTIT[TTION WEEK/CITIZENSHIP DAY PROCLAIMED and was seconded by Member Kelly for adoption of the following proclamation: EJHEREBS: States of America to secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity; WHEREAS: It is important that all citizens fully understand the provisions, principles and meaning of the Constitution so they can support, preseme and defend it against encroachment; and EJHEREBS: September 17 as CITIZENSHIP DAY and the week of September 17-23 as CONSTITUTION REEK; and VHEREBS: guarantees of the Bill of Rights, equal protection of the law under the Constitution, and the freedoms derived from it; NOU, THEREFORE, I, Frederick S. Richards, as Mayor of the City of Edina, do hereby proclaim September 17, as CITIZENSHIP DAY and the week of September 17-23 as CONSTITUTION WEEK and invite every citizen and institution to join in the national commemoration. Proclaimed this 8th day of September, 2992. Motion was made by Member Paulus PROCLAMATION We the People did ordain and establish a Constitution for the United The President and the Congress of the United States have designated The people of the City of Edina do enjoy the blessings of liberty, the The proclamation was accepted by Florence Norback on behalf of the Daughters of the American Revolution. *MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 17. 1992. APPROVED Motion was made by Member Kelly and vas seconded by Member Paulus to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of August 17, 1992. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT GRANTED - CROSS VIEW LUTHERAN CHURCJ3 PARKING LOT EXPANSION Presentation bv Planner Planner Larsen recalled that Cross View Lutheran Church, located south of McCauley Trail and west of Timber Trail, has applied for a Conditional Use Permit for expansion of their existing parking lot. heard by the Council on July 20, 1992, and was continued to allow the church time to meet with affected neighbors on Timber Trail. called for extending parking into a grassy area south of the existing parking lot to create a total of 198 spaces, with an additional curb cut on Timber Trail. The church has met with affected neighbors, most recently on September 1, 1992. As a result of those meetings the church has modified the proposed parking plan, the major element being elimination of the proposed southerly curb cut on Timber The proposed request was first The church's initial proposal 9/8/92 ' 213 Trail. northerly ingress/egress on Timber Trail. landscaping along the buffer to the east and south side of the parking lot has been submitted. In response to Member Smith, Planner Larsen said the proposed landscaping plan meets or slightly exceeds the City's ordinance requirement. Member Rice, he said the proposed berm area would be irrigated and be maintained as grass. Some grading work is also proposed to improve the sight lines for the A plan for irrigation and improved In response to I Presentation bv ProDonent Charles Sedgwick, member of Cross View Lutheran Church, explained that two meetings had been held with the neighbors. the initial plan was the south exit which has been eliminated in the modified plan. The proposed berming meets code requirements for screening and would be regraded to a 3:l slope for easier maintenance and be irrigated. Mr. Sedgwick advised that Roger Lillemoe, Dundee Nursery, has drafted the landscaping plan for the church. Mr. Lillemoe attended the meetings with the neighborhood and has tried to respond to their concerns by strategically placing large trees in their sight lines to provide screening. The neighbors' biggest concern with Public Comment Catherine Hapka and Dreip Sapayah, 6323 Timber Trail, pointed out that after the two meetings with the neighbors two issues remained: 1) traffic, which has been addressed by elimination of the southerly curb cut, and 2) landscaping plans. Concerns about the landscaping were berm height, possible installation of islands in the lot, and scheduling of another meeting by the church to review the plans. They also pointed out that the affected neighbors have not been advised that the issue would be on the agenda at this meeting and asked that the Council postpone their decision to allow them to review the landscaping plan. In response, Roger Lillemoe, Dundee Nursery, said that he had met with one of the neighbors, Noah Hurley. Together they surveyed the area from the Hurley's deck and concluded the location of one tree would help screen the lot from the home. Mr. Lillemoe stated that he was willing to work with each neighbor individually regarding placement of the trees. suggested that the trees be planted below the crest of the berm so that the fullest part of the tree would do the screening. slope of the berm, not the height, would be changed for ease in mowing. In addition, the sight lines for the northerly ingress/egress would be improved. To insure the greatest amount of screening he Further, Mr. Lillemoe said the Council Comment/Action Mayor Richards asked if the August 26, 1992, letter from Cross View Lutheran Church, which,mentioned the City Council meeting for Tuesday, September 8, was mailed to all Timber Trail residents; Mr. Sedgwick confirmed that it was. Mayor Richards then inquired about the church's future plans and the schedule for the project if approved. Mr. Sedgwick said the church's five-year growth plan projects over 1200 members and the City's ordinance requires the church to provide off street parking. the weeds. by laying down asphalt, installing the irrigation and planting of trees. could begin within ten days after approval and portions of the project could go OR simultaneously. Mayor Richards commented that he felt the church has done a diligent job of communicating with the neighbors. Member Paulus noted that if the'affected neighbors had read the church's August 26th letter they should have been aware of this meeting. If approved, the first thing would be elimination of Then the berm would be graded and re-shaped. That would be followed Work 9/8/92 Member Smith then maved adoption of the following resolution: WHEXEAS, the procedural requirements of Code Section 850 (the Zoning Ordinance) have been met; and UHlBEAS, it has been determined that the Findings as required by Code Section 850 have been satisfied; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit to Cross View Lutheran Church, 6645 McCauley Trail, for parking lot expansion. Motion was seconded by Member Paulus. 214 RESOLUTION GRBNTING CONDITIONAL USE PWMT I Rollcall : Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL CONTINUED TO 10/05/92 FOR MKRK DALQUIST ADDITION Presentation bv Planner Planner Larsen reminded Council that the property proposed for subdivision is located south of Interlachen Boulevard and west of Schaefer Road with a gross area of approximately 10.5 acres. Currently, there is a new single family home under construction in the southwesterly portion of the property. The applicant has submitted a subdivision request that would create four additional buildable lots to be accessed by the extension of Harold Woods Lane. served by a driveway off of Schaefer Road. The fifth lot is The proposal was heard by the Council on July 20, 1992, and was referred back to the Planning Commission. based on the changed facts of setbacks for the conservation easement adjacent to the ponds and also the City Attorney’s opinion relative to the definition of lot width. The Commission again recommended denial of the proposal on a 8 to 2 vote. Planner Larsen informed Council that about 2:45 P.M. this date staff became aware through a transmittal from the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) that a petition had been submitted to them with the required 25 or more signatures requesting an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) be prepared to consider environmental impacts of the proposed subdivision. The required process is as follows: 1) Petition submitted to EQB, 2) EQB designates responsible governmental unit (RGU), 3) RGU has 30 business days to make determination on need for EAW, 4) City Council may decide to order EXW or reject petition based on written findings of fact. only recourse would be district court. The Commission reconsidered the proposed subdivision In either case, the decision of the Council is final and the Planner Larsen advised the Council that hearings on this proposed subdivision have extended nearly to the 120 day limit set by statute. made within that period, which would expire before the next Council meeting on September 21, 1992, the application would be deemed approved. He recommended continuing the public hearing to either September 21 or October 5 for decision by the Council on the need for the EXW based on the findings. However, in order for this to happen, acquiescence from the developer would be necessary to allow continuation beyond the 120 days. If a decision is not Mayor Richards asked Ron Clark, on behalf of the developers, if he would acquiesce for a continuation and noted that he would not be present on September 21. Member Rice said he was irritated by the fact that a considerable amount of time already has been spent on this proposal and further, that because the petition was received so late today, it was unreasonable to expect that findings could be prepared for this meeting. Mayor Richards said he was frustrated because some residents do not seem to have confidence in local government that all the facts Mr. Clark responded that they would agree to a continuation. 9/8/92 have been presented in this case as evidenced by the petition for an EAW. said he felt the Council has been sensitive to all the questions that have been raised regarding the proposed subdivision and asked for public comment. Public Comment Betsy Robinson, 5021 Ridge Road, informed the Council that the petition was filed because the neighbors felt they were not receiving adequate information on drainage and grading which is a major consideration for that low land and how much fill may be required for building pads that would conform to the City code. The information provided has been for building pads that require variances which would have an affect on the wetlands. for the proposed subdivision. Ms. Robinson said she had filed the petition with the state on Friday, September 4, 1992, as she had just learned that this option existed. Further, she felt staff had been uncooperative in her endeavor to attain information about the proposed subdivision. concerned about the proposed subdivision and felt it is being forced upon them. He I Also, a wildlife study has not been done The neighborhood is very Ted Pier, 5021 Ridge Road, stated he sensed Council’s anger at the community for taking a legal avenue to protect their interests and to further assess the impact this proposal would have on the community. He said he did not understand why the Schall home under construction would be grandfathered in and questioned why the access road is not subject to setback requirements when it is a part of the same subdivision. As a concerned citizen, Mr. Pier said he would support an evaluation of the impact this construction project would have on the community. Ann Putnam, 5208 Larada Lane, informed Council they had bought their home during the drought. Their back yard has been very wet and their lot is the lowest in their subdivision. watertable and result in more water on their lot. Louis Starita, 604 Blake Road, noted that he had appeared before Council to request a 75 foot setback for a division on his property. At that time the Council voted that the 25 foot variance request was not appropriate even though the Planning Commission had recommended approval. Because he felt that the Dalquist preliminary plat ‘will be approved, he said it might be perceived that larger developers get a different kind of consideration over smaller homeowners. If it were approved, he would be prepared to come back and again ask that his property be given the same courtesy. They were not from Minnesota and did not understand wetlands. She voiced concern that the proposed subdivision could change the Ed Glickman, 5217 Schaefer Road, felt the full Council should vote on whether the preliminary plat should be approved. Ingrid Mantyh, 6413 Interlachen Boulevard, said they were denied a 10 foot setback variance last year and asked why the rules are not followed. Council Comment/Action Member Smith made a motion to continue the hearing on preliminary plat approval for the Mark Dalquist Addition to September 21, 1992. second. Motion failed for lack of Member Rice made a motion to continue the hearing on preliminary plat approval for the Mark Dalquist Addition to October 5, 1992, so that findings of fact can be drafted regarding the need for an environmental assessment worksheet. was seconded by Member Kelly. Member Rice asked who would prepare the findings and pay the cost. Rosland explained that staff would prepare the findings of fact. costs would be the responsibility of the developer, however, since this is a Motion Manager Normally the 9/8/92 request made by the opponents the City would have to absorb the cost. 216 Ms. Robinson asked for an opinion of whether a stop work order should be issued on Lot 1. was issued for that home to be constructed. building permit was issued at a time when no petition was pending so the permit is valid. Mayor Richards said his understanding was that a valid building permit Attorney Gilligan opined that the Mayor Richards then called for vote on the motion. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. *LOT DIVISION APPROVED FOR LOTS 17. 18. 19. AND PART OF LOT 20. BLOCK 10, NORMANDAIX 2ND ADDITION Member Paulus for adoption of the following resolution: VHEREBS, the following described property is at present a single tract of land: Motion was made by Member Kelly and was seconded by RESOLUTION Lot 17, Lot 18, Lot 19, and the South 1/2 of Lot 20, Block 10, NORHANDALE 2ND ADDITION WHEREAS, the owner has requested the subdivision of said tract into separate parcels (herein called "Parcels") described as follows: Lot 17 and the South 35 feet of Lot 18, Block 10, NORHANDALE 2ND ADDITION and The northerly 15 feet of Lot 18, all of Lot 19, and the South 25 feet of Lot 20, Block 10, NORMANDAIX 2ND ADDITION VHEREBS, it has been determined that compliance vith the Subdivision and Zoning regulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and said Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purposes of the Subdivision and Zoning regulations as contained in the City of Edina Code Sections 810 and 850; NOU, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina that the conveyance and ownership of said Parcels as separate tracts of land is hereby approved and the requirements and provisions of Code Sections 810 and 850 are hereby waived to allow said division and conveyance thereof as separate tracts of land but are not waived for any other purpose or as to any other provision thereof, and subject, however, to the provision that no further subdivision be made of said Parcels unless made in compliance with the pertinent code sections of the City of Edina or with the prior approval of this Council as may be provided for by those sections. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. *HEBRING DA!CE OF 09/21/92 SET FOR PLANNING MATTER Motion was made by Member Kelly and was seconded by Member Paulus setting September 21, 1992, as hearing date for the following Planning matter: 1) Preliminary Rezoning - Planned Residence District PRD-2 to Double Duelling Unit District R-2 and Preliminary Plat Approval - Vernon Hill Addition Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. BROWNDALE BRIDGE FEASIBILITY STUDY AND TRAFFIC ANALYSIS GIVEN explained that the Browndale traffic review is part of a larger issue. initially started reviewing the Browndale/Country Club area as part of a rehabilitation/modification of the Browndale Bridge. only restricted structure in the City based on weight limits. Engineer Hoffman Staff The bridge is currently the Staff had started collecting traffic data in the neighborhood this summer to establish base line conditions. questioning speed and volumes in the Country Club District. Additionally, a petition was received from Browndale residents regarding speed and volume. Engineer Hoffman observed that action taken to date involved the Traffic Safety Committee recommendation and Council approval of that recommendation as follows: Residents had noticed this process and began 9/8/92 I' 217 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) Conduct speed surveys with an unmarked police vehicle during morning, evening and noon rush hour periods, Conduct same during the period of 4:OO-6:00 P.M. on Sundays, Incorporate this data with the current study being undertaken, but specifically cite the rush hour figures, Contact Edina Public School District and relay concerns of children crossing Browndale Avenue to get to the bus stop, and Conduct a sight line survey on Edgebrook Drive to ascertain if parking should be prohibited on the west side of Browndale Avenue. I Staff would continue to collect traffic volume and license survey information in the Country Club District to identify existing conditions. Additional issues to be addressed would be: A. B. Evaluate structural and functional adequacy of the bridge, Develop and evaluate alternative solutions with input from the State Historical Society, Minnehaha Creek Watershed, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, etc., Depending upon the input from the agencies above, conduct a traffic analysis for each possible solution. Develop a feasibility report for Council review in mid-1993. C. D. The above items would need the assistance of structural and traffic engineers. Consultant costs could range from $5,000 to $15,000 depending upon the level of alternative solutions. Funds for the consulting engineer would be from the capital plan as depicted in the 1992 budget for Browndale Bridge. anticipated that any improvements to the bridge would be done in 1994-1995. It is Staff would complete the above and return with this information to the Traffic Safety Committee in November. to consider in November, 1992. $3,000. The Council would have a report and recommendation Initial evaluation costs would be approximately Member Rice made a motion approving the schedule of activities for the Browndale Bridge feasibility study with a report back to the Council on November 16, 1992. Motion was seconded by Member Paulus. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. VACANCY NOTED ON THE EDINA FOUNDATION BOARD there is a vacancy on The Edina Foundation Board and asked that names of anyone interested in serving be submitted to him. Mayor Richards informed Council that APPOINTMEN!i! MADE TO COMMUNITY EDUCATION SERVICES BOARD Mayor Richards advised the Council that he intended to appoint Jeannine M. Nayes to the Community Education Services Board. Member Smith made a motion for consent of the Mayor's appointment of Jeannine M. Nayes to the Community Education Services Board as a member-at-large, for a term ending June 30, 1993. Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. *HEARING DATE OF 10/19/91 SET FOR FJINE AND BEER LICENSE FEES Motion was made by Member Kelly and was seconded by Member Paulus setting October 19, 1992, as hearing date for a proposed increase in wine and beer license fees. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. 1993 RECYCLING CONTRACT APPROVED Recycling Coordinator Chandler on the 1993 Recycling Contract which included 5 cost comparison chart. The Recycling Commission would recommend acceptance of Manager Rosland submitted a report preparedby 218 9/8/92 -~ the Woodlake proposal to provide city-wide recycling service with the following terms: 1) three year contract, 2) add mixed mail to the collection in May, 1993, 3) include pickup of household batteries, 4) special drop-off in spring for telephone books, 5) curbside placement of recyclables, 6) proviso for profit sharing if the value of materials rises above the current level, and 7) year-end program review and option to change pickup point. introduced Kevin Tritz and Craig Seim from Woodlake and Lev Wood, member of the Recycling Commission. Mr. Tritz commented that over the years there has been a tremendous increase in the recycling efforts in Edina - from 1600 tons in 1989 to a projected 4000+ tons in 1992 and that the program speaks for itself. The Woodlake proposal of August 24, 1992, includes the following options: #1 Continue the existing program B Coordinator Chandler Single family $2.60/unit/month Multi-unit $2.00/unit/month Continue existing program and add mixed mail in May, 1993 Single family $2.72/unit/month Multi-unit $2.10/unit/month Single family $2.35/unit/month Multi-unit $2.10/unit/month #2 #3 Curbside program and add mixed mail in May, 1993 Discussion by the Council Members centered on the issue of curbside pickup versus garage side pickup of recyclables and the $60,000 cost for garage side pickup. It was suggested that the Recycling Commission be given the charge to educate both the residents and the haulers where the containers are to be placed before and after pickup. Member Smith made a motion to approve the Woodlake proposal of August 24, 1992, to provide city-vide recycling service to include Option #2 - Continue existing program of garage side pickup and add mixed mail in Hay of 1993, and with the additional proviso that the City could opt to change the collection point at the end of any year. Member Rice seconded the motion. Rollcall : Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. METROPOLITAN CODNCIL REGIONAL BREAKFAST MEETINGS FOR LOCAL OPPICIBIS NOTED Manager Rosland advised that an invitation had been received from Mary E. Anderson, Metropolitan Council Chair, inviting local officials to a breakfast meeting on either September 23 or 29, 1992. to talk about regional issues the Metropolitan Council is dealing with and provides local officials a chance to talk about the impact. encouraged Council Members to attend one of the meetings. The meetings provide an opportunity Manager Rosland Member Rice raised the issue of response to the Metropolitan Council's "Metro 2015" document. on September 21. 1993 PROPOSED CITY BUDGET LEVY ADOPTED September 1, 1992, the Council concluded their review of the 1993 Proposed City Budget line by line with no formal action taken. the proposed budget; no comments were heard. Mayor Richards suggested that this. be discussed by the Council Mayor Richards recalled that on He asked for public comment on Member Paulus said she had a philosophical issue in that the Council had sent a directive that this budget would not include new, creative programming. At the September 1, 1992, meeting the Human Relations Commission asked for $2,000 as a reserve fund to be used for programs that might come up so that they would not have to come before Council again to acquire funding. Member Paulus said she 9/8/92 .A ' 219 objected to including the request in the budget because it was for no specific program. Member Rice voiced concern about the affect on the community with not replacing the one narcotics officer. operating without the narcotics officer now and therefore it is difficult to assess whether there is any increase in drug activity. However, Edina does not have the indigenous narcotics trafficking environment (e.g. bars, etc.) but things occur in some of the housing projects and in the commercial areas. said he would like a narcotics officer but not at the expense of something else. The Edina Public Schools do have the D.A.R.E. program and are attempting to put something like that in every grade level. With no further comments, Mayor Richards called for a motion on the 1993 Proposed Budget . Chief Swanson responded that the Police Department is I He Member Paulus introduced the following resolution and moved approval: RESOLUTION ADOPTING PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF EDINA FOR !l'HE YEAR 1993, AND ESTABLISHING PROPOSED TAX Lew FOR T'EE YEAR 1993 PAYABLE IN 1993 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, Ml3NESOTA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLTiOWS: Section 1. proposed as follows: Section 2. follows : Section 3. personal property in the City of Edina a tax rate sufficient to produce the amount as follows: The Budget for the City of Edina for the calendar year 1993 is hereby TOTAL GENERAL FUND $14,471,815 Estimated receipts other than General Tax Levy are hereby proposed as TOTAL ESTIMATED RECEIPTS $ 3,146,700 That there is proposed to be levied upon all taxable real and FOR GE3ERAL FUND $11,325,115 Adopted this 8th day of September, 1992. ATTEST : Mayor *d.W%- City Clerk Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Kelly. It was the consensus of the Council that the contingency budget be increased from $60,000 to $62,000 and that the Human Relations Commission budget be ,decreased by $2,000 accordingly. On the budget item of $28,000 for AMM and LMC membership dues, it was the consensus of the Council that those organizations be put on notice that the City may not renew the memberships, and that a final decision be made upon final adoption of the 1993 Budget in December. Mayor Richards then called for vote on the motion. Rollcall : Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Resolution adopted. PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON PROPOSED ISSUANCE OF REFUNDING BONDS: RESOLUTION ADOPTED CALLING FOR SALE the proposed issuance by the City of Edina of General Obligation Recreational Facility Bonds and various refunding bonds. Pursuant to due notice given, a public hearing was conducted on 9/8/92 220 . Finance Director Wallin explained that the recreational facility bonds are to finance the purchase and construction of Normandale Golf Course, the construction of the new nine holes at Braemar and the recent pool renovation. The bond issues proposed to be refunded are: G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1988 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1989 $ 9,425,000 7,800,000 I G.O. Golf Course Bonds, Series 1985 550,000 G.O. Recreational Facility Bonds, Series 1988 2,295,000 G.O. Recreational Facility Bonds, Series 1989 1,560,000 G.O. Utility Revenue Bonds, Series 1988 1,865,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 1989 1,045,000 Under Federal tax law, the City may only refund these bonds one time. advance refundings the City would redeem all of the bonds maturing on or after their call dates. Notice of Bond Sale and the Official Statement prepared by the City for distribution to potential purchasers of the Bonds. taken into account by the purchaser in determining what to bid for the Bonds. In these This redemption provision was clearly stated on the Bonds, the This redemption provision was Director Wallin observed that when this matter was first brought to the Council several weeks ago interest rates were a little better. buyer's index was at 6.06% to 6.05%. based on a bond buyer's index of 6.31%. about 6.24%. the General Obligation Recreational Facility Bonds and the various refunding bonds. Director Wallin noted that Fifield, Springsted, Inc., financial advisor and bond consultant for the City, was present to answer any questions as well as At that time the bond The packet information for this meeting was This week the rates have gone down to Staff would recommend adopting a resolution calling for the sale of Attorney Gilligan. James Phelps, 4611 Tomes Circle, and member of the Alternate Revenue Source Committee, commented that refunding is a popular thing to do for the same sort of reason that homeowners are refinancing mortgages. well-respected firm, capable of giving good advice. whether rates would go even lower. He noted that Springsted is a It is a judgement call In response to Member Rice as to estimated cost savings and refunding costs, Director Wallin confirmed that, based upon the index of 6.31%, net savings are estimated at $1,239,058, with present value savings estimated $808,418. Costs related to the proposed refunding would include bond consultant fees, bond counsel fees, Moody's and Standard & Poor's bond rating fees, and underwriter's discount. Mr. Fifield interjected that estimated total costs would be approximately $100,000 - $110,000, excluding the underwriter's discount. He added that two subjective criteria are used to recommend refunding: 1) Minimum savings of 6% present value of refunded interest expense (the proposed bonds to be refunded are over lo%), and 2) savings factor as a ratio of cost of issuance. Mayor Richards asked what would happen if interest rates change so that the estimated savings are not there. rejected if the market indicates an unacceptable level. City's general fund low reserves would affect our bond rating. answered that the key in the rating strategy is the general fund reserve. Moody's looks hard at that given the whimsy of the state's fiscal policy. Typically, Moody's has not treated cities with as heavy a hand as they have school districts, but they will look at what philosophically the Council has set as policy for maintaining what they would determine to be reasonable operating reserves. Attorney Gilligan interjected that if interest rates spiked up, the intent would be to proceed with the new money issue and cut off the refunding issues. Director Wallin said any and all bids can be Member Rice asked if the Mr. Fifield 9/5/92 . +‘221 Member Smith introduced the following resolution and moved adoption: RESOLUTION CBIlLING FOR THE SALE OF GENEBBL OBLIGATION RECREATIONBL FACILITY BONDS, SERIES 1992A, GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFONDING BONDS, SEBIES 1992B, GENERBL OBLIGATION RECREATIONBL FACILITY REFONDING BONDS, SERIES 1992C, GENERAL OBLIGATION UTILITY REVENITE REPUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1992D, BND GENERBL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT REFTINDING BONDS, SEBIES 19923 BE IT RESOLveD by the City of Edina, Minnesota (the City), as follows: of the City to issue the following series of bonds of the City (coLlectively, the Bonds) for the following purposes: to Minnesota Laws 1961, Chapter 655 and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, to finance the acquisition and betterment of municipal recreational facilities of the City. B. General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 1992B, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, to refund the General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1988 of the City, initially dated as of October 1, 1988, maturing in the years 1997 through 2009, and the General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1989 of the City, initially dated as of April 1, 1989, maturing in the years 1999 through 2009. C. General Obligation Recreational Facility Refunding Bonds, Series 1992C, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, to refund the General Obligation Tax Golf Course Bonds, Series 1985 of the City, initially dated as of September 1, 1985, maturing in the years 1997 through 2000, the General Obligation Recreational Facility Bonds, Series 1988 of the City, initially dated as of October 1, 1988, maturing in the years 1999 through 2009, and the General Obligation Recreational Facility Bonds, Series 1989 of the City, initially dated as of April I, 1989, maturing in the years 1999 through 2009. D. General Obligation Utility Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1992D, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, to refund the General Obligation Utility Revenue Bonds, Series 1988 of the City, initially dated as of October 1, 1988, maturing in the years 1995 through 1999. E. General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 19923, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, to refund the General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1989 of the City, initially dated as of April 1, 1989, maturing in the years 1996 through 2001. consultant to the City, has presented to this Council forms of Terms of Proposal for each series of Bonds, which are attached hereto and hereby approved and shall be placed on file with the City Clerk. Terms of Proposal are hereby adopted as the terms and conditions of the Bonds and of the sale thereof. Springsted Incorporated, as independent financial advisers, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2, paragraph (9) is hereby authorized to solicit bids for each series of Bonds on behalf of the City on a negotiated basis. Section 3. Monday, October 5, 1992, at 7:OO P.B. for the purpose of considering sealed bids for the purchase of the Bonds, and of taking such action thereon as may be in the best interests of the City. Section 1. Purpose. It is hereby determined to be in the best interests A. General Obligation Recreational Facility Bonds, Series 19921, pursuant Section 2. Terms of Proposal. Springsted Incorporated, financial Each and all of the provisions of the Sale Meeting. This Council shall meet at the City Hall on ATTEST : 1 Mayor City Clerk Motion for adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member Paulus. 222 9/8/92 Rollcall : Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Resolution adopted. I DATES SET FOR "RUTEi IN TAXATION HEBRINGS Manager Rosland reminded Council that the City is required to inform Hennepin County of its Truth in Taxation hearing date(s) by September 15, 1992. Truth in Taxation hearings for all governmental bodies must be held in the period beginning November 30 and ending on December 21. 14 business days after the first public hearing. Continued hearings must be held at least five business days but no more than Following a brief discussion, Member Paulus made a motion setting Monday, November 30, 1992, at 7:OO P.M. for the Truth in Taxation hearing and December 9, 1992, at 7:OO P.M. as the continued hearing date. Motion was seconded by Member Smith. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. *CLBIMs PAID Motion vas made by Member Kelly and vas seconded by Hember Paul- to approve payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated September 3, 1992, and consisting of 32 pages: General Fund $471,074.06; Cab;e $6,417.82; Working Capital Fund $12,293.87; Art Center $8,909.47; Pool $5,307.75; Golf Course $37,759.18; Arena $18,422.58; Gun Range $340.04; Edinborough/Centennial Lakes $22,892.45; Utilities $310,599.60; Storm Sever $5,518.87; Liquor Dispensary $65,192.76; Construction fund $1,081.67; TOTAL $965,810.12; and for confirmation of payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated August 14, 1992, and consisting of 15 pages: General Fund $170,416.68; Pool $58,339.50; Golf Course $7,000.00; Utilities $281.67; Liquor Dispensary $272,309.26; TOTAL $508,347.11. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Richards declared the meeting adjourned at 9:50 P.M. .. City Clerk