Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-02-04_COUNCIL MEETINGAGENDA EDINA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FEBRUARY 4, 1985 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ROLLCALL MINUTES of January 21, 1985, approved as submitted or corrected by motion of , seconded by EDINA CITY COUNCIL I. PUBLIC HEARING - WOODDALE SCHOOL SITE /UTLEY PARK /11. 50TH STREET REPORT II. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REPORTS ON PLANNING MATTERS. Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by Planning Department. Public comment heard. First Reading of Zoning Ordinance requires offering of Ordinance only. 4/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass Second Reading or if Second Reading should be waived. Lot Divisions, Plats, Appeals from Administrative or Board of Appeals and Adjustments decisions require action by Resolution. 3/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass. A. Set Hearing Dates - 2/25/85 1. Brutger Companies. R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District to PRD -3 Planned Residential District - Generally located west of Cahill Road and south of Dewey Hill Road .2. Preliminary Plat Approval for Vernon Woods 2nd Addition. Pearson /Elmer Town omes Plan Amendment. R -2 Double Dwelling Unit District to PRD -2 Planned Residential District - Generally located south of Vernon Avenue and east of Vernon Court 3. Conditional Use Permit for Edina Public Schools, ISD 4273 - Located at 5701 Normandale Road III. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS IV. AWARD OF BIDS A. 1985 Cushman #53085 B. Jacobsen Greens King IV V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS A. City Hall Space Study . B. On -Sale Beer License - .Bravo! Italian Specialties, C. Report on MLC 1985 Legislative Platform D. Boards /Commissions Appointments E. Light Rail Transit F. Appointment of Weed Inspector - Eugene Davis: G. Migratory Water Fowl H. Special Concerns of Mayor and Council I. Post Agenda and Manager's Miscellaneous Items 1. Regular Council Meeting - 2/25/85 VI. COMMUNICATIONS Inc. - 4926 France Av. So. A. Set Hearing Dates (3/4/85) 1. Petition to Vacate Drainage and Utility Easement -'Lot 22, Block 4, . Lake Edina,2nd Addition 2. Petition to Vacate Utility Easement - Lot 2, Block 1, Warden Acres Peterson Replat VII. FINANCE A. Claims Paid. Motion of , seconded by , for payment of the following Claims as per Pre -List dated 2/4/85: General Fund $75,757.00, Poor Fund $184.22, Park Fund $580.27, Art Center $318.80, Golf Course Fund $8,494.75, Recreation Center Fund $4,538.66, Water Fund $3,916.58, Utility Fund $7,435.06, Liquor Dispensary Fund $1,834.27, IMP Bond Redemption #2 $1,244.42, Total $104,304.04; and Pre -List dated 2/4/85: General Fund $26,902.67,-Park Fund $77.95, Art Center $129.32, Golf Course Fund $553.22, Recreation Center Fund $3,011.41, Water Fund $5,555.88, Utility Fund $4,367.10, Liquor Dispensary Fund $559.05, Total $41,000.70 AGENDA EDINA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FEBRUARY 4, 1985 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ROLLCALL MINUTES of January 21, 1985, approved as submitted or corrected by motion of , seconded by EDINA CITY COUNCIL I. PUBLIC HEARING = WOODDALE SCHOOL SITE /UTLEY PARK /[J. 50TH STREET REPORT II. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REPORTS ON PLANNING MATTERS. Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by Planning Department. Public comment heard. First Reading of Zoning Ordinance requires offering of Ordinance only. 4/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass Second Reading or if Second Reading should be waived. Lot Divisions, Plats, Appeals from Administrative or Board of Appeals and Adjustments decisions require action by Resolution. 3/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass. A. Set Hearing Dates - 2/25/85 1. Brutger Companies. R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District to PRD -3 Planned Residential District - Generally located west of Cahill Road and south of Dewey Hill Road 2. Preliminary Plat Approval for Vernon Woods 2nd Addition. Pearson /Elmer Town omes Plan Amendment. R -2 Double Dwelling Unit District to PRD -2 Planned Residential District - Generally located south of Vernon Avenue and east of Vernon Court 3. Conditional Use Permit for Edina Public Schools, ISD #273 - Located at 5701 Normandale Road ..III. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS IV. AWARD OF BIDS A. 1985 Cushman #53085 B. Jacobsen Greens King IV V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS A. City Hall Space Study B. On -Sale Beer License - .Bravo! Italian Specialties, Inc. - 4926 France Av. So. C. Report on MLC 1985 Legislative Platform D. Boards /Commissions Appointments E. Light Rail Transit F. Appointment of Weed Inspector - Eugene Davis- G. Migratory Water Fowl H. Special Concerns of Mayor and Council I. Post Agenda and Manager's Miscellaneous Items 1. Regular Council Meeting - 2/25/85 VI. COMMUNICATIONS A. Set Hearing Dates (3/4/85) 1. Petition to Vacate Drainage and Utility Easement - Lot 22, Block 4,. Lake Edina 2nd Addition 2. Petition to Vacate Utility Easement - Lot 2, Block 1, Warden Acres - Peterson Replat VII. FINANCE A. Claims Paid. Motion of seconded by for payment of the following Claims as per Pre -List dated 2/4/85: General Fund $75,757.00, Poor Fund $184.22, Park Fund $580.27, Art Center $318.80, Golf Course Fund $8,494.75, Recreation Center Fund $4,538.66, Water Fund $3,916.58, Utility Fund $7,435.06, Liquor Dispensary Fund $1,834.27, IMP Bond Redemption #2 $1,244.42, Total $104,304.04; and Pre -List dated 2/4/85: General Fund $26,902 :67; -Park Fund $77.95, Art Center $129.32, Golf Course Fund $553.22, Recreation Center Fund $3,011.41, Water Fund $5,555.88, Utility Fund $4,367.10, Liquor Dispensary Fund $559.05, Total $41,000.70 MINUTES EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY JANUARY 21, 1985 Answering rollcall were Members Kelly, Richards, Turner and Mayor Courtney. MINUTES of January 7, 1985, were approved as submitted by motion of Member Turner, seconded by Member Kelly. Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. HEARING DATE FOR PROPERTY DISPOSITION /EDINBOROUGH AND AMENDMENT TO SOUTHEAST EDINA REDEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN DISCUSSED. Mr. Rosland advised that it would be premature to set hearing dates for property disposition /Edinborough and the Amendment to Southeast Edina Redevelopment Area Plan because of potential changes. No action was taken. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned by motion of Member Richards, seconded by Member Turner. Motion carried. Gordon L. H ghes Executive Director I r y EDINA PARK BOARD January 22, 1985 - Special Meeting 6:30 p.m. Edina City Hall PRESENT: Joan Lonsbury, Bob Christianson, George Warner,Virginia Shaw, Jim Fee, Jean Rydell, Marilyn Wooldridge, Andy Montgomery, Bill Lord NOT PRESENT: Don Wineberg, Mack Thayer STAFF PRESENT: Bob Kojetin, Rick Jacobson, John Keprios, Ken Rosland, Madelyn Krinke, Harold Sand OTHERS PRESENT: Bev Casserly, Joe Price, Faith and Yngve Magnuson, Mary and Al Kluesner and Jane Bennett SPECIAL MEETING - WOODDALE SCHOOL /UTLEY PARK Bob Kojetin reviewed the plans from BRW briefly for all present. He also reviewed the attached staff report which was compiled October 24, 1983. The staff reported that at the present time there is a need for space for the Edina Gymnastics Associ- ation due to limited space at the hut. Other current programs presently have adequate facilities through the schools. A gymnasium with a stage would be a highly used facility if it were available, and if more space was available, the current athletic programs could be expanded more in years to come. Some questions asked by Park Board Members were, "If plan C was adopted, how would the Historical Society be able to afford the building ? ", "What would the cost be to complete the park if the building is removed ? ", "Any idea what it would cost to erect a gym with an auditorium ? ", "Would the council take extra expense from_.the current Park budget ? ". Ken Rosland remarked that the Park Board and staff would have to show a very strong need to keep the building to justify the expense of using it. Harold Sand of the Planning Department commented on the historical significance of Wooddale School. He expressed concern that the building might be saved and restora- tion might be done less expensively than quoted. Joe Price, a neighbor of Wooddale, stated that the proposed alternatives A, B and C are not acceptable to many of the neighbors of Wooddale. The cost factor of all three of the plans is unacceptable to them. The parking provisions if the building is kept would mean a lot more pavement and the neighborhood representatives feel that as much open space and passive area should be left as possible with a minimum of pavement. Mr. Price urged the Park Board to recommend to the City Council the same recommendation they made in 1981 and 1983 to demolish the building. 0 Al Kluesner affirmed what Mr. Price said, that they want to keep Wooddale Park as a neighborhood park. Mr. Magnuson and Jane Bennett also concurred with the comments of Joe Price and affirmed what he said. Mary Kluesner stated that she has not heard any common sense ideas for the use of the building and agrees that the building should be removed and the park left as a neighborhood park. The alternatives suggested by BRW for Wooddale School in brief summary are: Alt. A- Renovation of the present building; Alt. B - Demolition of part of the building, leaving the gym. Renovation of the remaining structure; Alt. C - Demolition of part of the building, removing the gym and renovation of remaining structure; Alt. D - Demolition of all of the building except the two story front entrance which would be left as a monument ; Alt. E - Total demolition of the buiding. A ballot vote was called for to determine what the first and second choice of alter - natives was of the Park Board members. The results were as follows: for first choice 7 voted for Alt. E, 1 for Alt. D, 1 for Alt. C, one for Alt. B. For second choice, 8 voted for Alt. D, 1 for Alt. E and 1 for Alt. B. Mr. Magnuson asked if there would be more hearings to decide what would happen with the park development. Bob Kojetin replied that the Wooddale Park would be handled as we do any other development in the City whereas we would have a rendering from an architect based on input from the,Park and Recreation staff. We would then have a special meeting with the neighborhood to get their input to the recommended design. After we receive the input from the neighbors, we would then have a final design made and have another neighborhood meeting for final approval of an ultimate plan for the park. Also, at this meeting, recommendations would be made as to how much of the park could be completed with the present funding and what phases of the park would be constructed over the next couple of years. Most of the parks in the city have been done on a schedule of phases over several years as funds have been allocated for that park in the Capital Improvements Budget. The BRW design has the basic faciliites that we would recommend for a neighborhood park, which include a large open space play area, a hard surface area for court games, a playground equipment area and a parking lot to accommodate somewhere around 42 cars for activities that the local neighbors might drive to. All of these park facilities are in the present design, but the location of these items has not been discussed by the staff yet. Also being considered is a passive area within the Wooddale Park site which was not included in all of the designs because the final decision has not yet been made about the building. Other considerations which were mentioned included the need to look very carefully at the location of the parking spaces and entrance to parking lot once the determina- tion has been made about the building. Utley Park possibilities were also discussed as Bob Kojetin showed the diagrams by BRW. Attention was drawn to the proposed lagoon and canoe dock which appears in each of the 5 plans and also the tunnel under 50th Street was pointed out. Bob Kojetin indicated that some of the sketches include the two historical buildings, because one of the possibilities is to move them to Utley Park. Joan Lonsbury com- mented that Don Wineberg had been present for the meeting at Wooddale School on January 15 and had seen the proposed plans and he feels very strongly that an under- ground room would not be desirable for storage, particularly at that location because of the creek being in such close proximity. Mrs. Kluesner expressed the concern that two additional buildings in Utley Park would be overcrowding the park. 3 Bob Christianson commented that if the two historical buildings are going to be moved, it would be his suggestion to move them to the Parbury property. Mr. Price expressed concern about the tunnel creating a problem of youngsters congregating and causing trouble. Bob Kojetin felt it would not be enough of a problem to prevent putting the tunnel in because of the merit of having a pedestrian underpass. Bob Christianson MOVED THAT THE CITY NOT MOVE THE GRANGE HALL AND OLD CAHILL SCHOOL TO UTLEY PARK. Marilyn Wooldridge SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED. Jim Fee MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THE LAGOON FOR A PUBLIC SKATING AREA. MOTION WAS SECONDED. THREE VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, THREE VOTED AGAINST THE MOTION AND TWO ABSTAINED. Virginia Shaw stated that she felt it is inappropriate to make recommendations about what should be in the park at this time. Bob Christianson MOVED THAT WE RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THE WOODDALE SCHOOL BE RAZED IN ITS ENTIRETY (ALT. E), AND THAT THE SITE BE UTILIZED FOR OPTIMUM PARK PURPOSES. JEAN RYDELL SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Virginia Shaw MOVED FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE MEETING. BOB CHRISTIANSON SECONDED. The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION BY CITY COUNCIL: MOTION CARRIED: TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY NOT MOVE THE GRANGE HALL AND OLD CAHILL SCHOOL TO UTLEY PARK. MOTION MADE, 3 VOTES FOR, 3 VOTES AGAINST, 2 ABSTENTIONS: TO RECOMMEND TO THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THE LAGOON FOR A PUBLIC SKATING AREA. MOTION CARRIED: TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THE WOODDALE SCHOOL BE RAZED IN ITS ENTIRETY (ALT. E) AND THAT THE SITE BE UTILIZED FOR OPTIMUM PARK PURPOSES. TO: Ken Rosland, City Manager FROM: Bob Kojetin, Director, Park and Recreation Department DATE- October 24, 1983 SUBJECT: Edina Park and Recreation Staff's Position on Wooddale School Park At the October 20, 1983 Park and Recreation Staff meeting attended by Bob Kojetin, Rick Jacobson, John Keprios, John Valliere, Carole Kulak, Mary Huiras, Pat Greer, Marion Ward, Larry Thayer,. -Mitch Asplund, Susan Weigle, and Madelyn Krinke, three areas of concern were discussed: 1) If we had the building, how would we program it. 2) If we did not have the school building how would we use the land. 3) Pros and Cons of the facilities 1) Programming If We Had The Building: Expanded room for the Art Center - - Studio Art Rooms could be rented out -Use classrooms for larger Art classes -Use larger rooms for workships - Art -Use larger rooms for Watercolor Club & others having guest speakers -Art Camp - Performing Arts activities -Use large rooms for dance instruction -Use stage for performing Arts - theater -Use large rooms to show old movies (like they do at Walker Art Center) -home for the Sousa'Band and their equipment Seven Day A Week Usage of Gymnasium - Use of gym for basketball, volleyball, indoor sports, ie indoor tennis - Floor hockey - If possible to knock out walls and make larger area - use for indoor soccer - Use for registrations -. Gymnastics location Room Usage - Park & Recreation Video Center - Use for headquarters for tours - Rooms for other community groups - Expansion of Historical Society - Sr. Boutique location - Sr. Citizen North area - Use for Halloween haunted house - Santa House location Give each athletic association a meeting & storage room for their equipment -2- 1) Surrounding property if school was still in tact would be primarily left the same, except relocation of parking lot and hard surfaced area west of the school would be recommended. 2) How We Would Use the Land if School Buildin4 Demolished - Playground activities - Playground equipment Picnic area -T -ball - Football -Small soccer field Sr. Citizen passive area - Install overhead walkway across Wooddale Street to connect Utley Park with Wooddale -Ice skating rink - Possible small children's spray pool - Expanded Open Space 3) Pros and Cons of the facilities Cons: -We would run into direct conflicts with the Community Education Programs. -We would take away from the use of the Community Center Facility -Most of the activities which would be recommended would not be accommodated - by the present layout of the building. Costly renovations would be required before many of the rooms would be feasible for the activities being recommended. If additional programming was done in the building, a program coordinator would have to be present between 7 a.m. and 11 p.m. to take care of scheduling, answering phones, etc. Other staff would also be necessary, i.e. custodians. - Increased parking problems due to added activities. - Additional traffic would be generated by increased activities at the building - General upgrading of the building would be very costly in the long run - projecting into, the next 30 -50 years, because of the'very large size of the building. - Maintenance on such a.large and old building is expected to be extremely costly. Pros: - Because of the gymnasium and auditorium facility of the school, this would be a very useful facility to have in the vicinity because of the number of multi - purposes which could be programmed by the Park & Recreation Department. -If expansion of rooms by knocking down walls and • the building so as to create larger spaces, the could be don in p Positive programming of many of theseactivities, would also add more In consideration of all of the above, the general concensus of the Park and Recreation statf is that in general, the structure would not be usable as it presently is arranged for most of the programming which would be recommended; e cost of grading the present structure would be extremely high; the building ando land n:9ould be a liability, because very little revenue would be derived from the types of programs which are being reccrme'nded. The staff was concerned about funding to cover the ne bud cessary get expenses if such the building and land were acquired. The present budget of Park -3- and Recreation could not withstand the burden of the additional tunas which would be required. It would demand the same maintenance staffing which the school presently has and also it would require some additional Park & Rec staff to ao in -house programmin, and be located in the building. It is the consensus of the Park & Recreation staff that the building be removed and the present site upgraded for a larger park site in the country Club area. BK:mk December 3, 1984 Leslie Turner 6710 Parkwood Lane Edina, MN 55436 Dear Councilwoman Turner, Re: Wooddale Site Again, we in the Country Club neighborhood ifind our sel'Ves. concerned about the future of the Wooddale Site and especially the school; building. In its simplest terms - -the school board chose to discontinue the use of the building as a walkable neighborhood school. In doing so, they halted the only practical, common sense use for the building: The land area is small, the traffic corner is congested, and the present park is small for such a high density neighborhood. The school board will not use the existing building as a school again, should the school population increase dramatically, since other buildings in the system which are newer and modern have been saved for that reason. The city hall can find any space needed in the old Edina East building, so could park and recreation or any number of other city departments. It appears then that since the only practical use is for a school (walkable neighborhood type) and that this use will not be Implemented that the remaining common sense approach is to raze the building and create green space. We have been working this empty building problem for 3 -4 years. We understand the significance of Historic Restoration and Preservation - -but Wbatuse will the building have if it is restored? It is obviously not in its original condition. Shall, we pay to restore it and then wonder again what to-do with it? I now need to address another issue concerning the group that seeks to save the building- -the Edina Historical Society. It is my opinion that the Society and its members receive preferential treatment over the ordinary citizens of Edina. I will show two areas where I have recently observed this: 1. Foster Dunwoodie wac i ^vited by the staff at City Hall to meet with the INDEPENDENT study firm of BRW during the study days on the Wooddale property. The neighborhood group found out in mid - November. I feel the study was completed when I talked with you, and even though you offered to arrange a meeting with-BRW--the question was academic after I returned from a 10 day trip Nov . 23 and an article appeared Nov. 26 in the Sun that quoted the completed study. Why weren't we INVITED to meet with BRW? 2. This past weekend the Historical Society had a large sale in the Wooddale building. I attended the sale. I have several questions regarding the sale: 1. Did the Historical Society ask for permission to have the sale? 2. Did the Society pay the taxpayers of Edina rent for the use of the space? 3. Are the proceeds of the sale being shared with the city? 4. Would you grant me permission to have a sporting goods sale in the building? 5. Will the proceeds from the sale be used politically.to further the ambitions of the Society and their views? One of the problems I see is that it seems to be assumed by members of the Council and the staff of city hall that the Historical Society and Preservation Board speak for ALL the citizens of Edina. Nothing could be further from the truth. As in the case of the Edina Mills Site - -we in the neighborhood are very unhappy with the interpretation at the site and that it serves as the entrance to our neighborhood. I understand that at the time of the plans the neighbors spent a great deal of time working with those parties involved and were completely surprised by the outcome. There is a feeling here that we werenot dealt with openly and honestly. I have often wondered if there is not a conflict of interest with the architect that serves as advisor and consultant to these historic restorations and preser- vations and then has his own firm hired to do the work. Has anyone on the council ever wondered about that? In the last rounds of public meetings I noticed that Foster Dunwoodie spoke at least 20 minutes, presented slides, etc. to promote his point of view. Could I ask that in the interest of fairness all sides of the issue are heard for the same amount of time? Understand that the neighborhood group does not have a paid staff at their disposal for a smooth, professional presentation nor are we trained in the art of presentations. The citizens of Edina did not elect, ask, or encourage the Edina Historical Society to speak for them. Please do not assume that they do. It is my opinion that the school building be torn down, the land converted to green area - -with a memorial to the school site and an attempt be made to connect the green areas at the intersection via bridge or tunnel. S i ncere ly, Mary Kluesner cc:Council Members Richard4 Kelley, Bredesen Mayor C. Wayne Courtney Ken Rosland, City Manager Bob Kojetin, Parks and Recreation January 21, 1985 To the Director of Parks and Recreation and Park Board Members: After attending both sessions of the public information meetings on the Wooddale Site, Utley and theconcern of 50th Street, I wish to convey some observations to you. I was quite caught up in the fascination of tunnels, lagoons, monuments, reflecting pools, history centers, skating rinks, fire rings, canoe landings, plazas and organized development for both parks. After some time of thinking about these alternatives and some conversations in the Country Club neighborhood, I came to realize that what this total package proposes in almost all of the combinations of alternatives is the loss of our neighborhood parks. I am concerned that the pastoral setting of Utley and the present informal use of the Wooddale Park and minimum use for summer recreation programs for grade school age children will be lost in the ambitious and over organized plans in the BRW alternatives. What BRW did not offer was the following - -leave Utley Park as it is, create a maximum of passive green space and minimum of hard surface (which means razing the building) and treat 50th Street inits present width as a street that needs re- building and /or re- surfacing. To be specific, the most frightening remark made at the public meetings was the request that the parking lot in the 'new'Utley Park be large enough to accomodate a bus turn around. I envision a tremendous amount of activity with a history center there. School buses regularly, regular meetings in the historic buildings, antique sales, boutique sales and the like. Why should these activities be held in our neighborhood park? If the corner of 50th and Wooddale is already traffic congested- - why are we adding to the problem? We know that the two buildings generate traffic problems, that is obvious on Eden Ave. Is Utley Park a logical place to transpose that activity? I propose that it is not. Cornelia Park with its large parking lot in place and large acreage already serving city wide interests may be a solution to the problem. I'm also wondering what people are going to be served by the proposed skating rink, canoe landing, fire ring etc. Our neighborhood skates informally at Arden Park, and isn't it true that the neighborhood rinks are being understaffed and under budgeted by Parks and Recreation in order to concentrate on the Braemar area? Are we building these proposed facilities for the use of those outside our o-wn community? And if so, ;,,hy? What children are served in the 'old fashioned' school days held in the Old Cahill School? Fine that our local children are - -but if a great number of these groups are from outside our area, why is our neighborhood park being considered for this activity? I feel that our neighborhood with its high density should be allowed the privilege of a small green area that is informal in style, has reduced hard surface and offers a reprise from the activity of 50th Street and concentration of homes on very small lots. Many of us still resent the loss of the open green area at the Mill Site. I urge you to really consider first of all the needs of the neighborhood. The question to be asked is this, "Should the smallest neighborhood parks in the city be converted to city wide use and possibly Greater Metropolitan use ?" Sincerely, Mary Kluesner 4409 Country Club Road PAina 19 1 GG/I')A I`I'• PPW WEST 50th STREET WOODDALE SCHOOL BUILDING WOODDALE SCHOOL SITE and UTLEY PARK Recommendations of the Edina Heritage Preservation Board to the Edina City Council February 4, 1985 Your Heritage Preservation Board has continuously followed the Wooddale School issue over the past several years. We recognize the building as historically important, constructed at the beginning of substantial growth in the Village. However our principal concern has been the school's physical and symbolic importance to the Country Club neighborhood, as the gateway to a National Register District. As citizens of Edina, we also strongly believe in an open and thoughtful decision - making process, and thus we strongly commend the City Council for undertaking this comprehensive study of transportation alternatives, recreational opportunties, and preservation issues. In that spirit, we have framed the Board's public discussion in terms of larger issues, rather than merely architectural importance. We know the Council will understand this Recommendation's emphasis on function and value does not imply a lesser importance to intangible, but nevertheless real, historical and esthetic values. Wooddale and the Country Club Neighborhood As the Council knows, the Country Club neighborhood has been placed on the National Register of Historic Sites and Places. This is a rare distinction, comparable to Summit Avenue in St. Paul, or the Mission Viejo district of Santa Barbara. Wooddale School plays a pivotal physical and symbolic role at the gateway to Country Club: as part of the remarkable -- perfect -- symbolism of a School, Church and Park at the corner of West 50th Street and Wooddale Avenue. Wooddale School as Substandard Property The School Board apparently has determined that Wooddale School is substandard for its purposes. We have no intention, as a Board, of contesting that position. However, casual observation will reveal hundreds of similar schools nationwide -- certainly dozens in Minnesota -- which are considered perfectly acceptable for educational purposes. A conspicuous local example is Barton School, at 44th and Colfax Avenue South. Barton, built 20 years before Wooddale, serves children in the Lynnhurst neighborhood on Lake Harriet, which has property values and income demographics equal to or greater than Country Club's. The Real Value of Wooddale School We state this merely to refute the occasional statement that Wooddale School is somehow an "obsolete" structure. This is a handsome building, structurally very sound, with substantial value as real estate. According to the Wall Street Journal, rehabilitation and restoration of existing buildings is the strongest single real estate market in the United States today. This is not only because of the investment tax credit incentives of the 1981 tax act, but also because rehabilitation of existing space to modern standards is almost always much less expensive than developing new property for a similar purpose. Members of the Board have extensive, national experience in the design and development of both existing and new properties. Based upon the current shell value of $20 /s.f for existing buildings, Wooddale School has a current value, exclusive of land, of $1,360,000 for 68,000 s.f. of space. Assuming the consultant's estimate of $25 /s.f. for "complete restoration and renovation," the building can be brought to modern standards for about one -third the cost of constructing similar new space, or a savings in this illustration of more than $2.5 million. The Operating Performance of Wooddale School To investigate this fully, the Board prepared an operating pro forma of Wooddale as rental property, appended to this Recommendation. We are aware of the Council's current policy position that only "public use" would be considered for the building. However, there is really no visible difference in impact between occupants (and their vehicles) working in "public" or "private" roles, and of course, this is an illustration rather than a proposal. As Council Members can see, the Board used very conservative assumptions in this exercise: an up- front, capitalized lease payment equal to the net shell value of the building; a long construction period, with contruction interest above that now commercially available; a four year rent -up period, twice to three time longer than could be expected; and net rents of $9 /s.f. /year (plus $3 operating and $2.50 property taxes), which is the low end of current market rents. The results of this sketch exercise - -see the second to last line, "Net Cash Flow " - -is an initial breakeven, with a rapid climb into profitability. We wish to emphasize that we are neither proposing the City sell the building to a developer, nor initiate a new municipal enterprise; however these figures support our position that Wooddale School has substantial real value, and should be considered a' municipal asset. Caveats The Board would like to address two caveats that occasionally surface in discussions of the building's future: market, and the School Board's reversionary clause. During the excellent neighborhood presentation by the consultant, there was an incidental inference that there may not be a market, or even public use for the building, should it be rehabilitated. For public uses alone, the Board believes there are ample candidates for tenancy: park activities, community theater, senior citizen center, and so on. Should there ever be interest in renting for general office tenancy, the 40,000 -odd square feet of rentable space represents about 1 /10 of 1% of the current Hennepin County office inventory, in a market that has seen a combined annual absorbtion of 3 -5% yearly for over 20 years. Also, the Board is aware of suggestions that the building simply be mothballed, as inexpensive insurance against future space needs. The issue of the reversionary clause appears to be a non - issue. The Board understands the School Board position as to never again use the building for educational purposes. Further, the site is apparently below minimum state standards for a new structure. Thus recall for school purposes seems unlikely. Finally, a 90 -day notice would effectively prohibit any investment to the property in perpetuity. Since all parties are approaching this decision in good faith, we know this would never be an actual prospect on the part of the School Board. Recommendation to the City Council As the consultants illustrate in their very thorough and professional study, the Council is faced with a complex array of choices with respect to street, school and parklands. The Heritage Preservation Board has taken no position on choices which do not directly affect the National Register District. For example, on choices of street alignment and renovation of Utley Park, the Board believes that the Park Board and City staff will have important recommendations, to which we defer. As to roadway section, the Board concurs with neighborhood sentiment that whatever is done to 50th Street, east of Wooddale, boulevarded sidewalks should be retained on both sides of the street, and that under no circumstances should the graceful boulevard trees be removed or threatened. The Board would consider underground routing of utility lines in this section to be very desirable. As to Wooddale School, the Board's position as to the historic and physical importance of the building is well known to the Council. Moreover we would be unable to recommend the demolition of a million - dollar public asset, as a matter of sound fiscal policy. Thus the Board's recomendation to the Council is Alternative "A ", retention of the structure. However, the Board also believes that the neighborhood is underserved with respect to active recreational area, and that the opportunity to provide playing fields north of 50th Street is very desirable, should the Park Board wish to do so. Therefore, the Board further recommends that staff provide an analysis to the Council of current parking use at the Community Center. We believe this may establish that the actual parking requirements by code are significantly greater than what can be experienced when the building is put to productive public use. Should the Council conclude that required parking will preclude the construction of a playing field, then the Board would support, if not recommend, Alternative "B ", retention of the 1926 building, with site development as generally illustrated by the consultant. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD TUESDAY, JANUARY 22, 1985 AT 8:00 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL RECEPTION CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Foster Dunwiddie, Tom Martinson, Gary Nyberg, John.Childs, Gordon Stuart and Lois Wilder. ; STAFF PRESENT: Harold Sand I APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Mr. Nyberg moved approval of the November 27,`1984 minutes as submitted. Mr..Childs seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. II. WOODDALE SCHOOL. Mr. Dunwiddie noted that the Board received copies of the consultant's report prepared by BRW, Inc. and presented at public meetings held January 8 and 15 at Wooddale School. The consultant has prepared five alternatives for reconstruction of West 50th Street from T.H. 100 to Wooddale Ave. and five alternatives for reconstruction of West 50th Street from Wooddale Ave. to Halifax Ave. In addition, the consultant has prepared five alternatives for the preservation or demolition of Wooddale School and five alternatives for development of the Wooddale School site for park use in connection with Utley Park. The consultant was not charged with preparing a market study or investigating various alternate uses for the vacant school building. The report addresses the construction and maintenance expenses for plans that retain various percentages of the building. The report does not contain a specific recommendation from the consultant; it is not known if there will be a specific recommendation presented at the February 4, 1985 City Council hearing on the issue. The consultant's report does not state the conditions of transfer of the property to the City from the School District. Those conditions included the agreement that the property_must be retained for.public purposes:. The'School District has the option to reclaim title to the property with not less than 3 months and: not more than 12 months notice to the City,. The School District provided $25,000.00 to the City to study the use of the property and..will pay an additional $100,000.00 to the City.on July 1,4985, the use of which is not stipulated. It is acknowledged that the site is not large enough to meet the current State standards for a new school and the School District does not have any intentions'of reoccupying the existing building as a school. Mr. Dunwiddie presented recent calculations with the floor area and the net rentable area of the building based on the alternatives in the consultant's report. The net rentable area includes the auditorium, balcony and basement of the building. The gross floor area of the existing building is 68,067 sq.ft. and the net rentable area is 37,686 sq.ft. Alternate B preserves the 1926 portion of the building and has a gross area of 43,625 sq.ft. and a net rentable area is 25,579 sq.ft. Alternate C preserves the front portion of the building and has a gross area of 20,700 sq.ft. and a net rentable area of 10,112 sq.ft. Mr. Martinson said that he analyzed the value of the structure without considering the historic implications of the building. On the basis of minimal IRS depreciation values of $20 per square foot the building has an intrinsic value of between $800,000 and $1,400,000 that is an asset to the community. Mr. Martinson also prepared an analysis of the building assuming a restoration for a private use on a short term basis. The report is based oo conservative figures and the building shows a profit in 5 years of operation. The Board discussed potential public uses for the building and suggestions included the performing arts program, the Sousa Band, an additional senior citizen center, the Edina Historical Society, community education and day care facilities. There may be private uses in addition to these public uses. The metropolitan area is growing at a rate of 3.5 to 4 percent per year indicating a continual need for new floor area. The Board discussed the alternatives for reconstructing West 50th Street and concluded that the various alignments, road widths and traffic patterns were not within the purview of the Board. However the boulevard trees that border West 50th Street between Wooddale Ave. and Halifax Ave. are an intergal part of the Country Club District because they were planted with the original development. The canopy of trees should be preserved to maintain the character of the neighborhood and the National Register District. Mr. Martinson moved to reaffirm the Board's previous position that the trees east of Wooddale Ave. should be preserved and and that the street should not be widened. Underground utilities would be desirable in any street project. Lois Wilder seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. Mr. Sand reported that the Edina Park Board held a special meeting today at 6:30 p.m. to consider the BRW Inc. report. The Park Department staff said they have plenty of uses for Wooddale School if the City should decide to retain the building. However all of the existing programs can be accommodated within existing facilities except the gymnastics program. The Park Board voted 7 to 2 in favor of alternative E, to demolish the building as the first choice on the property. The Board discussed parking requirements for the area and noted that most of the on- street parking would be removed with the various roadway options. The parking at Wooddale School could possibly be reduced depending on the use of the building. Mr. Martinson moved that the Board recommend acceptance of alternate A, preservation of the entire School because of its historic and architectural significance and because it is an asset to the Community. However, if the City Council concludes that more park space is necessary, the Board would be able to support alternative B, preservation of the 1926 portion of the building, according to the consultant's report. Gary Nyberg seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. Mr. Martinson agreed to prepare a report and present it to the City Council on February 4, 1985. III. Membership. Mr. Dunwiddie said that Mrs. Mary Nelson would not be continuing to serve on the board. He requested suggestions for a replacement. IV. NEXT MEETING. February 4, at 7:00 p.m. City Council meeting. February 26, at 8:00 p.m. regular Board meeting. V. ADJOURNMENT. 9:30 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Harold Sand Project: Office Uooddale School Edina, Minnesota allocated Percent of Expenses 1001 Starting Date Mau-85 INTERIM FINANCING Period Ending May -86 Hou -86 May-87 Noy -87 May -88 Oct -88 May-89 Nov -89 May -90 Nov-90 May -91 Land Purchase 0 850000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Contract for Property 10000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Design Fees 20000 30000 5000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Structural Testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Survey and Soils 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Environmental 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Consultants 0 5000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 Legal Fees 5000 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Placement Fees 0 15000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Broker 0 46213 0 40436 0 11553 0 0 0 0 0 Marketing and Pre -lease 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Market Study 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Insurance 250 750 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rd Ualorem Taxes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construction Mgmt 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construction Draw 308000 616800 103200 Total Period Expenses 343250 1563763 108200 40436 0 11553 0 0 0 0 0 Interim Interest 14.51 25011 140776 158917 173443 0 842 0 0 0 0 Draw Fee 0.51 1725 7984 1251 1002 871 58 4 0 0 0 0 Gross Period Draw 344975 _L_IIL 1596757 r�IIaaa 250127 100355 174314 11611 846 0 0 0 0 Cumulative Draw 344975 1941731 IILLLLIILa 2191959 aIIIISa == 2392314 ==aLIIII == 2566628 c�LIIII == 11611 = LIILeL == 12457 L =_ L= == 0 = IIIILLL == LIIII 0 = - - -- = 0 IIIIIIIIIIL 0 Carry to Permanent aaaasaaII LaIILIIIIIIII _ - - -a.L __ -_____ 2566628 =IIIIIIII_L IIIIIIIIIIII == 12457 LLLIIaIIIIII a.LLLaL 0 IIIIIIaxaL IIIILCee =a aaa 0 = —II= CO1BINE0 (PERMANENT + INTERIM) FINANCING RENTAL INCOME SCHEDULE STflRTIN6 NOU. BB LESSEE Sp. FT. 8 /SF/YR X INCR UAC YR I URC YR 2 URC YR 3 URC YR 4+ Office 42790 14.50 51 601 251 151 51 OPERATING EXPENSES SCHEDULE Real Estate Taxes 106975 Property Insurance 2000 Property Maintenance 100000 Power 10000 Uater and Sewer 5000 Legal and Accounting 10000 233975 Year Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Period Ending May-89 May -90 May -91 May -91 May -93 May-94 May -95 May -96 May -97 May -98 May -99 Rental Income 620455 6S1478 684052 718254 754167 791875 831469 873042 916695 962519 1010656 Less Uacancy Allowance 372213 162869 102608 35913 37708 39594 41573 43652 45835 48116 50533 Effective Rental Income 148182 488608 581444 682342 716459 752282 - 789896 - ---- -- 819390 -- - - - - -- 870860 - - - - -- 914403 - - - -_ 960123 Operating Expenses Management Fee (1 ERI) 51 12409 24930 29072 34117 35823 37614 39495 41470 43543 45720 48006 Operating Exp(flno Incr) 51 133975 245674 257957 270855 284390 298618 313549 329226 345688 362972 301121, Net Operating Income 1798 218504 294414 377369 396238 416049 436852 -------- - 458695 - - - - -- - 481629 - - - - -- 505111 - - - - - -- 530996 EQUITY SCHEDULE WITHOUT UOAB) First Mortgage Tern: 15 Principal Rate:13.0012400000 1384578 2367151 2347458 2325205 2300050 2171645 2239537 2203255 2162255 2115926 Principal Repaid 15422 17427 19693 22253 25146 18414 32108 36182 40999 46329 52352 Interest Paid 312000 309995 307730 305170 302277 299008 295314 291140 286423 281093 275010 Second Mortgage Tern: 25 Principal Rate:14.501 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Principal Repaid 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Interest Paid 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Revenue Bonds Tern: 15 Principal Rate:11.501 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Principal Repaid 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Principal Deferred Interest Paid 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Interest Deferred === enc= ez.. a. savoee: eze .eas...o.aaec =�eozc�n�= a�� - == Does= ao..a. == CASH FLOU WITHOUT UOBG) Funds Provided From Permanent Financing 2400000 From Equity 500000 100000 from Sales Equity 0 Het Operating Income 1798 218504 294414 377369 396138 416049 436852 458695 481629 505711 530996 Funds Used From Interim Financing 2566628 12457 0 0 Debt Service 327412 327412 327422 327421 317411 327412 327422 327422 327422 327422 327412 Net Cash flow 7747 -21375 -33008 49947 68815 88627 109430 131272 15420? 178288 203574 Debt Coverage Ratio 0.01 .0.67 0.90 1.15 111 1.27 1.33 1.40 1.47 1.54 1.62 TO: EDINA CITY COUNCIL 4C&H4 4#i41"icri soci v 4801 West 50th St. Edina, Minn., 55424 J5, Statement as a result of policies adopted at the Edina Historical Society's January 29th Board Meeting in reference to Wooddale School. Our firm position has to be that Wooddale School should be preserved in its entirety and at the very minimum the auditorium area be retained in any plan that may be adopted. We consider the audi- torium to be a major asset to the community. While we are in full sympathy with the need for park land in or around the County Club Area, we know that history cannot be reversed and that the park land originally designated for the area cannot be recovered. It is of historic signaficance that the building is designated as a pivital structure in the Country Club Historic Preservation District which is on the National Register of Historic Places in Washington, D.C. This does not happen without a great deal of effort on the part of those who wish to have it so designated but also involves a great deal of research by the national and state bodies who designate these sites. This, of course, will be gone if the school is removed, thus removing part of the prestige given the Country Club Area by its historic designation. As an aside, if the old Cahill School and Grange Hall buildings are moved,they too will be removed from the historic sites list. With Edina's Centennial coming in 1988, it seems almost ludicrous that we would be tearing down an historic building rather than working toward preserving it for future generations. Wooddale was, for many years, the only full scale schooloperation in Edina, which makes it unique.in itself. One cannot help but ask,why destroy something that would be so hard to replace? Will those Edina citizens of forty years from now be as appalled at our insensitivity as we are at the major blunder made when they sold the property that was originally designated for park land in the Country Club Area in the 1940's and the lack of foresight when they tore down the Edina Mill in the 1930's? We have tried to research to the best of our ability, without the aid of professional help, in order to learn what usages the build- ing could serve in the community. The following are what we found to impact on that subject. 1. We investigated the allegation that we didn't need another "white elephant" or "albatross," as the Community Center (old Edina East) is frequently called, to further the tax burden of Edina's citizens. What we found was that the Community Center was not only completely in use but that there was a waiting list to get into the building and that while the building is referred to an a Community Center, a Edina City Council Page 2 lions share of the facility is school or business oriented and not used for "community" activities. This meets almost none of the requirements submitted by the Edina Bicentennial Commission study on the need for an Edina Community Center. (That Commission was the fifth study done on that same subject - all five commissions recommended that a Community Center was needed.) 2. We learned that there were many uses that the building could serve. Foremost is the need to solve the growing needs of the elderly in Edina. Based on census data and many more recent studies - Edina has the fastest growing senior popu- lation in the county. We are informed that the South Hennepin Health and Human Services have been interested in setting up a sattelite office in Wooddale since the day the school was closed. Their main interest is the location of the building with its proximity to bus lines, city facilities and the 50th and France area. Therefore they had little or no interest in occupying space at the Community Center. An interesting bit of information they supplied was that over fifty percent of their calls for in -home service are coming from Edina while the agency serves Eden Prairie, Bloomington and Richfield as well. They also informed us that the Day Care facility for Seniors is no longer in operation. This being a growing concern in the world around us, should concern us as citizens of Edina. They supplied us with the data from the study commissioned by the Bloomington City Council and we submit that Edina probably should look into the idea of doing a similar study. 3. Another very real need that surfaced was the need of space for the performing arts groups in Edina whether they be dance, music or theatre groups. An example of which is the Second John Phillip Sousa Band which everyone would have to admit is an asset to Edina and certainly gives us favorable visibility elsewhere. The Edina theatre group is having many problems with space as are other dance groups and vocal musical performers. 4. If the building were to be destroyed where would the things presently being housed in the building go? Would it be necessary to build another facility to meet future needs that are already present and many that are not far off? Where will the museum and the collection of historic Edina artifacts go? Where would the City voting machine be stored? Where will the high school party supplies be kept and worked on every year? Edinamite supplies are another question. What if the city finds it needs more expansion space. Where will that be? What will be done to address the needs of girls' sports? What of the needed facilities for the gymnastics groups? Where will all of these things be housed in the future? Edina City Council Page 3 In final analysis is the tax payer going to be well served by destroying a building historic or not that is still in sound condition and a real asset to the community when there are so many needs in the community that are not presently being met? Can we afford to then construct other structures in the near future that will meet all of these needs? What is really the most cost efficient outcome for Edina? All of Edinal While this might not be the happiest solution for the immediate neighborhood, what about the city as a whole? Therefore, we believe that city as a whole not only now but in the future would be best served by retaining the Wooddale School as a public building. Thank you for the consideration you have shown to the Edina Historical Society. We respectfully submit this report. s Donna Skagerb rg, P sident Mary Fenlason, Vice President Barbara Peer, Secretary Frank Cardarelle, Treasurer Members of Board: James Fenlason Lyndley Opitz ( curator ) E. Dudley Parsons Mrs. Wayne Courtney Donald A. Storm Diane Storm Marilyn Curtis John McCauley Glenn Smith Edina a#idla4 l Socid it 4801 West 50th St. Edina, Minn., 55424 Letter submitted to the Park Board for their January 22nd meeting. Dear Joan: I'm sorry that I cannot send you a more comprehensive statement from the Historical Society but until our January 29th Board meeting I will not have all of the facts and concerns before me. Naturally saving Wooddale would be our first choice for a number of reasons that I can expand on at a later date; however, our board is not impressed with plans "C" or "D." "C" is out because it looks strange and really serves little purpose and "D" looks like a good spot for grafitti and pidgeons. As I told you at our last meeting on January 9th, one major concern was in regard to the moving of our two buildings from Tupa Park to Utley Park. In passing it was remarked at the informational meeting that a room might be built in a basement area between the two other buildings. The concern there was the need to have a building above ground as we are having many problems with damp basements now and the new location being so close to the creek would only make that worse. Our collections are much too valuable to be destroyed by dampness. i.e. our clothing collection is one of the largest and best in the state. Some other concerns were the location of the buildings (will they be targets for vandalism if they were put in the more westerly location? Will the parking lot be adequate for a bus turn around so that we can continue our school program? Will the boutiques which bring us much needed funds and great publicity for the Society have to be discontinued if we are moved? What happens to the name of the park (Frank Tupa and Kay Brown)(the room dedicated in her memory)? Both names we feel should always be attached to our whereabouts since they played such an important role in the development of our Historical Society. The one concern that we always have is what purpose do we serve in the community as a whole beyond the collecting and preserving of Edina's very colorful history. The Board for many years has felt that our real mission is to provide living, hands on historical interpretation of our buildings and collections. What we want most to avoid is a dusty old museum somewhere that only history buffs might sometime seek out. Edina's history belongs to all of Edina and all those who have ancestors here. You might be surprised to know that our recruests for information come from all over the United States and we do try to perform that service to the best of our ability. We also try to make information about Edina available for our Edina schools, civic groups and interested citizens. I'm sorry that I will be out of town on the 22nd. If I can be of any help perhaps I could attend your 'February meeting. Thanks for your interest. P.S. With your help maybe we can all work tolaard making our centennial really special! January 23, 1985 Edina City Council Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mr. Mayor and Council: I attended the public information meeting held at Wooddale School on January 16. The purpose of this letter is to give you my impression of the alternatives presented and some thoughts that you may wish to include in your deliberations toward adoption of an action plan. Let me begin by repeating in writing what I have said to many of you personally, that because of my very active involvement in the Wooddale community and in particular the long and painful debates over the closing of Wooddale School, it may be that I am not a rational or objective observer of the area. My personal opinion is that the closing of Wooddale School was not a sound decision. _ My thoughts in random order are as follows: 1. Even though there are diehards like me, the school is now closed and the property has been transferred to the administration of the City. 'The exact terms of that transfer s Edina City Council Page 2 are unclear to me, but for the school district to retain any interest or control over that site does not make sense if the land use cannot be for a school because of State guidelines and the adopted plan of the Edina School Board. I can appreciate that the land was transferred with the understanding that the site be used for some "public purpose" but in my opinion, that is as far as any restriction should go. 2. The various alternatives to retain all or parts of the school for community use seem admirable and possibly useful if the City is willing to subsidize whatever structure remains. I have serious doubts that there are enough "public purpose" organizations that would actually pay even the very bargain rates quoted over a long -term period to make the project even a breakeven proposition from the standpoint of the City. I do not believe any of the total or limited uses of the existing 'or remodeled facility are sustainable economically over any reasonable length of time. 3. While the idea of `•the "monument" has - a certain -- - appeal to me, I don't think it is justified if it would restrict a better site plan that could be designed if it was removed. If it is deemed to be of historic significance, perhaps it could be moved to a part of the site that would not encumber any other planning. Edina City Council Page 3 4. If the area is going to be used for a park, I believe the Park Department should recommend to the City a plan that gives the fullest utilization possible to the site. The neighborhood has long perceived a need for a "neighborhood park" and I believe that if the site is going to be used for a "public purpose," that is the appropriate use. 5. While I have always supported the concept of a tunnel walkway connection between Wooddale and Utley Park, I believe careful consideration should be given to whether or not this would become an attractive nuisance or a safety risk, especially for young children as it is my understanding that the contemplated design places the walkway physically over or adjacent to the creek. 6. The alternative plans presented for Utley Park were interesting to me, especially the alternative that seemed to turn it into a historic park with the moving of the old Cahill School buildings to the park. I have not studied the various plans in detail, but it seemed to me that the existing tennis courts were retained in all cases. At the risk of sounding parochial, it is my judgment that those tennis courts are used heavily by a high proportion of non -Edina residents. They could possibly Edina City Council Page 4 be relocated to some other near location, especially if keeping them in their present location dictates design constraints that would limit the optimal development of Utley Park. 7. There was considerable discussion at the public meeting about the creation of safer and more appealing facilities for the canoeists who use Minnehaha Creek. Minnehaha Creek is a regional asset and is used heavily by residents of the region. In some years, the canoeing season is very short. While I recognize that the City of Edina has always prided itself on being a contributing member of the regional recreation community, I question whether.it is good policy for the City of Edina to provide parking lots, portage. areas, rest areas and picnic grounds that mainly benefit regional residents in a small urban park. 8. One of the great assets of the Wooddale community is St. Stephen's Church. While it may not be recommended public policy to provide off- street parking for churches, I believe everything possible should be done to do just that in any redesign of both Utley Park and the Wooddale site. I further support the consultant's view that vehicular access to Utley and the Wooddale site should optimally be off of Wooddale Avenue rather than West 50th Street. . Edina City Council Page 5 9. Relative to the proposals for West 50th Street, I am confused. There are so many alternatives and safety, design and aesthetic elements to the various possible combinations that I am not able to sort them out. Generally, I think the council should seek the best professional design advice and neighborhood input and then choose the best alternative regardless of cost. My random opinions are as follows: a. Even though the roadway is an oddball width and does become virtually a two -lane road much of the time because of parking or weather constraints, it operates pretty well the way it is. b. While the roadway may be in substandard condition, it is my judgment that it certainly is not in such bad condition that it is materially detrimental to vehicles using the road or that it creates a safety hazard because of its condition. c. Although the consultant projects-no significant traffic increase if the road is upgraded, somehow I question that projection. d. While I am a fan of the elm trees, it seems that they have been so butchered by the power companies as to be somewhat unnatural and unattractive in their present condition and I suppose the forester would say they are all going to go sooner or later from Dutch Elm disease. Edina City Council Page 6 e. Although I was not able to study either of the alternatives that changed the alignment of 50th Street in the Wooddale -Utley area,. I doubt if either one would receive neigh- borhood support, especially the one that re- routed the street further to the north. In summary on the road issue, I believe Edina has always sought out the right and best solution to improvement issues. Let your eventual decision be driven by the real needs of the neighborhood and the City, not by available funding. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, o ac Rice 4904 Ridge Place Edina, Minnesota 55424 January 31, 1985 The Mayor and Members of the Edina City Council City Hall Edina, :Minnesota 55424 Ladies and Gentlemen: We would like to express our views regarding the Wooddale /Utley /50th Street Project: 1. We prefer the Monument alternative for the Wooddale School building. 2. We prefer alternative C for the 50th Street segment from Highway 100 to ` nooddale, because we believe that turning lanes are absolutely essential. (Betty was the victim of a year- end collision recently as she waited to turn north at Dale Drive ) The possibility of state -aid for this part of the project is appealing. 3. The canoe /skating lagoon is a great idea for Utley, as is the pedestrian underpass. We appreciated very much the thorough briefing of this complex proposal that you provided for the many interested residents of this neighborhood. Sincerely, eqe4 i and Bett y emstad \,LrC 'Ile 15S L m E � A'Np THE PILLSBURY COMPANY PILLSBURY CENTER MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 JOHN M. STAFFORD PRESIDENT January 28, 1985 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney & Edina City Council Edina City Offices 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney & Edina City Council: I am interested in the decisions being made regarding Utley Park and the Wooddale School site. 612/330 -8188 I believe it would be best to raze the old school building and create an unstructured park area including the play- ground. My preference would be to maintain Utley Park as it stands with no underpass access. The two existing tennis courts are adequate for the present space. In addition, I don't believe a median on 50th Street would be in the best interest of the City's taxpayers. Thank you. Sincerely, J� Stafford --� Residence: 4615 Moorland Avenue Edina, MN 55424 Cc L LwEFERS_� Let . Utley Park".".' a , s , a'street that needs resurfac- be Utley Park - ing., The" t'axipayers - of Edina should know that the top end of To the Editor: cost for the : ambitious alter- I have attended both session's natives in certain- combinations of the public information meet-, are approaching the $2 million ings on the Wooddale site, Utley mark Park and the concerns - of 50th All we really need or Want is a Street. street'. without, pothole's .and. a,! I was 'quite caught up in the ,: park -yhere our fascination of tunnels, lagoons, ,-.,neighborhoot-' children can play.'-, 7' monuments, history centers, re -, Mary Kluesnef fleeting pools, skating rinks Edina canoe landings,' plazas and or- ganized development. What the BRW proposes in almost any combination of its'- , alternatives is the loss of the neighborhood parks, both' Wooddale and Utley. What the BRW did not propose was the following — leave Utley Park as it is, that"Is",'informal, pastoral "I and open; create a maximum of I passive green space and-a min- I imum of hard surface on the t Wooddale site (which means s razing the building) and treat h 50th. Street in its present width S Edina SunXwent—week of Jan. 21,1985 • 5225 Kellogg Avenue Edina, Minnesota 55424 January 30, 1958 Dear City Council Member: Concerning the Wooddale site, we would like to recommend maintaining a maximum amount of green space and trees. From what we gather, having attended both information sessions and read the evaluation report, this concept could best be implement- ed by keeping Utlev Park as it is, without adding more paved parking there. Plan E could develope the former school site for sports and leisure and allow the minimum parking facilities needed where the land would already be open and probably not necessitate further tree removal. Also, any pavement there would take up a 'proport'i'onally smaller area than at Utley. Likewise, we would like to see Plan A adopted for both sections of 50th Street since that would maintain its present, residential character and trees. We hope you agree. Yours truly, 2;4 Qa-L-A- Bob and Jane Fuegner 4518 Wooddale Avenue Edina, Minnesota 55424 January 30, 1985 Edina City Council Edina, Minnesota 55424 To the City Council: You are currently considering proposals that would have impact on the existence and use of Wooddale School as well as 50th Street between Arden and Highway 100. With regard to the former, we are opposed to any alterations which would render the structure unusable as a neighborhood school. With generally increasing enrollments, the rising costs of providing bus transportation, and the re- juvenilization of the neighborhood that could be served by the school, the potential offered by re- opening that facility is significant. As for the re- vamping of the traffic lanes on 50th, we are unalterably to any change which would route additional traffic down Wooddale Avenue from 50th into St. Louis Park: JDP /c 1. The volume and speed of the traffic on Wooddale already poses a hazard to the substantial number of children living in homes along the street. 2. The design of the street, with S -turns at Country Club and Sunnyside, and two Stop Signs, is not conducive to the current, let alone an increased flow. 3. The character of the neighborhood would be changed significantly with the noise and pollution created by more traffic. Sincerely, Nancy V. Purcell' cv..,c `-1 Co U James D. Purcell V CP a 31 ��lfSr C/G / ✓-��JC -ems-' ��. Yi�.� L - L� C C� C� ev Ji. I.. Susan burnett Churl cZ1 �TPm ,Hers s� J &pAAI M Chi u r "G, ,E2e. f7 �1i tiQ . C110'�a Ge lw� Ila % ,U..akf;tt� `l Cdr 1n ex %�hc� Ct lm�' �Jrr�. Z44-zy, All _�► Z7.e 4c,7 v► ld /,I(10 �h�o LUao�i�wL dytvl� �i��ij � Li• CG,.�' ���, Z�6 17 -4t � January 30, 1985 Dear City Manager, Mayor and Council Members: I would like to urge you to choose the alternatives presented by BRW that do not impose a heavy tax load on an already tight budget in the city. We as taxpayers are not interested in spending our tax dollar to fix what isn't broken. Sincerely, .-,nibsmbotrthembombombombombombembombombombombombombombombombombombe January 30, 1985 To the Mayor, City Manager and City Council Members: Any plans that completely develop Utley Park seem to be over designed and not in the best interests of the neighborhood. The area is already high density and has a traffic congestion problem at the intersection of 50th and Wooddale. Sincerely, t 7- 67 A 4-5 6e, CX- c -�7 67 Dear Council Members and Mayor, I am opposed to the widening of 50th Street. The council hopefully, will look for ways to reduce traffic, congestion and activity on 50th and in the areas of the two parks at 50th and Wooddale. Sincerely, January 30, 1985 Dear Council Members and Mayor, am opposed to widening of 50th Street. am opposed to building a parking lot for 170 cars in Wooddale Park. am :opposed to the development of Utley Park into a high activity center. Sincerely, January 30, 1985 Dear Council Members, Mayor and City Manager, The concept that I would encourage you to follow regarding the Utley - Wooddale Site is 'less rather than more'. Spend less money rather than more, build less parking spaces rather than more, create less spquare feet of building to maintain rather than more, less traffic and congestion rather than more. The only thing the area needs more of, is open green space. Sincerely, 'Jae- Janaury 30, 1985 Dear Mayor and Council Members, I am in favor of razing the building known as Wooddale School and creating green space. I am in favor of re- surfacing and /or re- building 50th Street in its present width. I am in favor of leaving Utley Park as open, pastoral and informal in image. Sincerely, �it� SO U»1, NUn l - �, .-v.: DEAR MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER I URGE YOU TO BE PRUDENT IN THE DECISIONS CONCERNING THE WOODDALE AND UTLEY SITE. TAXPAYERS ALREADY HAVE A HEAVY BURDEN. PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER IF SOME OF THE ALTERNATIVES ARE REALLY NECESSARY. IT APPEARS THAT OPEN GREEN SPACE COSTS A MINIMUM TO MAINTAIN - -FAR LESS THAN BUILDINGS, SKATING RINKS, MONUMENTS, PARKING LOTS, CANOE LANDINGS AND THE LIKE. WHAT THAT AREA NEEDS IS A STREET WITHOUT POTHOLES AND GREEN SPACE TO RELIEVE THE HIGH DENSITY AND HEAVY TRAFFIC. SINCERELY, January 30, 1985 Dear Mayor, City Council Members and City Manager: I would suggest the following: a. re- surfaoeand /or rebuild 50th Street in its present width b. create open green space on the Wooddale Site C. allow Utley Park to maintain its informal image Sincerely, January 30, 1985 Dear Members of the Council, As you consider the plans and alternatives presented by the BRW study I would like you to give careful thought to the following: 1. Since these are neighborhood parks, what will benefit the immediate neighborhood the most? 2. Some of the combinations of alternatives were exceeding the 1.5 million dollar mark. What responsibility do you have to the taxpayer for prudent use of city funds? 3. Is there any reason at all to widen a street that has an accident rate that is less than one half that of national average for the same type of street? I trust that your decisions will be sound. Sincerely, AZ" ce� 5-4 ll ✓v �n kA-&f e =° T&A 5 SO S s -� , �k CLA W S ( - _ -- 5` 4504 Browndale Avenue TO: FROM: VIA: SUBJECT: DATE: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE Mayor and City Council Bob Kojetin, Director, Park and Recreation Kenneth Rosland, City Manager REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $5,000 Jan. 22, 1985 Material Description (General Specifications): 1985 Cushman #53085, with flatbed, sides & tailgate, PTO w /shaft, hyd. lift system, tailgate release, tachometer for Golf Course, includes trade in of Cushman from Golf Course Quotations /Bids: Company 1. Cushman Motor Co. 2909 E. Franklin Vlpls., MN 55406 2. Horst Distributing Department Recommendation: Cushman Motor Co. Finance Director's Endorsement. The recommended bid is c.-1" Amount of Quote or Bid $6,476.15 $7,225 City Manager's Endorsement: Department is not within the amount budget for the purchase. J. N. Dalen, Finance Director fl. I concur with the recommendation of the Department and recommend Council approve the purchase. 2. I recommend as an alternative: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE -3 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Bob Kojetin, Director, Park and Recreation Dept. VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $5,000 DATE: January 23, 1985 Material Description (General Specifications): 1 Jacobsen Greens King IV with brushes for golf course less trade in of 1976 Toro Greensmower Quotations /Bids: Company Amount of Ouote or Bid 1. R.L. Goulds & Co. $7745 3711 Lexington Ave. N. St. Paul, MN 55112 2. Toro $7905 Department Recommendation: R. L. Goulds & Co. Finance Director's Endorsement: z The recommended bid is is not within the amount-budget for the purchase. iu. uaien, rinance ll�rector City Man _er's Endorsement: I concur with the recommendation of the Department and recommend the purchase. P Council approve 2 . I recommend as an alternative: K BRAVO! ITALIAN SPECIALTIES, INC. y 'Q ANTONIO CECCONI, PRESIDENT • 5709 UPTON AVE. 5., MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55410 • TEL. 612-929-5728 January 18, 1985 Kenneth Rosland Edina City Manager 4801 West 50th Street Edina Minnesota 55424 Dear Sir, On behalf of BRAVO! Italian Specialities, Inc., I have applied for an on -sale beer license to be operated at 4926 France Avenue South in the Peterson Mall. This is a new enterprise scheduled to open approximately March 1, 1985. The City Council will consider the application on February 4, 1985. It is my understanding that the Council may delay approval of a license until the business has operated for six months. By this letter I wish to petition the Council to waive this policy at the time of considering the application on February 4, 1985. BRAVO! Italian Specialities Inc., is a single location food business that will specialize in Italian foods, mainly pizza, fresh pasta and sandwiches. The concept is to offer noon, take -out and eat -in foods, both fully prepared and ready for home cooking. For customers eating in at the location we believe offering beer as a traditional Italian beverage with food, along with soft drinks, will be expected by customers and will be helpful in acceptance of the restaurant. We do not expect that beer sales will exceed 5 to 8% of gross sales, but we believe that the availability of beer for adults could materially affect the degree of success during the critical first -year-of operation. So that we can initally present our restaurant to customers as it will be operating, we respectfully request that we be accepted for the beer license effective on opening day, on or about March 1, 1985. Sincerely, Antonio Cecconi President AC /gc LYNDALE AGENCY, INC. 7646 LYNOALE AVENUE SOUTH • MINNEAPOLIS. MINN. 55423 666 -4907 1 -24 -85 BRAVO! Italian Specialties, Inc. 4936 France Ave So Edina, MN 55410 Re: Liquor Liability I have made application to John H. Crowth Minneapolis, IAN 55402 for Liquor Liabili $509000 Bodily Injury each person, $100,0 $10,000 Property Damage each common cause each common cause. They have given me a Company. This quote is valid for 30 days upon approval of the license by the City Sincerely, LYNDALE AGENCY, INC. P'�" I 0 t R.L. Polkingho er, Inc., 230 Soo Line Building, ty. The limits specified were 00 Bodily Injury each common cause, and $100,000 Loss of Means of Support verbal quote thru Columbia Casualty from 1- 22 -85. Coverage can be bound Council. f i f) 'y'- MEMORANDUM TO: COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: C. WAYNE COURTNEY, MAYOR SUBJECT: BOARD /COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS DATE: FEBRUARY 1, 1985 I would like to recommend that the following persons be appointed to advisory boards or commissions as indicated below. All are reappointments except as noted: Community Development & Planning Commission - For term to 2 -1 -88 Helen McClelland John M. Palmer David T. Runyan Edina Park Board - For term to 2 -1 -88 Joan Lonsbury John M. Thayer Marilyn Wooldridge Board of Appeals and Adjustments - New Zoning Ordinance No. 825 provides for 3 yr terms. Terms are recommended to be.staggered beginning 2 -1 -85. Michael Lewis For term to 2 -1 -88 Rose -mary Utne For term to 2 -1 -87 James Bentley For term to 2 -1 -86 (New appointment - previously served on Planning Commission) For term to 2 -1 -88 Building Construction Appeals Board - For term to 2 -1 -88 Bruce C. Bermel A. Thomas Wurst Human Relations Commission - For term to 2 -1 -88 S Joe Cavanaugh C Canny Wright C John L. Senior, Jr. - Term to 2 -1 -86 (unexpired term of Frederic Nelson) (New appointment - previously served on Bd. of Appeals & Adj.) S Lynne Westphal (New appointment - submitted by School Board) S Edina Recycling Commission - For term to 2 -1 -86 Virginia Bodine Nancy Grimsby Edina Heritage Preservation Board - For term to 2 -1 -87 John C. Childs Thomas Martinson Lois Wilder r, Boards /Commission Appointments February 1, 1985 Page Two Advisory Board of Health - Term to 2 -1 -87 P Holly Branch C Effie McKerson P Dr. Stephen Sinykin P Dr. Walter Wilder C June Schmidt (New appointment - previously was ex- officio) P_ Dr. Sharon Aadalon (New appointment - submitted by Barbara Reynolds) P Virginia McCollister (New appointment.- submitted by Clemons Peterson) C Margaret Rash (New appointment - submitted by Holly Branch) Edina Art Center Committee - Term to 2 -1 -88 Harriet Bach Sandra Clark Betty Paugh James Van Valkenburg South Hennepin Human Services Council - Term to 2 -1 -87 Leslie Turner Betty Danielson (New appointment - submitted by Leslie Turner) As you can see, there still are three positions to be filled and I hope to have recommendations for those by the Council Meeting of February 25. ncs Health Counseling Services Holly Branch, MS CS Karen Finck, MS 5775 Wayzata Boulevard Suite 700 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 612/544 -3290 January 22, 1985 C. Wayne Courtney Mayor 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mr. Courtney: I am currently a member of the Edina Health Advisory Board and plan to continue for another term of appointment. I have been told by our chairperson, Barbara Reynolds, that vacancies exist for consumers. For that reason I would like to recommend Margaret (Peggy) Rash to serve on the board. She has fifteen years experience as a volunteer in the Minneapolis Children's Womens Auxillary Association and next year will serve as its president. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, oily B c v To: C. Wayne Courtney, Mayor 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, rIN 55424 Sorry, but I will not be able to accept reappointment as a member of the e- 3 / /S Gemmi -- .an /Board. I would suggest /�'%�'=S, l i f ; �� l ,� / I c �n �� i.S `' /' % !� `� % ✓�! Al" (name) (address) as a potential member. Signed �� ,)� /' ; G= L�' %J'-�_a Phone �- Address 383 FOR ACTION INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 273 Regular Meeting, December 10, 1984 Volume 56, Report 181 �• SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT TO THE EDINA HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION Be it Resolved, That The Board of Education Confirm the appointment of Lynne Westphal as representative to the Edina Human Relations Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION This appointment replaces Mickey Gamer. Board Policy #8140, adopted October, 1980, states that the Chairperson of the Board may appoint Board Members to serve on the Edina Park Board, Edina Planning Commission, Edina Human Rights Commission, and the Board of Directors of other school — related organizations, jsuch appointments to be confirmed by the entire Board of Education. UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TWIN CITIES 28 December 1984 Mr. Mark Bernhardson Assistant City Manager City of Edina 480 West 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mr. Bernhardson: College of Forestry Department of Fisheries & Wildlife 200 Hodson Hall 1980 Folwell Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55108 Per your request, I'm following up our 17 December 1984 phone conversation about Canada goose population problems in Edina with further details. My graduate students and I have conducted extensive research on the bird and firmly believe that the most feasible, economical, and long -term method of controlling urban Canada geese is by limiting their reproduction. Our current research is aimed at developing and testing reduction procedures. I've enclosed a detailed proposal for conducting a control program in Edina and several short background publications on management of urban geese. The costs outlined on the budget page are based on expenditures in our ongoing programs in Minneapolis and Golden Valley. If after reviewing these materials, you feel further discussions would be fruitful, I would be happy to meet with you to explore implementation of a goose population management program. Sincerelyn, James A. Cooper, Associate Professor, Wildlife Director of Graduates Studies, Wildlife cc Lloyd Knudson, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Richard Wetzel, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service enclosures Title: Population management of Edina Canada Geese. Prepared by: Dr. James A. Cooper, Associate Professor, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN. (612- 373 -1722) Date: 11/05/84 Importance: Extirpated by market and subsistence hunting over much of its southern range during settlement, the Canada goose (Branta canadensis) has been reestablished in the midwest and elsewhere. This successful wildlife management program resulted from federal, state, and private efforts (Nelson 1963, Dill and Lee 1970, and Cooper 1978). Contemporary landscaping and farming practices have greatly enhanced Canada goose habitat. Lawns, soybeans, small grains, and pasture sown on lake and wetland shorelines provide a super- abundance of brood- rearing habitat in both rural and urban settings, while these sites and harvested agricultural crops, especially corn and small grains, are used at other times of the year. This, coupled with refuges created to protect the birds during establishment and the expansion of cities where hunting is not permitted, have lead to a phenomenal population growth in past 20 years. Because Canada geese are highly social and occur in flocks during all periods of the year except nesting (Zicus 1981, Schultz 1983) and graze extensively on grasses, fortis, and crops, goose flocks, particularly adults 1 \; with flightless young, began to damage Minnesota crops in 1980 ,(Rase 1981). Concentrations of geese and their droppings in city parks, on golf courses, and goose flights near airports have lead to a growing number of complaints in urbanized areas, e. g., Denver, Minneapolis -St. Paul, Toronto, Boston, and West Chester County in New York (Laycock 1982, Oetting 1983). While population reductions methods, such as capture and removal and increased hunting kill, have been used, none have be adequately tested or documented in the literature. Objectives: 1. To assist with development of population objectives, i. e., the acceptable number of geese at specific sites within Edina. 2. To model populations and estimate removal levels needed to attain and maintain desired population levels. 3. Provide technical expertise and participate in public hearings and assist with public relations. 4. To coordinate and do goose removal in 1985 and 1986, and egg removal in 1987 and 1988 as population control procedures. 5. To monitor population levels from 1985 to 1988 to ascertain population reduction effectiveness. Methods: Model —Much of the data necessary to construct a model have been gathered from 1973 to 1983 for the Metropolitan Twin Cities Canada Goose populations (Salyer 1977, Cooper unpubl. data).. Parameters that have been measured include participation in breeding by sex and age class, age related 2 productivity, effect of re- pairing, emigration and immigration, gosling, subadult, and adult survival. Additional data are needed on the effect of density reduction on breeding participation, dispersal, and survival. These data will obtained by capturing and neckbanding (Sherwood 1966) flightless, immature geese, and subsequently capturing and removing the breeding segment of the population the next summer. Because Canada geese do not breed until 2 years of age, or older, by monitoring the breeding participation rate of the marked geese in the following 2 years and comparing the rate of participation with existing data (Cooper, unpubl.), the effect of the lowering the density can be determined. Survival and dispersal of will be ascertained from neckband reobservation (Cormack 1964; Cooper 1975). The model will be based on the Jolly method as modified Barry (1977) except that neckband observations will be employed instead of legband recaptures. Removal -The effectiveness of goose and eggs removal will be predicted using the model and evaluated by monitoring population growth. Population level objectives will be established in consultation with cooperating city and agency personnel. Selected target populations will be reduced by capturing and removing young and adults during the summer flightless period (Martz et al. 1982), while nests of other target populations will be located by searching from the ground or canoe (Cooper 1978) and a predetermined number of eggs removed. Growth in these populations will be measured by 1) ascertaining nest densities using methods similar to that of Cooper (1978), 2) by conducting brood counts prior arrival of migrants in mid - September, and by doing population counts from mid - September to December. 3 \; Chronology of Research Activities: 1985 15 May -15 June -- identify brood concentrations, model populations and estimate goose removal levels; participate in public hearings. 15 June -1 July -- coordinate and conduct goose removal; capture and neckband at sites where removal is not done. 15 August -31 December -- conduct population counts and read markers at goose concentration sites. •:. 1 January -15 April— summarize data and prepare first annual report. 15 April -15 June — conduct nest density surveys and brood counts; estimate goose removal using population model. 15 June -1 July -- coordinate and conduct goose removal; capture and neckband at sites where removal is not done. 15 August -31 December — conduct population counts and read markers at goose concentration sites. 1987 1 January - April— summarize data and prepare second annual report; determine egg removal level for desired population goals. 15 April -15 May -- remove eggs in selected nests to reduce productivity. 15 May -15 June -- conduct brood counts; model population levels and determine if additional goose removal is needed. 15 August -31 December — conduct population counts and read markers at goose concentration sites. 4 :. 1 January -15 April. 1987 -- summarize data and prepare third annual report; determine egg removal level for desired population goals. 15 April -15 May — remove eggs in selected nests to reduce productivity. 15 May -15 June- - conduct brood counts; model population levels and determine if additional goose removal is needed. 15 August -31 December — conduct population counts and read markers at goose concentration sites. 1989 1 January -30 June summarize data and prepare final report. Literature Cited: Barry, C.T. 1977. The mortality of Yorkshire Canada geese. Wildfowl 28:35- 47. Cooper, J.A. 1975. Estimating Canada goose survival in an urban environment from neckband observations. 37th Midwest Fish and Wildlife Conference, Toronto, Ontario. Cooper, J.A. 1978. The history and breeding biology of the Canada geese of Marshy Point, Manitoba. Wildl. Monogr. 61. 87 pp. Cormack, R M. 1964. Estimate of survival from sighting of marked animals. Biometrika 51:429 -438. Dill, H.H. and F.B. Lee, eds. 1970. Home grown honkers. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv., Washington, D. C. 154 pp. Barrow and Cooper. In Press. Pre -molt behavior of Canada goose family members. Wilson Bull. Laycock, G. 1982. The urban goose. Audubon 84:44 -47. Martz, J., L. Pospichal, and E. Tucker. 1982. Giant Canada geese in Michigan: experiences with translocations and nuisance management. In Johnson, M. A. (Ed.) Transactions of The Canada Goose Symposium, North Dakota TWS Chapter, 71 pp. 5 Nelson, H.K. 1963. Restoration of breeding Canada goose flocks in the North Central States. Trans. N. A. Wildl. Conf. 28:133 -150. Getting, R. 1983. Overview of management of Canada geese and their recent urbanization. In Johnson, M. A. (Ed.) Transactions of The Canada Goose Symposium, North Dakota TWS Chapter, 71 pp. Owen, M. 1975. An assessment of fecal analysis technique in waterfowl feeding studies. J. Wildl. Manage. 39:271 -279. Rose, J. 1981. Fergus Falls goose shortage turns into goose abundance. Minnesota Out -Of -Doors 27(11):22. Sayler, R. D. 1977. Breeding ecology of the Twin Cities, Minnesota, Metropolitan Canada geese. M. S. Thesis, University of Minnesota, 61 pp. Schultz, D. F. 1983. Fall flock behavior and harvest of Canada geese in the vicinity of the Talcot Lake Wildlife Management Area in southwest Minnesota. M.S. Thesis, University of Minnesota, 72pp. Sherwood, G.A. 1966. Flexible plastic collars compared to nasal discs for marking geese. J. Wildl. Manage. 30:853 -855. Zicus, M.C. 1975. Capturing nesting Canada geese with mist nets. Bird Banding 46:168 -169. Zicus, M.C. 1981. Flock behavior and vulnerability to hunting of Canada geese nesting at Crex Meadows, Wisconsin. J. Wildl. Manage. 45:830 - 841. 0 Budget: 1985 1986 1987 1988 Salaries (program coordination and monitoring) ............... 3,336 3,336 3,336 3,3363 Travel .......................... 165 165 165 165 Band materials .................. 33 33 33 33 Miscellaneous (boots, field forms, computer disks) ......... 66 66 66 66 TOTAL ........................... 3,600 3,600 3,600 3,600 Agency does not pay indirect costs. Investigator requests authorization to shift funds between budget categories. 7 %J 1, kjAOA . STATUS AND PRODUCTIVITY OF CANADA GEESE BREEDING IN THE TWIN CITIES OF MINNESOTA 1 Rodney D. Sayler and Dr. James A. Cooper Department of Entomology, Fisheries, and Wildlife University of Minnesota St. Paul, Minnesota 55108 Minneapolis -St. Paul, Minnesota, resemble a number of American cities that are home to breeding, wild Canada geese. In recent years, state, city, and private organizations have begun an active wildlife management program. However, questions about the management and ecology of urban Canada geese have been difficult to answer. With this impetus, a study was initiated in 1973. Investigation objectives include assessment of the history, status, and ecology of these metropolitan birds.2 This paper presents data on the status, reproductive success, and management of Twin Cities Canada geese. Twelve major breeding flocks of Canada geese are distributed throughout a seven - county metropolitan area of nearly 3,000 square miles (Figure 1). Three flocks are located east of the Mississippi River, an average of 15 miles apart, while nine flocks west of the river average about 7 miles from a neighboring flock. Twin Cities Canada geese share their environment with more than two million people. HISTORY The breeding populations under study have varied histories. Three flocks have been established on private lands, one at the Carlos Avery Wildlife Management Area, one in a city park, one in a city nature center, one on the grounds of the General Mills Corporation, and five in the Hennepin County Park Reserve District. Several other flocks are still in the building stage and have not attained free- flight status. In addition, there are numerous individuals throughout the city who harbor a few pair of geese on a backyard pond or raise and release young geese each year. Starting in 1955, introductions to the metro area came from a variety of cap- tive and semi - domestic flocks. Most birds were large geese obtained from game breeders in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Oklahoma. In recent years, geese have also come from South Dakota, North Dakota, and the Delta_ Waterfowl Research Station, Manitoba, danada. RACE IDENTIFICATION Measurements of exposed culmen length from a 1974 sample of birds ranks the present population among the largest reported (Table 1). In size and general confirmation, Twin Cities geese cannot be distinguished from other goose populations of mid - continental United States, identified as giant Canada geese (Branta canadensis maxima) (Hanson, 1965). -" 1 Presented at the 36th-79rdte -s�t_ sh and Wildlife Conference, Indianapolis, Indiana, December 16 -1� , 1974. 2 Support for this investigation comes from the Belford Research Committee and interested conservationists in the Twin Cities of Minnesota. (2) STATUS All twelve breeding flocks were established by holding pinioned or wing clipped birds until they nested and allowing the young to free fly. In general, each home flock area consists of a small refuge supporting a high density nesting population. Islands, both natural and man -made, and arti- ficial platforms are common nest site types, accounting for 87 percent of the nests studied (Table 2). Population pressures are sufficient in each home flock to force nesting birds to pioneer into surrounding areas. In the Hennepin County Park Reserve District, dispersing birds find ample nesting habitat within areas ranging in size from 1,200 to 3,000 acres. Birds from other flocks are moving into residential areas and nesting on lake shorelines, in city parks, and small marshes. Many geese nest in close proximity to sources of poten- tial disturbances, such as. nature trails, freeways, railroads, and houses. By early September each year, pairs nesting some distance from the flocks return with their young. This allows accurate population counts to be made. In 1974, individual flocks ranged from 25 to 600 birds, giving a total population of about 1800 geese (Figure 2). Foreign geese mix with local birds increasing the metro population to well over 2,000 by mid -October. NEST STUDIES Nesting studies were initiated in 1973 to compare the productivity of nest- ing geese in urban areas versus rural or wild habitats. Egg fertility, and nest, egg, and hatching success were measured for 80 nests in 1973 and 128 nests in 1974. Nests were studied in both refuge areas and suburban and urban locations. Dates of nest initiation were established by locating nests during the lay- ing period and backdating 1.5 days per egg. Special effort was made to visit nests of unknown initiation date during the period of hatching in order to back -date to the laying period (Figure 3). Cooper (1973) found that click - ing noises begin inside the egg on day 24 of incubation, strong vocalizations on.day 25, pipping on day 26, hatching on day 27, and departure from the nest early on day 28. NEST ESTABLISHMENT Migrating Twin Cities geese return from their wintering grounds in February and eary March, and begin nesting as early as mid- March. First nests were established on March 17 and March 18 in 1973 and 1974 respectively. Most nests were started during the last week in March and the first week in April, 1973 (Figure 4). Cold, March temperatures of the following year delayed the peak of nest initiation until the middle of April. The last nest started in each season was on May 4, 1973, and May 8, 1974. One was a known re -nest. Duration of the nesting season, that time between first clutch started and last clutch hatched, was 80 and 81 days for the two years. !f, (3) NEST SUCCESS Overall reproduction was good both years. Seventy -three percent of all nests were successful, having at least one egg hatch (Table 3). Six causes of nest loss were identified; nest desertion (11 %), nest fail- ures (unhatched clutches) (5 %), predation (5 %), flooding (3 %), platform failure (2 %), and death of a mate (1 %). It is significant that no nests were known to be deserted or destroyed because of human disturbance. All desertions were in high nest density areas of the home flocks where competition for nest sites was intense. Fifteen of the 23 nest desertions occured early during the laying or incubation period. Fertility of deserted eggs was markedly lower than for all other clutches. Only 49 percent of deserted eggs were fertile compared to 87 percent for other eggs (Table 4)e Cooper (1973) in reporting similar findings at Marshy Point, Manitoba, suggested that low fertility rates and behavior of deserting birds demonstrated some type of infirmity in the pair bond. It seems unlikely that normal human activities around nest sites, such as trail walking, maintenance activities, and nest study visits, contributed significantly to observed desertions. A unique cause of nest desertion occurs in three of the flocks. The Hennepin County Park Reserve District is re- establishing Trumpeter Swans in suitable habitats within the district. Six of 23 nest desertions resulted from Canada geese attempting to nest inside refuge pens for breeding swans. Goose -swan conflicts will not significantly affect nest success in the Twin Cities since it is unlikely that Trumpeter swans will ever achieve such densities as to occupy major portions of goose nesting habitat. EGG SUCCESS Egg success is a useful measure of productivity since it integrates losses due to both internal and external factors (Cooper, 1973). Egg success is the percentage of all eggs that hatch. Fates of eggs found during the nesting season were tallied by immediate causes'of egg failure (e.g. infer- tile, deserted eggs were classified as desertion losses although they would not have hatched if incubated) . Egg success from all nests was 66 percent (Table 5). Desertion and infertility were nearly equal causes of egg failure, account i n g f or 16.1 percent of all eggs. Losses due to predators, flooding, platform failure, and embryo death were each about 3 percent or less. Negligible losses, less than 1 percent each, occured from all other causes (e.g. death of mate, and displaced, frozen, dumped, dropped or broken eggs). EGG FERTILITY Egg fertility was determined using recent criteria from Cooper and Batt (1972). This method consists of examining unhatched eggs under laboratory conditions for evidence of embryo development. Egg content color and deterioration were not considered valid indicators of fertility. (4) si Infertility was the greatest productivity loss among Twin Cities geese. Fourteen percent of the 771 eggs examined were infertile (Table 6). This figure is similar to a 15 percent infertility rate for nesting geese of Marshy Point, Manitoba (Cooper, 1973). Both rates support the hypothesis advanced by Hanson (1965:171) that infertility and embryo mortality are major factors of productivity loss in giant Canada geese. HATCHING SUCCESS Hatching success is the percentage of fertile eggs hatching after full term incubation (28 days). This parameter, which partly measures incuba- ting success of the female was high, 96.5 percent. Conversely, the percentage of embryos dying among 664 fertile incubated eggs was low, 3.5 percent (Table 7). DISCUSSION Canada geese of the Twin Cities are as productive as geese nesting in rural and wild habitats (Table 8). Comparison of production statistics reveals no major differences in egg, hatching and nest success between these urban geese and other flocks of large Canadas.. Several factors relating to the reproductive success of Twin Cities geese are: 1. Canada geese are early nesters; broods come off the nests before heavy.recreational use of the cities' lakes and marshes. 2. Private lands, nature centers, and park reserves serve as breeding refuges where human activities are restricted to nature trails, observation blinds, and tours conducted by naturalists. 3._ Geese nesting in residential districts are often protected by neigh- borhood "vigilantees" who keep a close eye on "their geese." 4. The Canada goose is a large bird, often aggressive in defense of its nest when accustomed to the sight of people. It is a tenacious incubator, staying on the nest about 99 percent of the day (Cooper, 1973) . 5. Substantial nesting habitat exists in the Twin Cities. 6. Management programs successfully reduce nest losses. MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS The nesting data suggests that increasing productivity of Canada geese will not be the leading concern of wildlife managers in the Twin Cities. More important will be long -range problems caused by expanding goose populations in an urban center. One prominent management goal will be to manipulate distribution of flocks to insure that many people will have opportunities to view the birds. A small goose flock is truly a local resource, enjoyed most by residents living near the home flock area. Therefore, it is desirable to increase the number of separate breeding flocks rather than just the total population of geese. Lakes,marshes, and parks near the inner city are particularly valuable cites as they are close to many people. Human safety is another concern. Traffic accidents have been caused by pairs with broods crossing busy highways to reach suitable molting areas. This situation can be minimized by starting flocks on water areas adequate for the entire brood rearing period. Artificial nesting platforms often encourage geese to nest in appropriate locations. Chances for air collisions are small, but it would take only one goose and one airplane to create a disaster. A "no flock" buffer zone around airports would help prevent concentrations of geese from forming close to flight paths. in the fall, large aggregations of birds present special problems. High grain prices discourage nature centers, private individuals, and others from feeding geese as though they were songbirds. Instead, managers are turning to pasture or grasslands to feed the geese. This can be as easy as maintain - ing a lush, green lawn. Nature centers and park reserve districts are also beginning use of fire to restore grazing areas. Artificial feeding can have serious effects on goose behavior. Geese dependent on handouts become tame. Most flock managers prevent this situa- tion by limiting close human contact, artificial feeding, and forcing their geese to become migratory. Another management problem in the Main Cities is population control of expanding flocks. Although mortality studies are incomplete, it appears that hunting pressure in suburban areas is not limiting population growth. Geese on urban sites are protected even more. However, it is not the sole purpose of nature centers and park reserves to act as goose refuges. A large goose concentration can be detrimental to the total management program of a nature center. Wood Lake Nature Center confronted overpopulation on their urban site with a flock totaling only 85 geese. Techniques necessary for population control of urban Canada geese are fortun- ately quite simple. A small crew can efficiently capture molting geese in drive trapping operations using portable nets and poles. Surplus production can be used to build new flocks of geese in other locations just as breeding geese in the Denver metro area supplied some Colorado re- stocking programs - (Will, 1969) . Canada geese have adapted well to the metropolitan environment of the Twin Cities and other areas (Dill and Lee, 1970). With planning, the Canada goose will play an important role in enriching urban - suburban living. The problems need be few and the benefits great indeed. (5) N the number of separate breeding flocks rather than just the total population of geese. Lakes,marshes, and parks near the inner city are particularly valuable cites as they are close to many people. Human safety is another concern. Traffic accidents have been caused by pairs with broods crossing busy highways to reach suitable molting areas. This situation can be minimized by starting flocks on water areas adequate for the entire brood rearing period. Artificial nesting platforms often encourage geese to nest in appropriate locations. Chances for air collisions are small, but it would take only one goose and one airplane to create a disaster. A "no flock" buffer zone around airports would help prevent concentrations of geese from forming close to flight paths. in the fall, large aggregations of birds present special problems. High grain prices discourage nature centers, private individuals, and others from feeding geese as though they were songbirds. Instead, managers are turning to pasture or grasslands to feed the geese. This can be as easy as maintain - ing a lush, green lawn. Nature centers and park reserve districts are also beginning use of fire to restore grazing areas. Artificial feeding can have serious effects on goose behavior. Geese dependent on handouts become tame. Most flock managers prevent this situa- tion by limiting close human contact, artificial feeding, and forcing their geese to become migratory. Another management problem in the Main Cities is population control of expanding flocks. Although mortality studies are incomplete, it appears that hunting pressure in suburban areas is not limiting population growth. Geese on urban sites are protected even more. However, it is not the sole purpose of nature centers and park reserves to act as goose refuges. A large goose concentration can be detrimental to the total management program of a nature center. Wood Lake Nature Center confronted overpopulation on their urban site with a flock totaling only 85 geese. Techniques necessary for population control of urban Canada geese are fortun- ately quite simple. A small crew can efficiently capture molting geese in drive trapping operations using portable nets and poles. Surplus production can be used to build new flocks of geese in other locations just as breeding geese in the Denver metro area supplied some Colorado re- stocking programs - (Will, 1969) . Canada geese have adapted well to the metropolitan environment of the Twin Cities and other areas (Dill and Lee, 1970). With planning, the Canada goose will play an important role in enriching urban - suburban living. The problems need be few and the benefits great indeed. Figure 1. Locations of major Canada goose flocks in the Twin Cities, Minnesota. ' 3T.FRARCI3 ' BETN[l o�sta , LINWOOD "catI OAK GROVE ®s cfsT s[rrcl very I� wild �fe r° nt area w M{ I ANOKA CO. SET GROW NAMLAKL rose �e COLUMBUS 1 I IOR[3T LAKE I- NIA, SCANUM - 0 I FOREST LAKE I NA1 OA /TOR AN KA LINO lAK[7 MARINE IN CI'tl - l J RRROOOOCG LLL RRR SSf C. r' LIR COON RAPIDS BLAINE CENTERVILLE - HANOVER LEXINGTON CIfCI[IIF I V� MAY ark eser WWW1 Grou co. Of[ipNf1 r fCORAN 1 rMl[ GRDY[ 11 YOYNDS S.0111 71t. - _ -r -_ -- 0EU: ] 122 park. tl ONO Bf00RLYN PARK 12 NOf OAKS STIL1wATER - NENNEPIN CO. B OOKLYN rnouY NT [a N[■ .'• "' ■NIT[ B[A K[ GRANT P ' - ark [BIIiiGGpp `M/er e • ` 1 IBNIGNTON X13 •NiLS YADNAIS N[IGNTS f 2D 2 0 =9 Si ■Ai[ INDLI[FD[NC[ A PL MOUTH IB - MAP • -- 1 • IS - I_ I ros[Ynu 4 LITTLE ANAOA N.' AD' sr._•A -u -1'111 - 70 e tee' N 16 1] MAIL MOOD OARDALL LAKE Ba ♦IOwN �ATERTORN I 1 MIRR(7RISTA ON ONG l B ORONO AT MINN[70XRA ' , - 1 RAMSEY CO. [lY0 •••EST IaKEL -NU I ] ST. LOUIS PARK {AINT PAUL 1 21 LAR[L1ND HOLLYWOOD WATFRTOWN MOYND I 2 { INMBA"LI 31 D[[PNAYCN 01 ® r i 1 _ I ST. BOFIIACIUS _ - -- YAY[R - -- ° � LDIFA 9 � 1 �V REST ST, IP rI�B�T IAYI YY EfDIR ■ e AFT ML■ G[RYANY I C e to AJ;Po. T! 1B Mf1 SOUTH T N[w10NT I 9 CMAMXAS HT i12' .111 HT UN ESN IA L f sMIH 05erT'�e ®e erA� ._ACO� par, OrIN6TOR CHASKA AR INVER . CARVER CO. __ ----- L - - - - -- 1 LAGAN GROVE N[IGNT7 COTTAGE GROVE - :IENW RK M�j T I G I CHASKA (JAM[RICA I r 2 DAKOTA .CO. _. FORMOODC3.R q I CARVER JACKSON SHAKOPEE - - I COLOGNE. DAMLGREN I_I SAVAGE ( BURNSVILLE YOUNI:AMFRICA I BENTON L HAMBURG I j" - LOUISVILLE PRIOR LAKE 1 A►III YAII[/ ROf[rOYNT NIN-NGER L - - - -- -0000� - - - -J - - -- v HAITq I SAN FRANCISCO MANCOCN I OA - - -r- , - SAND CREEK I SPRING LAKE I CREDIT RIVER LARLYILLE I I VERMILLION EMPIRE I I IPaVFNNA M -R$MaN I SCOTT CO. I ib I ST.LAwRENCEI JORDAN I 1 IARNIN!TOII I VERMILLION 'I ----i----------- BELL[ PLAIN[ ' I - tlIANk LEY I BELLE PUINE I NEW MARKET HELENA CEDAR LAKE I I I I �N[IM TRIE■ EUREKA I I HAMPTON CASTLE ROCK I I N[{ ARK[T r I I I I - I ■1[SYII I[ - 1 FL� CAGY( lK0 I I HAMPTON - I III RANDOLIN OCT 74 MILES 5 _ 10 GREENVALE 15 20 25 • JINAIERFORO I li 1 I I SCIOTA TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA Figure 1. Locations of major Canada goose flocks in the Twin Cities, Minnesota. r ` �NwN CiTi /v7 I j MINNITRISTA HOLLYWOOD I WAFFRTOWN I 1 I rouN I I ST✓RORIF US -AVE, N[YaI�gMAMT I 6C CAMDEN I WACONIA LA TOWN WACONIA I I ___CARVER CO. �j fOUMG I CI (JANE RICA RORWOODC�. I COLOGNE( DAHLGREN YOUNI:AMIRICA I BENTON I $?.FRANCIf '.`A LINWOOD EAST BETHEL BURNS OAK GROVF I I — I ANOKA CO. � 75 RAMSET COLUMBU GROW MAULAKE I ►0X[57 LA[[ I AMe. SCAN D.. FORESTLAKE DAYTO AN NA LIMO LAKES I I —� HASSA ■IgIN[' CHAN L COON RAPIDS [Rf CENTE RYILIE L BLAINE MAY R xufo LEXINGTON CLE PINES [o WASHINGTON CO. COfCO RAN MAPLE GR 11 MOUNDS SHOR VIE —T - - -- BROOKLTN IA.K VIEW r 2 I 22 I II—� I 12 K IS TEBEA■ STILLWATER HENNEPIN CO. ►lloL[rr L NE ! RROOKL Try CLNTFq GRANT (BRIGHTON HEIGHTS t ]LO RE TfO C STAL Q13 ARDEX 23 2 fill RATE It XILlS 029 I NA PLYMOUTH H0F 1 — — p IS LITTLE 30 gOSEVILLE CANADA ry01 U ry l ST.'PAU Y 8 MAPiWOOD BAYTOWN LNG LAX VA L 16 17 , OARDAL[ ELMO - -- DND A % WEST 1 RAMSEY CO. LAKELAND MI ETONNA ST. L IS - 7 PA SAINT PAUL I 21 LA[[IAND 2 E OLIS 31 O[EI HAVEN 0►KINS ST. C10111 BEAC WEST WOODRUl1 EDINA UL 3 1 5T. ' LB PASOUTH [ LD (RIO RTi M["DOT — ST - NEWP AT CNAN MASSER X12' X[IGH N,ISN PAUL E EDEN FRA I[ ST. PAUL BLO M ARI CHAS RA 1 IXVER GLOVE EAGAN HEIGHTS COTTAGE GROVE DENMARK A 2 DAKOTA CO. 'EP IJAL'KSON SHAKOPEE SAVAGE I RU RNSVILI[ I L PRIOR APPLE VALLEY ROSEMOUNT NININGER MA BU ,M% I r LOUISVILLE LAKE RG MASTIXGS H =NCOCK I SAN FRANCISCO I OA VERMILLION I I 1 I I SAND CREEK I SPRING LAKE I CREDIT LAKEVILLE I I EMPIRE I ❑ I MARSHAN RIVER SCOTT CO. I FA ■YIN ;TOM I VERMILLION ST, LAWRENCE( JORDAN ( I I I I -- r--- - - - - -I — I - - - -� ------ - - - - -- mlc PuuE I MARKET I I I N[Iy T!1[■ BLAKELEY I BELLE PLAINE HELENA CEDAR LAKE NEW I EUREKA i CASTLE ROCK I HAM❑PTO (� I I ARM r.1,[ET I I S- HAMPTON I DOUGLALI$_ ME PLAGUE LKO I I I ------ -� - - -� —RAN PAN OLIN DO!PH .7, 1���LLL I I I GREENVAIE (WATERFORD MILES 5 10 15 20 25 I I SCIOTA TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA SUMMER POPULATIONS Figure 2. Flock sizes of Vain Cities Canada geese, 1974. Figure 3. Calculations of laying and hatching events for the giant Canada goose. DAYS TO FIRST EGG DAYS TO HATCH (1.5 day /egg) g O N Cj a L 4 Laying Period 1 2 3 Day of Incubation .......... 2425262728 Figure 4. Date of nest establishment for Twin Cities Canada geese, 1973 -74. NCB. OF NESTSi 4 a e DATE OF NEST -ESTABLISHMENT MARCH APRIL MAY e Table 1. Comparison of average male culmen length from various flocks of Canada geese. MEAN LOCATION NUMBER LENGTH RANGE AUTHORITY Seney, Michigan 39 60.9 56 -68 Sherwood, 1966 Larimer,Co., Colorado 74 57.5 - -- Will, 1969 Trimble, Missouri 123 57.5 47 -66 Brakhage, 1965 Marshy Point, Manitoba 60 56.0 49 -63 Cooper, 1973 Grantsburg, Wisconsin 29 61.2 56 -68 Zicus, 1974 - - - -- 129 60.4 51 -72 Hanson, 1965 TWIN CITIES, MINNESOTA 169 60.8 49 -72 ,THIS STUDY Table 2. Nest sites used by Twin Cities Canada Geese, 1973 -74. 1973 1974 TOTAL PERCENT Island 37 74 111 54 % Platform 29 39 68 33 % Muskrat 7 10 17 8 % Ground 6 5 11 5 % Table 3. Nest fate for Twin Cities Canada Geese, 1973 -74. N =208 1973 1974 TOTAL PERCENT Successful 58 93 151 72.5 % Deserted 8 15 23 11.0 % Nest Failure 4 6 10 4.8 % Predation 3 7 10 4.8 % Flooded 5 1 6 2.8 % Platform Failure 1 4 5 2.4 % Death of Mate 1 1 2 0.9 % Unknown 0 1 1 0.4 % 100.0 % Table 6. Fertility of Canada goose eggs, Twin Cities, Minnesota, 1973 -74. 1973 1974 TOTAL PERCENT Fertile 262 401 663 86 Infertile 45 63 108 14 Table 7. Canada goose hatching success, Twin Cities, Minnesota, 1973 -74. 1973 1974 TOTAL PERCENT Hatched 226 e 641 96.5 Dead Embryos 8 Table 6. Fertility of Canada goose eggs, Twin Cities, Minnesota, 1973 -74. 1973 1974 TOTAL PERCENT Fertile 262 401 663 86 Infertile 45 63 108 14 Table 7. Canada goose hatching success, Twin Cities, Minnesota, 1973 -74. 1973 1974 TOTAL PERCENT Hatched 226 415 641 96.5 Dead Embryos 8 15 23 3.5 Table 8. Comparison of egg, hatching and nest success from various flocks of Canada geese. EGG HATCHING NEST LOCATION SUCCESS ( %) SUCCESS ( %) SUCCESS ( %) AUTHORITY Dog Lake, Manitoba 51.4 96.0 46 Klopman, 1958 Trimble, Missouri 73.0 78.0 65 Brakhage, 1965 Fort Collins, Colorado - -- 80.0 69 Will, 1969 Crex Meadows, Wisconsin 87.1 96.8 74 Zicus, 1974 Marshy Point, Manitoba 67.0 97.0 75 Cooper, 1973 TWIN CITIES, MINNESOTA 66.1 96.5 73 THIS STUDY Table 4. Fertility of deserted Canada goose eggs, Twin Cities, Minnesota, 1973 -74. Deserted Eggs 49 % Fertile N = 45 All Other Eggs 87 % Fertile N = 726 Table 5. Egg success of Twin Cities Canada 4 ' N = 1,110 " f r 1973 Table 4. Fertility of deserted Canada goose eggs, Twin Cities, Minnesota, 1973 -74. Deserted Eggs 49 % Fertile N = 45 All Other Eggs 87 % Fertile N = 726 Table 5. Egg success of Twin Cities Canada geese, 1973 -74. N = 1,110 1973 1974 TOTAL PERCENT Successful 269 461 730 65.7 Deserted 34 63 97 8.7 Infertile 39 44 83 7.4 Predation 11 23 34 3.0 - Flooding 24 .6 30 2.7 Structure Failure 6 24 30 2.7 Embryo Death 9 20 29 2.6 Death of Mate 6 .6 12 1.0 Displaced 3 4 7 0.6 Broken 0 6 6 0.5 Dropped 1 2 3 0.2 Dumped 0 2 2 0.1 Frozen 0 Unknown 10 36 46 4.1 1,110 100.0 r The Urban Goose - - - ftw; Once a soul - stirring s}mbd of northern wilds, tine Canada goose has become as citified as the pigeon; and the citizenry is beginning to find fault with the bird it once befriended. T HEY CAME OUT OF THE northern skies_ J-- announcing their approach in haunting tones `t + that brought the farm lad up from his chores. Now, years 6 later, he still remembers scanning the heavens until the distant r , specks grew into birds, and there could not be the slightest - doubt of what they were. The giant southbound Canada geese passed over the autumn sky, then across the hills and , out of sight. The great geese had come and gone quickly, but they left the boy with an indelible memory and visions of distant lonely marshes in some empty land to the north. The passing . of the geese had touched him deeply, as it must have many others through the centuries. If the giant geese in flight can do this for the human spirit once a year, would not the pleasures be multiplied a hun- dredfold if we were to have the geese around every day? Given this possibility it was inevitable that people would try to manipulate the lives and travels of wild Canada geese. And they found they could do it with remarkable ease. This ' discovery was the first step in making the Canada goose the — center of what one biologist has called "a wildlife management success story without parallel." In 1927, Canada geese were 1 r r o ►•iorl •� ` ADD.LE5 1, I: a ? r N i I s introduced into Michigan's Kellogg Bird Sanctuary, an area from which they had disappeared, and they quickly reestab• t y o„ by GEORGE LAYCOCK ; dratcing by Arnold Roth ' .1..: ... � K.. -. ._� .: _ —. ��_. __ � _ - _'� rt` _ - ,y '�3, �'=_ _?' �_ a ��. - . ?y.. - -. . - z `mow'._ :± ��;� . M � �. ;... y ,. � _�^ . •�,., . S " � �i �''� � " 3._r .4 .. R7. _ _ -1,-_ _ _ '_,.. '.¢ _ ` ?Y ;, — �t.a4�a�. '�Y.- i" � 3 � M1� .. ��f � _ _ j�. � �_ 1 _— rts'�r f :'R: Y. ..L ��� w � f ti _ <,' . � _ .� 4�. �i ID ��� .. _: �� �� �" ', �F _,�. j� ! V'i Tti ,� f` $c_ �- �� :'�.. �x .�_,� lished themselves. With the creation of new refuges, wild goose populations built up, while smaller flocks of birds were encouraged to take up residence in the hearts of numer- ous villages and cities. They have flourished beyond all expectations. There are flocks of urban geese in dozens of cities from Seattle to Boston. Nobody knows how many Canada geese are now city dwellers all or part of the year. "Undoubtedly they number in the hundreds of thousands," says Robert B. Oetting of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's regional office in Twin Cities, Minnesota. Oetting calls this resource "im- mense and growing." Furthermore, geese still are being re- leased in parks and sanctuaries. The Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul have a resident flock of about 7,000 Canada geese, all originating with birds released in the mid- 1950s. James A. Cooper, long -time student of the Canada goose and associate professor of wildlife at the University of Minnesota, points out the tremendous advantages of city living for the geese. In and around the Twin Cities, geese occupy about fifty square miles where they are safe from hunting. "Every year," says Cooper, "another town council finds its human population reaching a level that prompts it to outlaw discharging firearms, giving the geese a growing area where they are not hunted." The Canadas are the best known of the North American geese —with their black-stocking heads and necks and their white cheek patches. There is, however, an astounding racial variety among them. Harold C. Hanson of the Illinois Natural History Survey, an authority on these racial differences, has assembled a collection of 1,300 skins and skeletons of Canada geese from all comers of the continent. Most waterfowl biologists speak of six to twelve races of Canada geese, but Hanson says there are closer to forty. Members of the smallest race are scarcely larger than mallards; those of the giant race weigh as much as twenty -six pounds and have up to a seven -foot wingspread. This giant Canada goose, known among scientists as Branca canadensis maxima, is native to a broad section of the upper Midwest. It is easily separated from other Canada geese by both physical and behavioral traits. Hanson wrote of it in his book, THE GIANT CANADA GooSE: "The placid disposition of the giant Canada goose sets it apart from all other races." Its tameness has permitted its domestication, and old -time goose shooters —and doubtless some Indian tribes before them —used the giant geese as decoys. "If this race of geese had been native to Europe," Hanson adds, "it would undoubtedly have been the progenitor of a domestic breed." For three decades the giant Canada goose was believed to be extinct. In the winter of 1962, though, Hanson found that members of the goose flock he was studying in Rochester, Minnesota, were of the giant race. Other flocks were iden- tified later. The biggest Canada goose of all was finding success in the cities. There was no hope of keeping them out on the marsh after they'd seen Fergus Falls. "The Fergus Falls, Minnesota, flock," says Bob Oetting, "is a good case study in urban Canada goose sagas." The city traces its goose population to birds first purchased by the Fergus Falls Fish and Game Club in 1963. Arland (Bud) Anderson, then president of the club, recalls that "one club member who was a state waterfowl biologist said that, with all the open water we have, we should be able to establish a permanent breeding flock of Canada geese. The giant Canada goose was the one we wanted because we are right in the heart of its original range, and it only migrates a limited distance, and in open waters it may not migrate at all." Soon civic clubs, business people, and the city council were caught up in the plan. "Everyone thought the goose project was an excellent idea," says Anderson. The club picked up a bargain in six mated pairs. The following year members went down to Round Lake, on the Iowa border, and bought forty more young birds, and then later that year they added another five mated pairs. The young were allowed to fly free beginning in 1965. "It worked right from the start," says Anderson. "We see geese now every day of the year." The Fergus Falls flock has grown until within a ten -mile radius there is a fall population of 5,000 resident giant Canada geese, which the Fergus Falls club attributes to its efforts. These birds escape much of the normal hunting pressure because the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, at the club's urging, established a goose refuge covering 155 square miles around Fergus Falls. Included are marshes, lakes, and sections of the Pelican and Otter Tail rivers. Inevitably there have been some complaints. The club has a three - person "Depredations Committee" that rushes off to meet with any regional farmer who reports trouble with geese in his fields. The committee members take along scarecrows, gas guns, and cracker shells. And advice. "We've learned a lot about goose damage control in the last two or three years," says Anderson. "Sometimes you can just leave your pickup truck in the field overnight and the geese %ill move. But people like the geese. This is just like anything else; if you want something nice, you have to pay something for it." IF ALL CANADA GEESE did was stand around on green lawns looking regal or float quietly on ponds in the park, nobody would object. The geese, after all, add rare beauty to the urban scene whether on the ground or in the sky. However, one must be a realist. Given enough geese, the citizens of any town are going to turn on the birds they once befriended and begin finding fault. Alan Stewart, a biologist in the Pontiac office of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, believes, "Twenty is the magic number. People still like to see geese, but one pair may be more attractive than a large flock. Let a flock build higher than twenty, and we start getting complaints." Much of the trouble comes from the fact that a big bird leaves big droppings. "The goose," says one biologist, "is an eating and defecating machine." City dwellers love geese until they have to walk with exceeding caution where the geese have been, step around droppings on the golf course. and clean the backyard before letting the toddlers out to play. In some neighborhoods wild geese even use the swimming pools. Ponds in Massachusetts have been closed to swimming after being fouled by geese. Golf course manners are seldom among the noose's true —46— 4Ifriends. Geese graze the succulent grass, leaving behind drop- rings complete with weed seeds. Golfers find that a goose on :he fairway destroys concentration. One golfer became so Q:uaged that he killed a goose, whereupon he had to appear in curt. As goose flocks build, there also may be problems in :rrounding farmlands. "Some farmers," says Kenneth Rose, =' -hector of the West Otter Tail County Extension Service in -US Falls, "have claimed damage by geese getting into their :in. You get a hundred or two hundred of those big old cats, and they can really clean up a grain field in a hurry." geese simply walk through the field, grazing on tender as -.!.l2 wheat, oats, and barley. Rose reports that, so far, few ;)le have gotten upset by them. "The geese are a part of I lives. They come right into the backyards, and .I've often aught that, if you opened the door, you could coax one of se rascals right inside." his level of tolerance, however, is less than universal, zcially among soybean farmers, who pay $110 to $130 an -c to plant their crop. Geese may be a bigger threat to .beans than they are to cereal grains. The University of nnesota's Jim Cooper first heard of goose damage to beans four years ago and says reports of damage have been :reasing, with some losses as large as ten acres. Soybeans are anted on heavy, wet soil, which frequently is found adjacent waterfowl refuges. Geese are adaptable animals, and Coop - points out that they will eat almost any succulent plant in :oportion to its abundance. Soybeans are succulent, and as _ese adapt to eating them, damage could become more crious. "In early work with giant Canadas," says one waterfowl •iologist, "we didn't think in terms of what we would do if we •ucceeded so well that we ended up with surpluses." They are thinking about it now, though. Public opinion still leans !ieavily toward protection of the geese —no matter how many of them are loafing on city lawns, parks, and sidewalks. So the state and federal wildlife agencies search for and evaluate every line of action that might reduce the exploding goose populations yet be acceptable to people. One of the first ideas was to transplant the surplus geese to new homes. This has been done in several places, including Toronto. In 1947 Toronto city fathers decided that Canadians, of all people, should be able to see Canada geese frequently. A few giant Canada geese were moved from the city zoo onto Toronto Island, where they grazed in contentment. All went splendidly for years, but by 1978 L. H. Eckel, Ontario's executive coordinator of outdoor recreation for the Ministry of Natural Resources, was saying, "The population of Canada geese at Toronto Island has burgeoned in recent years to a more or less manageable number of resident birds, which seemingly devote a great deal of their time to the routine destruction of lawns and other vegetation and the general despoiling of park property." A plan to move 1,000 of the offending birds west to the Manitoba - Ontario border was fought down by the Canadian Wildlife Service, which said that area already had Canada geese. Inevitably, the beleaguered Toronto officials began think- ing of a direct assault on the geese. Waterfowi biolo0sts main - 1 rain a close working relationship that transcends national bor- ders, and word of the impending fate of Toronto's geese soon reached Karl E. Bednarik of Ohio's Department of Natural Resources. He said, "Whoa, we can use those geese in Ohio." Bednarik, who is credited with bringing Canada geese back to Ohio's wetlands, needed birds of the giant race to stock reclaimed strip -mined lands in the hills of southeastern Ohio. Here, the Ohio Power Company had created a showplace with dozens of ponds surrounded by fields of grass. Ohio sent trucks north to haul back 1,500 geese. Within two years the Ohio Power Company lands were home to 2,500 geese (a figure Bednarik believes can go to 4,000 or 5,000) living far from towns and kept in balance by hunting. This relieved the pressure in Toronto — temporarily. In sub- sequent years trucks hauled geese to other states, but ob. viously there is a limit to places needing more geese. There are other ways to help hold down the number of geese in a city flock. A research team working for the National Wildlife Health Laboratory at Madison, Wisconsin, made news when it surgically sterilized seventy -three wild ganders in New York State. Vasectomy, which is costly and time -con- suming, is not advanced as a practical approach, however. "No others-will be given vasectomies," says a representative of the laboratory. "This was simply to give us a supply of geese for behavioral studies." Perhaps the only way to control the rapidly expanding goose flocks in many incorporated areas is to destroy the birds' eggs. Break or remove the eggs and the geese soon replace them, but if eggs are sprayed with miscible oil, a suffocating agent, the geese go on incubating until the season is too far along for a new nesting effort. This procedure has the advantages of being relatively inexpensive and perhaps more socially acceptable than destroying adults. Well - fertilized grass attracts geese, and it may be possible to lure them away from parks and golf courses by using fertilizer and water judiciously. Another suggestion is that dogs be trained to drive off the geese. Some of lower Michigan's surplus giant Canada geese are being shipped north to establish new flocks in the Upper Peninsula. The wings of mated pairs are clipped so the birds will remain on the peninsula through one nesting season. After this the parents return to their southern birthplaces to nest, while their goslings, imprinted by their natal area, nest• in the North Country. But Alan Stewart of the state's Natural Resources Department admits, "There is no good solution. The answers we've found are only temporary." Another waterfowl biologist says, "It's like dipping water out of a rain barrel during a downpour. You don't get ahead." Harvey K. Nelson of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service told waterfowl workers meeting in New Orleans, "We've responded to demands from governors, congressional delega- tions, goose hunters, flyway councils, technical sections, natu. ralists, and anti - vivisectionists. We've reduced populations, built populations, moved populations, measured populations, and dispersed populations. We've learned to produce them in incubators, compounds, pens, baskets, hay bales, tubs, plat- forms, and even old tires. "The problem," Nelson points out, "is usually seen as simply too much success ... too many Canadas in the wrong places." —47— " 1965 CI. iF EDINA 51 .1 2 A CHECK RE�.4TER REBUILD 6 6EN SUPPLIES - 02 -04 -85 CHECK N0. 04TE AMOUNT VENDOR! - - - -- _T- IfEI�OESEAfPiT6Fh�IC��[JNT N0. INV, q P.O. M MESSAGE 035003 01/29/85 233.34 ALBINSON PHOTO SUPPLIES 10 -4508- 420 -42 233.34 • -- -. _. I 035JJ8 01/29/85 92.28 KAMAN BEARING 8 SPLY REPAIR PARTS 10- 2010 - 000 -00 035008 01/30/85 44.28 KAMAN B =ARING 8 SPLY REPAIR PARTS 27 -4540- 662 -66 6 - _ -__ - -_ _._- -- - ---_ v,.13 Cl D35U12 ^1/30/85 32.95 AUTOMOBILE SERVICE C CONT REPAIRS 10- 2010- 000 -00 32.95 ! 035013 0.1/30/85 56.73 ALTERNA =T02 REBUILD GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504- 301 -30 035013 _01 /30-/85 76.68 ALTERNATOR REBUILD GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 301 -30 4 '33501 3 U U1/30/85 5 51 .1 2 A ALTERNATOR R REBUILD 6 6EN SUPPLIES - ' 3 • f f f r• r 735U26 01/29/85 49911.60 �— BADGER METER INC - WATER METERS �40- 1220 - 000 -00 - _ 49911.60 • �..I rikrrr fff -C� _ l_ - -- -' _— - -. .. - -_. .._ . "i 035029 �1 /29%85 26D �0 - -- - - - �-- FARNHAM CO GEN SUPPLIES 10- 2010 - 000 -00 735029 01/29/85 38.25 BERG & FARNHAM CO GEN SUPPLIES 10- 2010 - 000 -00 298.25 • rrrfrr •rr -C; 035U33 01/29/85 120915 BERGFORD TRUCKING­ INVENTORY— 50 =4626- 822 -82 -- -- Ow ,l035U33 U1/29/85 117.00 BERGFORD TRUCKING INVENTORY 50- 4626- 842 -84 f!35U33 01/29/85 117.00- BERS=ORD TRUCKING _ _ CORRECTION 50- 4626- 842 -84 035633 01/29/85 117.00 BER6FORD TRUCKING— - INVENTORY 7 =4626= 842=84 — - - -�- " 035U33 01/29/85 201060 BERGFORO TRUCKING INVENTORY 50 -4626- 862 -86 6f -7j c� ---------- - - - -- - - -- - 035J44 0.1/30/85 46909 BIL4 -BO YES FORD CoNT_FEPIITA 035044 0.1 /30/85 392.81 BILL BOYER FORD CONT REPAIRS 10- 2010 - 000 -00 035044 01/30/85 - -_ 25.0.10 BILL BOYER FORD CONT REPAIRS 10- 2010- 000 -00 ! 1 r 112.80 • . -- - - -- - -- .___.— Vi .I frrrrr _�—. 035U47 01/25/85 24940 BROWN PHOTO PHOTO SUPPLIES 10- 4508- 440 -44 24.40 * t 4 Vi .I frrrrr _�—. 035U47 01/25/85 24940 BROWN PHOTO PHOTO SUPPLIES 10- 4508- 440 -44 24.40 * t 4 �- 1Qg5 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 02 -04 -85 PAGE CHECK N0. DA *E - - - - -- eMOUNT -- -- vrr - ------- TTEM- OE$CfRPTIDM1T- '71CCOUNT -Aa: INV. A -P.D._ 0 -MESS AGE -_ - -_� 035074 _ 01/30/85 220. ^0 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON KENNEL SERV 10- 2010 - 000 -00 �. n35Lk7 01/28/85 33.34 CURTIN MATH SCI GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 482 -48 33.34 + fff�C• X35 ^9� i71 /29/85 - - - --- - -- - - 120.34 - - - -- CERT -POWER TRAIN - - REPAIR PARTS -' -- �+ 035090. r)35090 01/29/85 112.73 CERT POWER TRAIN REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540- 560 -56 01/29/,5 -_ 23.35 CERT POWER TRAIN REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 • 2 56.4 2 . -_ _ - - - - -- — - -- — -- 035U91 U1/30/85 206.50 - -- __206 CITY OF E]I'NA WATER 10- 2010- 000 -00 035u91 01 /3, ^_./85 99;12 - - "-CI TY -OF EJ INA - �+ 035091 1:1/30/85 120.36 CITY OF EOINA HATER 10- 2010 - 000 -00 035091 '135L91 01/30/85 - 22.50 - -22.50 CITY OF EITNA WATER 20- 2010- 000 -00 U1 /30/95 CITY OF_EOiNA WAITER --- - - —50= 2010= 000 -00- — _ 035091 01/30/85 69.62 CITY OF E3INA WATER 50- 2010- 000 -00 - 540.60 + Q35111- - -- 017291-8 -S OB.48-- ��yj�ypfiR�D�j2P -C�- REPAID PWRTS =45-40= 803 =8D- ° 108.48 035120 C1/29/95 — 6039.24 DORSET 3 JHITNEY SERVICES 10- 2010 - 000 -00 6139,74- + - - -- -- — - - -- -- -- 035125 135125 71/30/,.5 Q1/29/85 680.00 MERIT SUPPLY GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 318 -30 � 035125 uI/99785 - -- 299.25 —'- 406:95- MERIT SUPPLY 3. - FIERIT ;Up LY - ________ GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504- 343 -30 -S X35125 01/30/85 437.25 MERIT SUPPLY CLEANING_ UPPCIES- -10- 4512 = 540 =54- 035125 01/29/85 78.00 MERIT SUPPLY REPAIR PARTS PARTS 10- 4540- 560 -56 435125 U1/28/85'__ ' -___ "- 1;105;55 - -- MERIT - SUPPLY-- - CLEANING SUPPLIES 10- 4620- 560 -56 -28 -4512- 708 -70 -- 03 512 5 U1/28/85 52.12 MERIT SUPPLY CLEANING SUPPLIES 28- 4512 - 708 -70 39059.02 035128 01/28/85- DAIRY HOM= - -- CONCESSIONS i 74:10 + 935131 01/25/95 44.25 ASPLUND COFFEE CNCESSIONS 28- 2010 - 000 -00 !. 1 �F 5 C, JF EDINA CHECK RL__�TTR 02-04-85 r A G CHECK No. bAft AMOUNT b _6"_ __ - - - ITEM --DE�t 6 MFSSAG,-- ^35131 01/25/35 354*45 ASPLUNO COFFEE CONCESSIONS 28-2010-000-00 • U3 513 1 01/28/85 109.25 ASPLUND COFFEE C_0NCESSI_0lYS_________ 28-4624-704--70 507.95 • n35136 01/30/85 160.80 EARL F ANDERSEN GE4 SUPPLIES 10-45C4-646-64 • 7351 36 01 /30/85 139.08 F ANDERSEN - S16NS P6STS'_______10-4542- 328m3J 299. 98 0 3514.9 01/25/85 96.00 ELVI%1 SAFETY SUPPLY GEN SUPPLIES 10-4504-449-44 035148 ul /?5/ P 5 35_?3__­ELVIq'SAF_TY SUPPLY GEN SUPPLIES--------- 11351 4P 01/25/95 96:0 0. ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY CORRECTICN 10-4504-449-44 035148 01/25/85 96.00 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY GEN SUPPLIES 10-4504-449-44 212.'97 ***-C 40 n3515u 01/3(1/85 70*24 ELECTRONIC CENTER GEN SUPPLIES 10-4504-482-48 70.24 • 935157 01/29/85 49750.f?,0 50TH FRANCE BUS ASSN BILLS RUBBISH 10-4200-395-30 49750.00 035 159 01/30/85 1055*05 FLEXIBLE ;DIPE TOOL C GEN 19355.05 0.55164 ^1/30/8c 10.26 FREEWAY DOGE INC REPAIR PARTS 10-4540-560-56 4 10.2-6 ,01" 035766 01/29/85 39465.00 DEDE HENSEL PROF SERVICE 10-2235-000-00 39465.00 0.1/28%85 5,43 Gr_itMS iNf-----" d' 035183 01/29/85 20.94 GIVENS INC REPAIR PARTS 10-4504-646-64 035183 01/29/85 5*23 GIVENS INC PARTS 10-4540-540-54 035183 01/30/85 74098 —_--_--REPAIR GIVENS INC 2_8-45D4-708-;70__—__-- 111.58 035185 01/28/85 19160*00 GOODIN CO CONT REAPIRS 28-4248-708-70 1985 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 02 -04 -85 'PAGE CHECK NJ. DATE - -- -^ AM6U0-- "�ENDd #— ------- ITEASESC-RIPTION-- ACCOUNT -W-e TNY—VP: 4- MESSAG = -- 19160.00 r.rtff frf -C r x'351 94 01 /29%85 285.40- - --GENERAL COMMUNICATNS—CONT -REPAIRS- -- - w 035194 01/29185 30.90 GENERAL COMMUNICATNS CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 560 -56 r35194 01/30/95 41.20 GENERAL COMMUNICATNS RADIO SERU 10- 4294 - 440 -44 055194 .:•1/25/85 _ 44.38 -- GENERAL COMMUNICATNS - -'- -RADIO SERY - -�-' 10- 4294 - 440= 44 - - -- far ^35194 01/29/85 19.23 GENERAL COMMUNICATNS PARTS 10- 4620 - 560 -56 i"4 421.61 • i Ur r f f f a r 035ZU: 61/28/85 215.00 GENERAL OrFICE PROD RADIO EQUIP----' ►s 215.00 + ar � r352u9 CA /30/85 11.21 GENUINE PARTS REPAIR PARTS 10- 2010 - 000 -00 0352j9 L1/3U/85 - - - -- 9r.26 -- GENUINE PARTS - - REPAIR PARTS - -- -- -- - " -10- 2010- 000 -00 u. 0.35219 L1/30/85 5.64 GENUINE PARTS REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 � 035209 61/3';/85 21.92 GENUINE PARTS GEN SUPPLIES 40- 4504 - 806 -80 frtftt - +rf.0 � er 235214 01/25185 14.70 H.R. TOLL COMPANY GAR EQUIPMENT 27- 4926 - 662 -66 � 14.70 f f f f f t 05522u 01/30/35 62.?Ef WAR 4ED'LJM8ER CO GEN SUPPLIES —. -- `-- - --1D- 4504 - 318 -30 -- �► 62.90 + rftC- 035222 01/30/85 17.23 HEDBERG 8 SONS CO GEN REPAIRS 10- 2010 - 000 -00 17.- 2 3 -+ - -- - - -- -- - - - — f f f f f t fft -C W 035228 01/28/85 157.65- HILLSTR!OM AUTO SUP Y REPAIR PARTS 10- 2010 - 000 -00 035228 01/28/85 70.07 HILLSTROM AUTO SUP Y REPAIR PARTS 10- 2010 - 000 -00 � 035228 01/28/35 — 53.R6`-- _- _NILLSTR0M AUTO SUP Y GEN SUPPLIES - ----- - --"10 -4504- 301 -30 -- -- 035228 01/28185 21.24 MILLSTROM AUTO SUP Y REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 520 -52 C35228 01/28/85 139.39 HILLSTMOM AUTO SUP T REPAIR PARATS 10 -4540- 540 -54 035228 61/28_f85 60.82_- AILLSTROM -AUTO SUP -Y REPAIR- PWRTS— 10= 4540= 560 =56 - - - -- _- ®. r (135228 01/28/85 88.08 HILLSTROM AUTO SUP Y TOOLS 10- 4580 - 560 -56 ! 035228 01/28/85 19140.79 WILLSTR;OM AUTO SUP Y PARTS 10- 4620 - 560 -56 r'S5228 _ u1/28185 _ -- 32.76 ___ — HILLSTR,0M AUTO SUP Y - - REPAIR PARTS �! 055228 01/28/85 6.99 HILLSTROM AUTO SUP Y PARTS 27 -4620- 662 -66 ( ! .i 035228 01/28/85 6.12 HILLSTROM AUTO SUP Y REPAIR PARTS 30- 4540 - 783 -78 035228 01%28 —T2 -09U }HILLL;TRbW--CUTO SUP- Y-- GENSUPPCIES 4D= __- >� 29375.37 r ei 19A5 C, F EDINA CHECK RE._.tER 02 -04 -85 .uE CHECK NO. w DATE - AMOUNT VENOOi - ITEM MESSAGt' -- (755239 1:.1/3G% ?5 577.00 HYDRAULIC JACK CONT REPAIRS 10= 4248560 -56 - - .� 577.00 • C. v 035244 01/29/85 211.50 HAYDEN MURPHY REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 - - -- -1-1 .5 0 .. - - -- • i f i i. f v 035253 0.1/29/85 26.50 HUMP -PREY RADIATOR CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 560 -56 26.50 • Vag 035267 - 01/25/85 -" - 961.Q2- IBM CORPOR4TION - - - -- EQUIP "REfP�1�L = 4ZZ6= 5TD =51 -- - - -" - -- __ 961.92 • s 035268 01/30/85 115.64 ITASCA EQUIP CO REPAIR PARTS 10 =4540- 560 -56 - -- - to, 035268 01/30/85 118.53 ITASCA EQJTP CO REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 035266 0'1/39/85 -- - -- 91.78 ITASCA EOJIP CO REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 325.95 + - - -- - - -- - - -- - - - Pi Y 035233 01/30/85 340.00 J)NES CHEMICALS INC CALCIUM CHLORIDE 10- 4520 - 318 -30 340.70 . 035284 01/25/95 84.00 RAYMOND HAEG PLBG REPAIR PARATS 10 -4540- 646 -64 ! 64.00 + OS 5292 U1 /29%85 12,776.70 HARRIS H4MEYE�2 C0 INSURANCE 0= .T260--510 -51 --- r 735292 01/29/85 1,172.00 41ARRIS HOMEYER CO INSURANCE 10 -4260- 560 -56 139948.70 + infra ' 035504 01/30/8° - 163.67- KNOX LUMBER C0 - CREDITS - -..'T - "1� =2010- 000 =D7- -- - - - r 0555J4 01/30/85 114.24 KNOX LUMBER CO GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504- 646 -64 035304 01/30/85 __ _ 69.44 - -- KNOX LUMB =R CO PARTS 10 -4540- 540 -54 v 0353J4 0.1/30/85 _ 26.19. -- _. -KNOX LUM9:R CO - _REPAIR REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 540 -54 - - �, U353'4 lit /30/85 129.99 KNOX LUMBER CO LUMBER 10 -4604- 646 -64 [.553J4 0.1/30/R5 94.18 KNOX LUMBER CO 10 -4604- 646 -64 r 055354 01/30/85 33.49 _ _ KNOX LUMBER CO _LUMBER LUMBER- Q= 4604=646 =64 -� - �, 035304 0.1/30/85 97.45 KNOX LUMB =R CO 6EN SUPPLIES 30- 2010 - 000 -00 t 401.31 055313 U1/29/85 44.80 JOHN H FOSTER - RffAfVVA' r 5-40= 805 =80 -- -- -- �"' 44.80 • 4 19F5 CITY OF E!OINA CHECK REGTST'R 02 -04 -85 PAGE CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT - V:M00� -- - I-TEM- DESCRIPTION A- COUNT- ND- :- INV:- -W-P.O•vq- MESSAGE 035317 U1/29/85 72.79 LAOSMN PRODUCTS GIN SUPPLIES - 10- 2010 - 000 -07 035317 01/29/85 243.90 LAWSON PRODUCTS SIGNS POSTS 10- 4542 - 325 -30 (135317 01/29/85 187.60 LAWS04 PRODUCTS PARTS 10- 4620- 560 -56 -- -- -- - - - - -- - -- 504.29 -f — - - - -- --- - - -- - -- ---- -- - -- -- - - -- a ffffrr C; 035325 01129/85 15.32 LONG LAKE FORD TRACT REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 a 15.32 �✓ ff f fif 035329 01/311115 -- - - 46.79 --- -LAYN_ MINVESOTA CO _ REPAIR PARTS - - --40-;4540-805-80----- ' - .. 46. 79 • ^35337 J1/30/85 1.51 LAKE STATE EQUIP CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 560 -56 035357 01/30/85 _ 272.68—'---- LAKE STAT_ EQUIP - CONT REPAIRS - -- ___-10-4248-560-56- 03 5 3 5 7 U1/3C/85 64.00 LAKE STATE EQUIP CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 560 -56 • 035337 /30/F5 14.48 LAKE STATE EQUIP CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 560 -56 ___U1 035337 _ U1 /3 ^ /8S 1115_'04 LAKE STAT: EQUIP - " - -- _- CONT REPAIRS — 10= 4248 = 560- 56 - - " -- w 035337 U1 /30/85 28.75 LAKE STAT_ EQUIP REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 a 835337 01/37/85 166954 LAKE STATE EQUIP REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 560 -56 0-) 533/ _ L1/30/85 _ 39.98- _ LAKE STATE EQUIP" CREDIT -- - - -" - -10= 4540 - 560 -56 r. 1,623.02 * • 035541 0.1/30/85 118.88 MAC oU_EN _QUIP INC. REPAIR PARTS 10- 2010 - 000 -00 - - - - - -- -118.3 8- : - - -- - -- - - - v • M 035344 01/28/85 34.12 MED OXYGEN B EQUIP 1ST AID SUPPLIES 10 -4510- 440 -44 34.12 • N '- f► k f f f ifi. Cl . � 835353 - X1/29 f8 5 -- 40: 7S- - MINNESOTA - GLOVE-'---- -GEN- SUPPLIES- 10= 4504- 301- 30 - - -- -- �; 035353 01/29/85 69.80 MINNESOTA GLOVE GEN SUPPLIES 40- 4504 - 801 -80 • 110.55 . Y 1fffif fif-C, S 035355 01/30/85 62.63 *_­­ M!NNSOTA B?4RING CO REPAIR -P -ARTS— 10 -4540- 560 -56 - -- - - - -- a� x135020 01/30/85 110.21 * AIR- HYDRAULICSYSTEMS PARTS 10- 4620- 560 -56 • .�I I 035356 01/29/85 185.03 MINNESOTA BLUEPRINT BLUE PRINTING - - -10- 4570 - 260 -26- - 185.03 • ..i -Cc• s• 0353611 '1%3 %85— MINNESOTA WAFT ^J "R - C'ONT REPAIRS- - - - - -' '-10- 4248- 56C- 56--- - - - - -- 51.50 n � v e, OF 5 Cl . OF EDINA 01/30/85 108.60 CHECK RL .TER 28- 4624- 704 -70 C2 -04 -85 5E CFPECK N0. OATE AMOUNT V�MD02 - - LfiFI- DE$�RIPT�61���CC�UN1' -1�0. INY: -i! P. D: a MESSAG = - - - -- -�- d 035360 'J1/30/85 38925 MINNESOTA MINNESOTA WANNER CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 560 -56 _. L 3 536' _. _ - - 48.50 -- MINNESOTA MANNER CONY _ _ REPAIRS _ -10= 4248 = 560 -56 -' - 035365 0.1/30/85 174.25 MINNESOTA WANNER CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 560 -56 y 05536U 01/30/85 8.25 MINNESOTA d CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 646 -64 MCGUIRE! ROBERT AREA 3 320.75 + --WANNER - --- - -- - -- -- ---- -- MCGUIRE ROBERT TREE INSPECTIONS 10- 4242 - 353 -30 840.00 + - •ft fff •■rrtt ' •r.wC: 035362 J1/3 9/85 582.45 MODEL STOV= COMPANY 'REPAIR PARTS 10- 2010 - 000 -00 582.45 + 14w' r■frr• 035367 01/2.5%85 SUPPLIES 10Ti504= 500 =50- r "I 120.90 i Wr ; 4 •r ■ -C;_ e -.e 05537 01/30/85 108.60 MIDLAND PRODUCTS CO CONCESSIONS 28- 4624- 704 -70 h3537U _ _ J1/30%85 - 224, 23 _ MIDLAND PRODUCTS CO CONCESSIONS _ 28 =4624- 704 -70 - -- 03531L 01/28/85 329.90 MIDLAND PRODUCTS CO CONCESSIONS 28- 4624- 704 -70 " 662.73 + •+r-- - ■flit r _ - -" ^.35385 - -__ _- 01/30/95 -Y- �-_ --._. 360. "0 _ . .. -_ "�.._ _... MCGUIRE ROBERT"- - - -- -- AREA ­2 0- 1300 = 011= 18- - -_ - "- - d 035365 01/30/85 360.30 MCGUIRE! ROBERT AREA 3 10- 1300 - 012 -18 ^35385 01/30/85 120.00 MCGUIRE ROBERT TREE INSPECTIONS 10- 4242 - 353 -30 840.00 + •■rrtt ' t„ 035470 01/28/85 19906.32 NORTHWESTERN TIRE CO TIRES & TUBES 10- 2010- 000 -00 ^554JU- - -- - - - -- 01/28/85 19814.61 NORTHWESTERN TIRE CO TIRES & TUBES 10 -4616- 560 -56 39721.43 + _ r 035416 J1/28/85 72.10 OFFICE PRODUCTS OFFICE SUFPLIES 10- 4516 - 510 -51 --- -.. ^ -_ 72.10 + ' f ■ f f r • 035421 L1/29/85 - - 14.10 - OLSON CHAIN 8 CABLE GEN SUPPLIES -' -10- 2010 - 000- 00- - " - -- r;' 035421 01/29/85 47. ^D OLSON CHAIN & CABLE GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 646 -64 055421 -- 01/29/95 165.35 OLSON CHHAIN & CABL= GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 646 -64 - 226.45 * -- -- - -- - -- "II t ■ttrf r- 05441 01/30/85 160.37 THE PRINT SHOP PRINTING 10 -2010- 000 -00 _ !. 160.37 + 035445 - 01/29/85 717.44 PAPER CALMENSON 6 CO REPAIR PARTS 02010= OD0 =00 - - 4 •r ■ -C;_ e -.e �s 1 e r +• -C' . t •+r-- - is •'1 �s 1 19?5 CITY OF FOINA CHECK REGISTER 02 -04 -85 PAGE c CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT iTEM- DESLRZPTI -0 U19T- NOwZNV..- #- P'.' 0.- V- RESSAG_ -- 1T_g00; —^ 055445 01/29/95 345.56 PAPER CALMENSON & CO REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 560 -56 19123.09 f - - -- x'35450 01/25/85 PBE PARTS 10- 2010 - 000 -00 1 102.96 10-2.,96.*. ' fii itf rff + ' 1 C35469 TA /30 /85 - - 136.35 ROAD MaCM;NERY -- - REPAIR- PARTS - 10 =2II10- 000 =00 - — - - 136.35 f ^35479 01/30/85 39.90 R & R SPECIALTIES CONT REPAIRS 28- 4248 - 707 -70 y w ff f if f 035486 01/28/85 22.00 DON STRiEICHER GUNS GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 421 -42 f fi.. 035486 01/3'0/85 226.50 DON STR'M_'RER GUNS AMMUNITION 10- 4572- 420 -42 r -- - i f t t t• 035490 01/30/85 146.23 SHERWIN W!LLIAMS GEN SUPPLIES 10- 2010 - 000 -00 f f f+ 1 v 146.23 f rtlflt rff -� 1 035492 C1/3005 -" - -- 16.58------ "SOUTHbhLc FORD - REPAIR PARTS -- -`- - - -10- 2010 - 000 -00 - cs 1 035492 01/30/85 474.05 SOUTHOALE FORD CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248- 560 -56 1 035492 01/30/85 407.81 SOUTHOALE FORD REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 a j f•35 5J2 0.1/28/85 21.44 SUBUIB4N CHEVROLET REPAIR PARTS 10- 2010 - 000 -00 40 035502 01/28/85_ 1.44 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 1735 5J2 D1 /28185 34 ; >6— SUBURBAN- CHEVROLET — "— _(EPA_IR -PARTS —1II= 6540 - 560=56 — - -- • 62.64 * ! d 035505 - - -- 01/30/85 -- 7.89 7.89 SUN ADVERTISING - 10 -4210- 140 -14 --- ftp • lrf tff atf —C ._. 0355J8 01/29/85 41.51 ST PAUL BOOK GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 325 -30 1 J.� 035508 63.97 ST PAUL BOOK GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 420 -42 -- 035 508 _0,1/28/85 _01 /25%85 PAT1L 000K - -- - -- OFFICE- SWPLZES- -- 10=4516 - 510=51 -` - -- - yl i 108.89 • t r .. f - -- - - -- -- - -- --- --- - --- - -- - -- __.- -- -- -- f t f+ C, - A s A � - ~� 11n5 c^ Jp cozmx cxccn n, rco 02~0*~85 ac _ � �At� K--��.'-- ~..^ ---�f��l1��t -~ ._~ ...~~.^ .~~ ^-.~ - . °��'w ncssxwc�- ---' ! .'~... .^-~-` ~35511 - ����»��� ----'----- �r.v�'-----��uY����-V�cuum mcex chNr'ncpAlmg Ow4248-52Oc52----' - ^ / nr°v» . ` ~~ 035516 sr n�cuucu ncpxzy pxn7o 10~2010-000-00 � L' | n�x�o _av/so/nn ------ ����� --�6x4 -------ocxea or-xnM7hncFuCn--- - rnmLo ---------'-----4o-o4580-801--;8o -- -- `.' v*°aa °����� ------ --'-- ---°°^-cto ---- ry5539 cl/3I r *a.oz runr m pp cmm"xmv pcxrzcrccp or~�5 58~662~** _ '- 9546.1 --'-- ------ '----'----------- --------------' —' r35545 ovvoovun 2*.19 TWIN orr yxnxnc oomn ncpxzn pxeTm 10~4540~5*0~54 ~, z*~�p ^ ^ c� 5,00 MA MA --TUE S -- —' ----- - 5.90 ° *~ _ ^ c? p35.56501 n RGEN SuppLzcu 10~2010~000~00 ..~-. ' - | n35»69 01 /30/85 4*u.`v VALLEY zmo rnopxmc mxoo�zmc oo~4a1o~ror~ro ' ° -. **o ° '� . 035 571 w, ] ' r355/l 01/29/95 �* ^ 51~ A u w o^rrEov cosoIr 10-2010-000-00 ° C35571 01/29/85 116 .25 x m m mxrrcnv RElPAIR_PxmxTs 10~2010~000~00 1 ' o� -| C35578 o1v29/85 74°93 wn°n*orcaL--n CO INC ncpxzx PARTS 10~2010~000~00 r* oo m ° ` C35 536 01/25/85------------ 95*3 ER-------- --�U�-��������-- 4 5V*-m;_4 zO;wua----'-- - - ~w 1 295.32 / ---'------- | Q35 59�-___' INVENTORY 23~1209~000~00 -- - --' - i. ^ _ --------- � v � ~~ 1985 czn OF EoImA CHECK N). oxTc---- `~ ~' r^5594 cl /29/o5 c*ccx mcszorEn oa~o^~ns p*sc I� , AMDUNT ---- mOn�---'------'---t-rEw-ocucnzpTT-o umT-mn7e-%mwO---n-p.o-.-'w-mcsoxsc-- -- � z ov.�o ° ' _-- _ 39604.16 uroas rnovr pnn ocxv ' 10~*224~50*~50 " 39604.16 ° u35729 01 /25 JqS -- -- - 45 -00 -- l3rxmr_ wzLomxro nsrmxo ART ccwrcn-''----23^35oo~0n0~0n---- + *5.00 ^ ^ oj513u - -01x25y85-----------1u4: _7F------­MwE_-4WDEn'3$m------' - «wooLumosncFomo------ 70=3180~00 0�0 o---'----- ~ 1o4.00 ° , cu573 1 01/25r85 ' - --- 1*.��------7H� S�n*np�n zpmmE --- Poorxnc ---- --------vn�4sn4~400moz - ' 18.25 ° _ 05 5/3a �iiv25yu5-- �-------'1na�'�-'------�xVzD-8%�0n------'--'----oNI FORM 'zrcnn----------,uW-42oa~42am;uz---- - - +- 132.7* ° o_5»,3 3 31m5118 5 -'--40 5.12 '� '--'-ALnn pnoo mxsr ' PAozo EQUIP ---�-------ln~4n,4~42o~4a - ' 405.12 035134 -J�������---'--------r��dOr------��/0nr�H�x�cn coom'---� -' ooEs---------'---------,n.;.42o«-,4n�14--------- - rn.no ° ~ o5,3 5 01r25185- -- --19.68 ---cooIa'XonA*xm ----- mcrca ncxocn-- -40=4208~806680 —'- 19,68 ° m '135136 �3v��sy8 -----H�mW[pzW-��Vm7v---------�o�m-&-onnn 8�9�n�-- 2,819.02 ns»or uv/25/85- 77 66- ----- osPr - muow u BOARD---"----- --- 10~2010~080~00 ' rr,00 ^ � U35r38-- 01125 ^� zss°om ° * | 03573" 01 125/85 o°sv1.po------thrclw%rznoxL SALT SALT 10~2010~000-00 - 035/3p �l /25r85 z,3ov.ar ImrcmmXrzmmwL n«Lr n«Lr 10~4538-318~30 * 59781.65_�_-__�-_--___-'--_-_--_'' °m C35 74C 01 125vx5 322.77 Sccunzry cwmouLTamry cowr xcno 20~2010~000~00 * na�r ^ _ __-- _ . 77-..* -,-.----32 mp. � 035 141 iv/25/85 75.00 cnpLovcno cnuwcaL ocmzm*x 10~*502-1*0~1* w rs.no ° m. 035742 01/25/85 4.36 4 acxsuws ocxx INC cnmT xcpxzno 10~4248~520~52 * 035 142 ul /o»s �� w.un 4 nco�omn ucxx INC scm auppLzco 1u~4noo~suu~so � *6.1�-* - -_--' -__- ` 035 743 u1m5m5 vm*.zc *cmw ory rnc^Suncn DUE 7o c7r uuoz7mn 15-20 70-000-00 ! ' 035 1_4 T----- 1-970°2-3-------HEKNJ-trY-TRCxSUnEm------0oE-TzF'Crr-^ooI ^~~ ~~-~ ��o~no��V�---------� --� -- ' - - ! 368°45 ° * r35r4-4� ------- bi/r07-q5--'----'---- -SmMP co-- uEm muppLzco----- � ° ' ` w ' 1985 CI, JF EDINA CHECK RE,- rER 02 -04 -85 of CHECK N0. DATc AMOUNT VENDO2 - - ' - -ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. IN17. It P.O. p MESSAG_- '" 34.03 + 035745 01/28/85 97.63 GARTNER R =F & MAINT GEN SUPPLIES 28- 4504 - 707 -70 _ 97.63 + 1735746 31/78/85 299.89 Z - SHARP GEN SUPPLIES 28 -4504- 708 -70 w - 299.69 I 035747 J1/28/85 40.00 PEGGY KELLY CONFERENCE 10- 4202 - 140 -14 40.00 + 035748 01/28/85 144.00 COTE PUBLICATIONS COLE DIRECTORY 10- 4226- 421 -42 144.00 + 035149 3.1/28/85 161.00 U IF M REG MUNICI PAL 10- 4202 - 500 -50 161 r • n3575G 01/28/85 850.00 PLASTIC PRODUCTS PRINTING 27- 4600- 660 -66 R50.00 • 035751 J1/28185 173. ^8 EDNA SA :NFILLPPO SEWER REFUND 40- 3560- 000 -00 173.1-8 + (135752 01/28/85 18000 COLLEEN' P4ULUS MENA WINTER 10- 4202 - 480 -48 18.00 + 035753 01/28135 18.00 EARL MEICHSNER MENA WINTER 10- 4202 - 482 -48 18.00 035754 31/29/85 39681.00 SUBURBAN RATE CONT SERV 10- 4200 - 509 -50 v 39681 CO + 035755 J1/29/85 10.00 HENN CTY FIRE CHIEFS DUES 10- 4204 - 440 -44 � v _� 10.0^ • I' 035756 01/30/85 83.95 WOOD N STJFF CONT REPAIRS 10- 2010 - 000 -00 • 83.95 + 035757 U1/29/85 40.90 JEAN ADAMS POST REIM 10- 4290 - 510 -51 � r 1- - -- 40.00 + (135758 01/29/85 400.00 LES 4NOING BOILER CHECKS 10- 4200 - 646 -64 400.00 n35/59 01/29/85 12.50 DAVID VELDE MACHA MEETING 10- 4202 - 480 -48 12.50 • i 035760 01/29/85 8.00 I.A.F.C. BOOKS 10- 4502 - 440 -44 � r � 8.00 • 035761 01/29/85 270.00 CITY OF EIINA RUBBISH REMOVAL 50 -2010- 000 -00 ,� 270.00 • 035762 01/29/85 6.60- RETAIL DATA SYSTEM CREDIT - - -- - -- -- . _- 50- 2010 - 000 -00 _,0357b2_.- _01/29/85 970000 RETAIL DATA SYSTEM CUNT REPAIRS 50- 4248 - 841 -84 ` 19p5 czT, OF cnzmx c*ccn ncsrorcn oa~o*~mn pxnc I c*scx No. o�r�-----------��dUw ---�cm�Dn--' -'- ----IrcM-ocacnr ccoUmT-moF.-ImWs-n-p~o'-w'mcosxfs--� ----T `~ 963.40 ° 035763 nrzp^m 11.1u xn oxncnIco cnMp onmccouzumm 28~4624~704~70 18.10 ° ^_ n3 575 * u1129f85 ».z* nzmwcsorx uC pomn xmooxxmcc 10~4160~510+51 2.u4.° -35765 amp/ns von.on cnnxn wcer_n cnwr scnn 10~4200~500~50 -_'--__- voo . ao ° ' °°^-cx' 035767 n/29m5 -- - 110 .09-- --McmmcpIm'"ecam INC mcm aopPLrcm `- 110.110 ° 035768 - mynvvos'------'------p�- uPL !CAT zym --------Gsm-soppczcn--- o^5*ows4'---------'-- - '- `~ vn.om ° "35 7,)9 J1/no/m5 - - vs nr -' wIcxmLo NET rwIms scm nuppLzcu-----------,n~*�nu~u�a~oo' *s.or ° ^ omrro z1��g»8�' '---------��n r-8nn'npLo---------'umu PP_ aunpLun-----------6u=o*9o~ou0=oo---- *on.un ° ' 035711 _�1m1'o5 - --' o*a so - cxcxLx LvmweaEzo cLcnIcAL ucno '-----��1o~oa DO- sno~sn - l� x�o . xo ° 18.45 ` 035773 Jv/moi85 - -- ' - -- 4 40.zOr-----CYLINDER CITY INC comr ncpAzna--'- -- - 10~4248-560�;56 --'- +, ' 4*n.ou ° ` o.5» f/4 y" 120.40 ° ' n35775 u1v30/85 '- --- wc.rM - -----�mousrmI AL 'm4LcSF -- 'ocwcmxL-omppLIcu---------1n~osn4~o0rmou �w '� 9n"7e ° ' o3 5 11 -- -0 1 /30 r89-- -----'---Y3 7 . AOU*-0 EPO7_ _R EP-At 0 w_4540-�;5 40-m-5 4-------- ---'- --- �� ,sr.nn ° ' 03 5r/7 01v39/o5 - -- 159.03 -- --- occn-ru ouPPLzss -' ouxno n4zL MAT-------- vn~znvn~oUo~oo-- - - ^~ � n��//r u�x�nvxn ��.on nccmcx ou����so scm oupp�zcn 10-2010-000-00 ' z*n.uo ° . ' +~ 035778 ulvsn/on 4709 Aonxszoc mpcoz^Lxor ssm ouppLscn ,o~unn*~**a~e* ` 47.89-�-_-_'_ n:5119 a1v30m5 52.4u xncmIcxw sncsov pnIwrzmn 23-4600-610- 61 -'i '- -- --- nz.*n �� | � oo�ruo o��oo�us s� ° o� cxnn� oo*u� ro xcrumo --------- -- --1 10~22*0~000~00 s�°u� '. � . ' ~ . ` . � w °. 1,99n c OF cnzmA cxccn K .rcx � c��c�l�� � 02~0*~85 ^sc 12 NY-70�-�mA�-�-�°��-w-Mc�mxsc ----�-r 475.00 03573* ----l01/30185------- ---988 ' ILiEN§ki'----' -------'��n`z-�----------------�o~�az�~s�U�sa-- -' - ' ' � ^ 035 7 89 u1vso/v5 98.nn mzLcwsn, PAR TS 1o~4�aV~�ao~sa ����y� a 10-4620-560-56 '..~.^ ^ = 03579U _ _01v _ o�ovo o, THE pmcnr ncpxz� pxR7m oO~*�*�~�oo~vm ! nv � ° ����------------ ---___ _ . -035 30 8 5 875.78 ' p o pxn�a ,o~�mao~s��~oa o'� ,e | ° _ 035792 _ zaYar~69 ACME VISIBLE RECORDS pxnrn �o~����~n6O~su ---------'-' '--' =~ � � 50~4202~840~84 . mu°uu .,' .� -7 .' .' L'^ .`` ~ � /- .� � -- ` � `~ '--'---'-- ---'- = '- ---- '-------- cmo � -75 97��~UU--------FUNolU-rorxL------- osNEoxL-pdNo----------------- ---------'-- --' ° 'u*°za puwo �� ror»� pnnn « � ""m"�er checks �`o *��o� - s '-curu-*m '- ~ o co '~ rxL PARK 318°80 p04o-29-y6fA T � = 89494°75 puno or TOTAL mnLr cmunoc Fumn l ---49.53-8o66 FUND 2m rgrxL ncCoc-x-z'x-n-w ccmrcm romm 3,�1u.5 V s0-ThrAi �-- ---- - - ^ 79435°06 ruwn 40 rnr^L wrzczTY pumo — '( 9244*43 F-- 3- .^! � ---------------___-_-____I04 9 304 o 3 4 TOTAL nnE-~~ � w -�������-----'------oU���------�dmmA'AEr-E-Ig - - » »nnVLwmot-ntpum0-------,U�orn�~noo�nn'-�--- - - - ~ 6000 ° i����� -- - -Ui/_fjTF5 6 60 2 W Wn�-mpLS p p15'-Su 2 2 4*0.-;-.0 00-0 o----' --------- . i aao°aD ° �ii�/�85------------3V�p�-------��K��l-----'-�-------'--'orFlc�'ou.Pp[YcS--------',0~2010~000�-00'------ - - = . 39.99 ° � , ,an°5V ^ 035785 - -- J 1 3 9 5---- ------'31 - -_ ] --------Fi R R f- C 41, c_�'kxs4 zmE--- U U0c9'--------'--------ID__4�aU*~*44;4�-----'- - - ~ n1.uo ° / ~ o»���� - ~.'^.'.' ~ ~.,'° ~ ~°^^"~"� ,/n� u -- =' 62.50 ° � � 0357-d'7 = . 1 170.00 ° ..'�T30�8_-__- 0 01/30 ^ = 03579U _ _01v _ o�ovo o, THE pmcnr ncpxz� pxR7m oO~*�*�~�oo~vm ! nv � ° ����------------ ---___ _ . -035 30 8 5 875.78 ' p o pxn�a ,o~�mao~s��~oa o'� ,e | ° _ 035792 _ zaYar~69 ACME VISIBLE RECORDS pxnrn �o~����~n6O~su ---------'-' '--' =~ � � 50~4202~840~84 . mu°uu .,' .� -7 .' .' L'^ .`` ~ � /- .� � -- ` � `~ '--'---'-- ---'- = '- ---- '-------- cmo � -75 97��~UU--------FUNolU-rorxL------- osNEoxL-pdNo----------------- ---------'-- --' ° 'u*°za puwo �� ror»� pnnn « � ""m"�er checks �`o *��o� - s '-curu-*m '- ~ o co '~ rxL PARK 318°80 p04o-29-y6fA T � = 89494°75 puno or TOTAL mnLr cmunoc Fumn l ---49.53-8o66 FUND 2m rgrxL ncCoc-x-z'x-n-w ccmrcm romm 3,�1u.5 V s0-ThrAi �-- ---- - - ^ 79435°06 ruwn 40 rnr^L wrzczTY pumo — '( 9244*43 F-- 3- .^! � ---------------___-_-____I04 9 304 o 3 4 TOTAL nnE-~~ � w .,' .� -7 .' .' L'^ .`` ~ � /- .� � -- ` � `~ '--'---'-- ---'- = '- ---- '-------- cmo � -75 97��~UU--------FUNolU-rorxL------- osNEoxL-pdNo----------------- ---------'-- --' ° 'u*°za puwo �� ror»� pnnn « � ""m"�er checks �`o *��o� - s '-curu-*m '- ~ o co '~ rxL PARK 318°80 p04o-29-y6fA T � = 89494°75 puno or TOTAL mnLr cmunoc Fumn l ---49.53-8o66 FUND 2m rgrxL ncCoc-x-z'x-n-w ccmrcm romm 3,�1u.5 V s0-ThrAi �-- ---- - - ^ 79435°06 ruwn 40 rnr^L wrzczTY pumo — '( 9244*43 F-- 3- .^! � ---------------___-_-____I04 9 304 o 3 4 TOTAL nnE-~~ � w � w » - - �vo� czr� up cozm� cmccx s r_ c_--_ n r_ x. cs-___ KATHY nxRocLL osw uoppcIsn 10~2010~000-00 .035z^3 _ N3. nCHccx rc_ _KAnoELLu mccrIN_Exp_ v» ousyju 1-11 /31/85 11*"55 nxm*m ecxoImo o opLr n«nxcLL --- .05029 "1 31 y05 32 °73___--nAM»m-aC8lImmJ& SpL» 15.00 KATHY nxp)cLL v*r,zn -- - 0*5zj3 L 1/31/85 13.50 KATHY uxnocLL ocm ouppLIco 10~2010~000~00 1352'3 �1,n�e5 10.50 n�rxv 035074 cI,m/nn 199825. 00 czry OF eLmnmImarom (.1/31/°5 a*.00 KATHY 19V25 oml- _ . o3pu/r �_1/31m5 _ 6.51 _ c*r ncpnzsEoxrIOw so°sn ' 10~2010-030-00 03 52.3 58.50 _ 02~04~85 pAoc ` _zl-EM-DE8CRzPTznN_-_--_ ACCOUNT _Noe Imw._o P.O. VMcsuxac _ vEpwzo p«nrm 27~4540~662~66 -O��AJR-RAn 7~4540~*621-46__---_-__--_'- cnmr ucmvrcoc EQUIP MAINT 03 5u r .1 /y1/»» _ ' --a2*~29cuerzmL MATH _SCI ____ mc�_SyP2LzcS _ 224°e9 ° - ' ' ».` c3 51e5 11/31/o5 952.65 MERIT nup"Lv cLExmIms SuppLrco � nzoe!) .1/o/us 1pn.*oM_:_RIr-Sop"L_y_________ _c�EA.NJ'4G__oupPLIEu / 19152^15 ° » -_-- -�- *°^_cxo 10~2010~000~00 -'--'--'--'- --- - -- --' - ^°^-ms -'-- cws 10--450*-482-*8 _ °°°~cxs _ 23~4 512-70 8~70 28-4 512-70 ^^^~cxs _035213 -c1/31/85 --_ ']9-30P.60_----JmmE�5-0msylc8L-$-.zmc_. -_-x 40-4622~805-80�_' IL � � � � � � � � � � � �. ~. � � � � � � � � °°,-cxu cu5 2-3 L 1/31 /85 14.82 KATHY nxRocLL osw uoppcIsn 10~2010~000-00 .035z^3 _ '1,31 /c5 _-_13^80 KATHY _KAnoELLu mccrIN_Exp_ vo~xnvn~ono~uu cl /31 /95 5 .�� KATHY n«nxcLL --- ---ocm SuppLzco ----'- ---1n-zo1o~noo~0u--'-- 0652^3 Cla1r85 15.00 KATHY nxp)cLL comp 10~e010-000~00 0*5zj3 L 1/31/85 13.50 KATHY uxnocLL ocm ouppLIco 10~2010~000~00 1352'3 �1,n�e5 10.50 n�rxv _�_ uxno��� — mccrzws cnp -- '-- -vo~zo1V~uou~uu-- — - ~ r_ise�r (.1/31/°5 a*.00 KATHY nxRocLL wccrzws cxpcmoc 10~2010~000~00 o35/'3 L 1 /s1/x5 __- _ 6.51 _ KATHY nxpmcL L ncs7Imc`c°p 10~2010-030-00 03 52.3 -1131^u5 29.50 KATHY xwnocLL-- --' ocm suppLIcd----- -10-2010-000-00 -- - c352,j3 :1/31/85 19.80 KATHY wxaocLL scm ouppLzcs 10~2110~000~00 - cmx�L�s 1131 /n5 _1*.51 '_-n^Twxx«mcLL acN_SuppLzco vu~zo,V~noO~no 03 5z"s c1m1/os 35.30 KATHY nxn)cLL _ B 0 x/pxappLsrS----'---vu~zuvO~uoo-oo--'- 000-nu x,,2-, ^.,n/o, _ _ 4.96 .,,.-..-.KATHY nxnocLL_ asw SuppLzco 10~2010~OCn~on � 03 5u�3 �1 /a/ms 8.50 KATHY __ xxnDsLL - - mEc7zmm cxp '-- ------vu~ro10~ono~on-- � c3 52~3 1m1r85 *.00 wArmv nxn)_-_LL cowp vn~zo`o~oon~no 03 5 d� 3 '_1/y1/x5 -'- -_---_-a.3s______nx THY nonocLL__ ocm sVp2LIEn . - m5 2� � �,/y1/ux x.�o KATHY nxnusLL mcErImn EXPENSE- -- _10~2010~000~00 - n~42 o6 ~2 0 0 ~2 0 '-- -- - 0-�:2-3 1,/31/n5 1.5n KATHY nxxocLL wcErzms Expcmnc 10~4206~260-26 '^. CS 5 2_', 3 ^l/31/u5 --_ _---1,75--_____nurxv-_KAR)ELL_--_ _ Eyp�xsc 13~4206~420~*2 o�5z�3 clro/x5 30.30 KATHY nxnocLL --.---MEETING -- wcc7zmm'cxp --- --vu~4zao-*zz-*z'�--'-- -- ' . 03 5zi3 1/31/85 4.00 KATHY nxnocLL MssrIms cxp 10~4310~421~*2 ' n3 5u0 1 oIvy,/oo -_ _ 7.42 .-KATHY xunocLL_ oonxS_ 10~4502-421~42 .'� oS,z's � l /31 /ox *.00 KATHY nxn)cLc - PHOTO oUpp�IEU-------'1V~*sou~z6o~au � zoz'^o ^^^~cxs _035213 -c1/31/85 --_ ']9-30P.60_----JmmE�5-0msylc8L-$-.zmc_. -_-x 40-4622~805-80�_' IL � � � � � � � � � � � �. ~. � � � � � � � � 1 ar 1995 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 02 -04 -85 PAGE 2 _.._ CHECK NO. - DATE_...— _— ___.__AMOlIN.I___-. —._ -- VENDOR ___.__ —...- _.ITEM- QESLBI TION ACC.OQh_"Oe._.INV -e -p. P-._O, _- A.MESSAGE i 1,308.60 + *f►•f • *** -CKS 035329 X1/31/85 _ -- - . 3205 $.50--- _- _LATNE-- MINPIESOTA_C0 3.058.50 ' *•f►•f *** -CKS I "I 03555_ ;.1/31/85 42.00 MILLER DAVIS CO GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 200 -20 _.. - -- - -- ____42 .00 * - -- * . f . • # *** -CKS ^. 05536 :1/31/85 14.10 MINNESOTA MANNER CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 646 -64 14.00 + �. / -- - - - *** -CKS 03537 X1/31/85 _ _222.•50 ----- _ - - ---- MIDLAND PRODUCTS.CO.__ _ _.._CONCESSIONS _ 28- 4624- 704 -70 222.60 _ • # / f # # 1 035533 61/31/85 4,795.88 MPLS CDMP TREAS WATER 30 -2010- 000 -00 ^ .4979598$ - *_ f f f f f t *•• -CKS "1 735416 :1/31185 55.00 OFFICE PPOOUCTS SERV CONTRACTS 10- 4288 - 510 -51 035416 ,1/31/85 294.00 OFFICE PRODUCTS GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 510 -51 - -- - - 349.30 ' -- - -- *•f.. # *** -CKS 1 035461 .1/31/95 129.45 REED SALES & SERVICE REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540 - 662 -66 129.45 • -� .••.. f * ** -CKS 035461 1 /?1 /ES __- _ 52.20 _RICHFIELD ?LUMB & CO - CONT REPAIRS_ 28 -2010- 000 -00 035465 61/31/85 202.10 RICHFIE!LO PLUMB & CO _.. _ -. CONT REPAIRS „ 28- 2010 - 000 -00 035465 _j1/31/85 29.30 RTCHFIEILD PLUMB & CO CONT REPAIRS 28- 2010- 000 -00 „ CKS 0354o4 L1/31/R5 41.84 AMERICAN 3HARECOM TELEPHONE 10- 2010 - 000 -00 * ^35484 E1/31/85 112.52 AMERICAN S!1ARECOM TELEPHONE 10- 4256 - 510 -51 I'- - - — - -. .15 4.3 6. * - — -- - -- - -- - - - - -- - -- _ .. - - - -- - - - - - •*• -CKS I`i 035 50- X1/31/85 20.70 ST PAUL BOOK GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 420 -42 135 5:8 G1/31/R5 84.00 ST PAUL BOOK GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 600 -60 "` ~ %9«5 c OF r"nzmA coccn k .rcn na~o*~ns sc 3 ^ � cxccx m«. DATE __^Moowr _ xcmoo� ----- _ITEM -DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT mq°_zmw° w p.o° w�McxsAwc ` _| 035 5um �l /31m5 ,*.ro sr PAUL nomn opp�oc uuPpczco 1o~4sv�-zaO-aa [ 035 5u y �m,/o� -_-_ 7.58 ---___-or pxoL oouu - ppICE_��Fp�z��_________�p~*s�a~svp~sv________ ^ ~ ! m5 5J8 c1,31/o5 4.00 nr pooL 900n nrpIcc SoppLIcu 10~4516-510~51 - 1135 5-in c1o1m5 5.C4 sr pxoL aunx nrpIcE ouppLzco 10-4516-510-51 `| _ouooa _�,��n�n�_.2 2 0.7 4---__---ur PAUL BOOK OFFICE IES 19-4516-510-51 035 5n8 u/n/o» 50.75 yr PAUL aoox nrpIcc suppLIsm 10~451*~600~60 `| ' oox,'r ^1/31185 77.95~ mr PAUL onnx cncnrT aU~ou,o~oVo~oU rmxn_�x cI /o1 /c5 _ 4.14 - -' ur p«oL-ao«x- --- - _-npp3c�-S �22���»�-45`a_@6o-a6__--- yss.ro ° _ ' _ _-__-____-' ' � 035526 o1m1m5 193*6.00 rnAcr OIL co sxnoLzmc in~auva~nnn~uo - 1135 526 51 /r,/n» - __1.8 96.70 - '- 7aAcf QIL cO'----�-_- c-o6!���6-_ o,rpz.)o ° - *°^_cxS__ - ~ nxom1 c�����x� 19.99 rnnnc7 Gcm auppLIco 10~450*~440-4* °°^~cxo .� � 035547 c1m1/ox 1020181 usznLc nu:' MILEAGE -�- 600-60------�---�--- '-- -- � 102.81 ^ ' ^ °°^-cxu / ~ � | _�y�rs� _-�������n' - - ' -- -- oa. ^�cnzc ~^`-^~~ � ' 1- 36.00 ~ � c3 5ru2 - o1 /31m5 ' _150 °3 U- prxo ---_-�__- �c�zmw�10-4202~421.*2-___' -oss/Ln_ J 1 / 31 /9 5-_ »v^50_-___--wpH-zmooyJnzE8--___-____cqU274~421~42 035 70 3 o1/31/85 np°sn ep* zNnwornxEs cuuTV— M�� __ ar*�4o�~�a -------''—' - --- ' � 119.7-0 , nsnrr� y���n,os za9.zo mzoucn7 nmoacn ocno comr ocpo�n����-- _-__ --������m~yd���d-------- — -- . � 329.19 ° . 0 3 5 70 5 01m1x85 znr.v0-------- GOPHER -OIL -COMPANY 8-2010~000-00 -------------- -- --/ � ~ 03 57uj 01/31/85 328.90 sopmcx OIL cmnpxmv LoenIcAm7o 28~2010-000-00 � mo°� __ - -- -'---'----------- ------------------'-'-- -� � . | ozxrJu 01131rn5 52.50 IMpmzmncny scm nopPLzcm 10~*504~510-51 !��------------- ___''__-�� � nus/jr 01 /n,/nx 60.00 mm nocp o)unoc ouco 27~4204~*60~66 60.00 ^ . 035 7"8 ! u,/31m5 15 *00 " nw p*xp ma��nu�uonn ouca �V~�an4~����ao � ` .,r---------' '`. ^-� 03 5 7n9 01/31/85 10000 mxnv uuzmLzxxm CLASS eEFuwo 23~3500~000~08 1485 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 02 -04 -85 PAGE 4 .CHECK N1. DATE AMOUNT _ ..._ VENDOR __- _ - - „_ _. -__ ITEM - DESCRIPTION__ -_ -_ ACCOUNT NO.,_LNV._p -P. O. k.- NESSAGE 035710 J1/31185 7.00 GAYE ROSS CLASS REFUND 23 -3500- 000 -00 G35711 01/31/85 15.00 ANN MCCRE- CLASS REFUND 23- 3500 - 000 -00 _ . 15.70 • 1 035712 ?1/31/95 15.00 SJSAN PEARSON CLASS REFUND 23 -3500- 000 -00 035713 U1 /31 185 15.10 DIANVE FARBER CLASS REFUND 23- 3500 - 000 -00 �- 15.00 f � 035714 1/31/95 45.50 0 C 4NNIS SEWER INC CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 646 -64 _ 45.50 f 035715 01/31/35 112.30 ADVENTURE VAN EQUIP RENTAL 10- 4226- 422 -42 - -- -- .. 112.30 • 03571,5 i 1/31/R5 425.25 XEROX PRINTING 10- 2010 - 000 -00 �. 425.25 • .3 5 717 01/31/85 36.0.1E PRO COMPUTING - SUBSCRIPTION 10- 4204- 420 -42 l.. 36.Of! • 03571 71/31/85 50.00 THE 4ENIN COUNTY MEMBERSHIP 10- 4204- 420 -42 �• 50.00 • 1 035719 .1/31/85 225.0^ COLOUR RE JUVENATOR CONT REPAIRS - 10- 2010 - 000 -00 \r 225.00 ^.3512,1 ]1/31/85 20.1C MN CIRRICULUM SERV BOOKS 10 -4502- 490 -49 �. 20.10 1 0357?' 71/31/85 438.50 OFDE HENSEL PROF SERV 10 -2235- 000 -00 438.50 • 035722 01/31/85 212.35 CAROLE KULAK SCHOOL 27- 4202 - 660 -66 212.35 • 035723 01/31/95 299.55 FLAHERTIYS HAPPY TIME - i INVENTORY - - -- - - - - - -- ... - 50-2010-000-00 035723 J1/31/85 201.00 FLAHERTIYS HAPPY TIME INVENTORY 50- 2010 - 000 -00 500.55 • _ -- 035724 11/31/95 760.10 FEED RITE CONTROLS REPAIR PARTS 30- 2010 - 000 -00 - - - - -- - - -- - - -- -- -. 760 .00. r, (135725 01/31/85 26.32 MARI3N WARD REFRESHMENTS 23 -2010- 000 -00 - - - 26.32 f r DS 5726 ;l1 /31/85 5.00 EDINA COUJNCIL OF DUES 23- 4204 - 610 -61 - - -- - arr -CKS 1 1 J9R5 l OF E!)INA CHECK STER 02 -04 -8: GE 5 CHECK. N-1. DATE _ AMOUNT.___ VENDOR_ -_ _ LTEN_UE_SCRIPTION- JiCCQUNT NO. _INV- _.q___P._0. p MESSAGE___ P35 193 -)1 /31 /95 _ _ _ 457.18 - _ _ EDINA ELECTRIC_ COMPANY - -- CONY REPAIRS 2710 - 400 -00 la ` 457.1R -28- - - -- - - - -- - ...... - - - -- CKS 26,902.67 26,996.6? FUVD 10 TOTAL GENERAL FUND -- - - - - -- — �, 77.05- FU40 20 TOTAL PARK 129.32 FUND.. -23 TOTAL _- ART _CENTER __ 553.22 FUND 27 TOTAL GOLF COURSE FUND 3.011.41 FUVD 28 TOTAL RECREATION CENTER FUND 1 _ -- _--__5,555.88 FUND 30_ TOTAL 4,367.10 FUND 40 TOTAL UTILITY FUND T 559.05 FUND 50 TOTAL LIQUOR DISPENSARY'FUND' Computer checks #.' -s- - -- - - - - - -- - -- - -- _- - -- 61643 thru 61684 -41;884 ?a. 41,000.70 TOTAL - -. FlPPi G,`'_ „lCfd7 'I vllY trl.'L.- - � I - t `r