Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-09-09_COUNCIL MEETINGAGENDA EDINA HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EDINA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 9, 1985 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL MINUTES of August 5, 1985 and Joint HRA and City Council Meeting of August 19, 1985 approved as submitted or corrected by motion of , seconded by I. RESOLUTION APPROVING EDINBOROUGH UTILITIES AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS ADJOURNMENT EDINA CITY COUNCIL EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION - John Danz, Don Lofthus, Jim Michalko and John Olson MINUTES of the Regular Meetings.of August 5 and 19, 1985, Special Meeting of August 12, 1985 and Joint Council /HRA Meeting of August 19, 1985-approved as submitted or corrected by motion of seconded.by I. PRESENTATION OF 1986 BUDGET II. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS. Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by City Manager or Engineer. Public comment heard. If Council wishes to proceed, action by Resolution. 3/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass if improvement has been petitioned for; 4/5 vote required if no petition. A. Wooddale Park Improvements (Cont'd from 9 /19/85) III. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REPORTS ON PLANNING MATTERS. Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by Planning Department. Public comment - heard. Zoning Ordinance:. First and Second Hearing requires four -fifth (4/5) favorable rollcall vote of all members of the Council to pass. Waiver of Second Reading: Four - fifths (4/5) favorable rollcall vote of all members of the Council required to pass. Lot Divisions, Plats, Appeals: Favorable rollcall vote of majority of quorum required to pass. Final Plan Approval of Property Zoned Planned District: Three - fifths (3/5) favorable rollcall vote of all members of the Council required to pass. A. Final Plat Approval 1. Foster Green Addition B. Lot Division 1. The Habitat, 6112 -14 Habitat Court 2. The Habitat, 6108 -10 Waterford Court C. Set Hearing Date (9/16/85) 1. Zoning Change - R -1 Single Dwelling District to R -2 Double Dwelling District and Preliminary Plat Approval - Folke R. Victorsen, 6101 France Avenue So. 2.. Preliminary Plat Approval - Parkwood Knolls 22nd Addition 3. Conditional Use Permit - City of.Edina - Braemar Clubhouse - 6364 Dewey Hill Road 4. Final Development.Plan — James W. Nelson - 3922 -30 W. 492 Street .1. James W. Nelson - 3922 -30 W. 492 Street 2. Mail Handling, Inc. -,7225 Washington Avenue So. IV. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS V. AWARD OF BIDS A. Sidewalk Replacement Improvement No. S -34 B. Traffic Control Signal System VI. RECOMMENDATIONS AND IEPORTS A. United Way Resolution B. Approval of Edinborough Utilities and Ordering Advertisement for Bids C. Update - Braemar Executive Course /Road Improvement D. Appointment to Community Development and Planning Commission (Un- expired Term to 2 -1 -87) E. Recommendation for Issuance of On -Sale Wine Licenses 1. Le Bistro Cafe 2. Dayton's Boundary Waters Restaurant F. Homart Development Update G. Bloomington Megmall Update H. Revision of 7/1/85 Minutes - Lot Division Resolution I. Special Concerns of Mayor and Council J. Post Agenda and Manager's Miscellaneous Items Agenda Edina City Council Page.Two VII. RESOLUTIONS. Favorable rollcall vote by majority of quorum to pass. A. Prohibiting Parking on Braemar Boulevard from Gleason Road to Valley View Road B. Supporting S. 1570 Regarding Federal Fair Labor Standards Act VIII. FINANCE A. Claims Paid. Motion of seconded by , for payment of the following claims dated 9/9/85: General Fund $761,709.86, Park Fund $2,489.75, Art Center $2,382.29, Swimming Pool Fund $8,229.20, Golf Course Fund $135,557.13, Recreation Center Fund $7,098.79, Gun Range Fund $646.44, Utility Fund $24,805.80, Liquor Dispensary Fund $3,460.40, Construction Fund $19,423.34, Total $965,803.00; and for confirmation of payment of the following claims dated 7/31/85: General Fund $270,138.34, Park Fund $18.34, Art Center $687.91, Swimming Pool Fund $4,926.00, Golf Course Fund $8,148.079 Recreation Center Fund $3,044.08, Gun Range Fund $186.23, Utility Fund $25,174.73, Liquor Dispensary Fund $316,270.31, Construction Fund $15,190.18, Total $643,784.28. IX. STRATEGIC PLANNING Monday Sept 9 Monday Sept 9 Monday Sept 16 Monday Sept 16 Tuesday Sept 17 Monday Sept 23 Monday Oct 7 SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS /EVENTS Interviews for CDPC Appointment Regular Council Meeting First 1986 Budget .Hearing Regular:_Council.Meeting (Special Assessments) Second'1986 Budget Hearing Third 1986 Budget Hearing Regular Council Meeting Monday Oct 21 Regular Council Meeting N 5:30 p.m. Council Room 7:00 p.m. Council R 5:00 p.m. Conference Rm 7:00 p.m. Council Room. 7:00 p.m. Conference Rm 7:00 p.m. Conference Rm 7:00 p.m. Council Room 7:00 p.m. Council Room MINUTES EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AUGUST 5, 1985 Answering rollcall were Commissioners Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner and Courtney. MINUTES of July 1, 1985 were approved as submitted by motion of Commissioner Turner, seconded by Commissioner Kelly. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. LAND USE PLANNING AND DESIGN AUTHORIZED FOR GRANDVIEW REDEVELOPMENT AREA. Mr. Hughes recalled that the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority esta- blished a tax increment financing district for the Grandview area about one year ago. The principal objectives of the district were the upgrading of various public streets and the provision of off - street parking facilities. It was anticipated that tax increments needed to assist with those projects would be generated by the redevelopments of the Biltmore Motel site and the property west of Summit Avenue that were proposed last year. These redevelop- ments did not o.ccur and new projects have been proposed for these properties which generate substantially less tax increments as compared with prior proposals. As a result, the public improvements which were contemplated have not proceeded. Mr. Hughes explained that during the past several months, several property owners in the district have expressed an interest in redeveloping their properties. Staff believes that a unique opportunity may now exist for pursuing a more comprehensive redevelopment of the Grandview area. To accomplish such a re- development, staff feels additional planning and design activities should be undertaken. BRW has been asked to offer a proposal to assist in these acti- vities. They have responded with an offer to provide services to assist in the redevelopment planning not to exceed $9,000.00. Staff would recommend ,authorization of such a contract with BRW. Commissioner Turner suggested that BRW be given a dealine by which their report must be completed. Com- missioner Kelly questioned -why bids were not taken for the work. Mr. Hughes explained that BRW has provided most of the planning and architectural con- sulting services for the City over the years and that they also did the initial traffic study for the Grandview area. In staff's view the traffic study will play a major role in the development of the district. Commissioner Richards commented that the contract should set a time deadline and that it should be specific as to the end product. He suggested that if there is an overrun on the estimated cost, that the private sector developers should be asked to pick up part of that cost. Mr. Hughes responded that the contract with BRW could specify that the product would be a land use and design type graphic, similar to what they prepared for the 50th and France District. Commissioner Turner then introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that it hereby authorizes and directs the Mayor and City Manager to enter into a contract with Bennett, Ringrose, Wolsfeld, Jarvis, Gardner, Inc. (BRW) for a land use and design graphic for the Grandview Redevelopment Area, not to exceed $9,000.00, and to be completed by October 15, 1985. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Commissioner Bredesen. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. HRA Minutes of August 5, 1985 Page Two HEARING DATE SET FOR AMENDMENT OF SOUTHEAST EDINA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN. As recommended by staff, Commissioner Bredesen's motion was seconded by Commissioner Richards setting August 19, 1985 as the hearing date for the Amendment of Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned by motion of Commissioner Kelly, seconded by Commissioner Turner., Motion carri4- / Executive Director I! EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EDINA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF JOINT MEETING AUGUST 19, 1985 Answering rollcall were Commissioners /Councilmembers Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner and Courtney. PUBLIC HEARING CONDUCTED ON AMENDMENT TO 1985 AMENDMENT TO SOUTHEAST EDINA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SALE OF LAND TO THE HRA. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved and ordered placed on file. Attorney Erickson explained that this public hearing is for the purpose of approving an Amendment to the 1985 Amendment to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan for the sale of land to the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority. The amendment is necessary to add three lots which were not included in the 1985 project area and to increase the bond issue from $11,000,000 to $12,000,000 for the Edinborough project. The additional action by the City would be to authorize the sale of that land, which is owned by the.City, to the HRA so it can be included in the project. The sale price listed in the resolution is the same sale price at which the balance of the land is being sold to the developers, less some interest factor. Mr. Erickson recommended adoption of the resolutions. No objections being heard, Commissioner Turner introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE 1985 AMENDMENT TO THE SOUTHEAST EDINA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Edina, Minnesota (the "HRA "), as follows: 1. The HRA and the Edina City Council have previously approved a redevelopment plan, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.421, subdivision 15, designated as the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan (the "Plan "), which also constitutes a redevelopment project, as defined in Minnesota Staututes, Section 445.421, subdivision 13, and a tax increment financing plan, pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.74. The Plan established a tax increment financing district, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, - Section 273.73, subdivision 9. The HRA and the Edina City Council have previously approved amendments to the.Plan, designated as the 1985 Amendment to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan (the "1985 Amendment "). It has been proposed that the HRA approve additional amendments to the Plan designated as the First Amendment to the 1985.Amendment to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan (the "First Amendment "). 2. The First Amendment is described in the document entitled "First Amendment to the 1985 Amendment to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan" which has been presented to this Board, and the First Amendment as so described is hereby approved, and the Executive Director of the HRA and the attorney for the HRA are hereby authorized and directed to proceed with the implementation of the 1985 Amendment as amended by the First Amendment. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Commissioner Bredesen. Rollcall: Ayes: Commissioners Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. ATTEST: Executive Director Chairman 1 ,_ H.R.A. /COUNCIL MINUTES August 19, 1985 Page Two Councilmember Kelly then introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE 1985 AMENDMENT TO THE SOUTHEAST EDINA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SALE OF LAND TO THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Recitals. This Council and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Edina, Minnesota (the "HRA") have previously approved a redevelopment plan and rede- velopment project, under Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.411, et. sue., and a tax increment financing plan, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73, subdivision 9, designated as the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan (the "Plan "). The Plan established a tax increment financing district, as defined in Minnesota .Statutes, Section 273.73, subdivision 9 (the "District "). This Council and the HRA have previously approved amendments to the Plan designated as the 1985 Amend- ment to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan (the "1985 Amendment "), which include, among other things, the establishment of an interest reduction program under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.445, subdivision 11. The HRA has approved additional amendments to the Plan designated as the First Amendment to the 1985 Amendment to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan (the "First Amendment ") and has requested that this Council approve the First Amendment. This Council held a public hearing on the First Amendment on August 19, 1985, after notice of the public hearing was published in The Edina Sun, the official newspaper of the City, on August 7, 1985, at which time all persons desiring to be heard on the subject were given an opportunity with respect thereto. 2. Approval. The First Amendment is hereby approved. 3. Findings Under the Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,,Section 462.521, it is hereby found that: (A) The land located within the 1985 Project Area, as defined in the First Amendment would not be made available for redevelopment without financial aid sought; (B) The redevelopment plans for the 1985 Project Area as set forth in the 1985 Amendment as amended by the First Amendment will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the redevelopment of the 1985 Project Area by private enterprise; and (C) The 1985 Amendment as amended by the First Amendment conforms to the general plan for the development of the City as a whole. 4. Tract 5 as described in the First Amendment is hereby authorized to be sold to the HRA for a price equal to $5.94 per square foot, and the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute and deliver a quit claim deed to said Tract 5, in exchange for the sale price, and to execute and deliver such other documents, and to take such other action, as may be necessary or desirable to consummate such sale. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilmember Turner. Rollcall: Ayes: Councilmembers Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor H.R.A. /COUNCIL MINUTES August 19, 1985 Page Three There being no further business on the agenda for the Joint HRA and City Council Meeting, Commissioner /Councilmember Kelly's motion to adjourn was seconded by Commissioner /Councilmember Turner and carried unanimously. Gordon L. Hughes Executive Director TO: Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Edina Mayor & City Council FROM: Francis Hoffman, City Engineery$�W VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager Gordon Hughes, Executive Director, HRA DATE: September 5, 1985 SUBJECT: Feasibility Report - Edinborough Utilities The following improvements have been investigated and it has been determined that they are feasibile and their construction would be in the best interest of the overall development of the City of Edina: FUNDING IMPROVEMENT ESTIMATED COST City Assessment Sanitary Sewer No. P -SS -371 $4,620.00 (off -site) City Assessment Watermain No. P -WM -356 $102,343.75 (off -site) City Assessment Storm Sewer No. P -ST.S. -177 $186,184.37 (off -site) CITY,ASSESSMENT SUB - TOTAL: $293,148.12 HRA Sanitary Sewer No. P -SS -372 $46,116.25 (on -site) HRA Watermain No. P -WM -357 $16,427.50 (on -site) HRA Storm Sewer No. P -ST.S. -178 $45,617.50 (on -site) HRA Utility Services - Park $9,225.00 HRA SUB - TOTAL: $117,386.25 The above projects are ready for HRA and Council approvals for commencemnt of full construction. The requested action from the City Council is to approve the assessment projects; authorize plans and specifications; and bids to be received for Improvment Projects No. SS -371, WM -356, and St.S. -177. The requested action from the HRA is to approve the HRA Funded projects; authorize plans and specifications; and bids to be received for Improvement projects No. SS -372, WM -357, ST. S. -178 and Utility Services for Park. FJH:Im - MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL AUGUST 5, 1985 Answering rollcall were Members Bredesen, Kelly, Richards; Turner and Mayor Courtney. SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICERS COMMENDED. Chief Craig Swanson introduced Rose Harmon, Erik Amundson and Brandon Deshler, Senior Community Service Officers, advising that they have been with the Police Department over two years. He noted that all three have completed their preparatory courses for entry into law enforce- ment and commended them for their conscientious and superior work in the Department. They were presented silver pens bearing the Edina Logo. The City Manager and the Council extended their thanks and appreciation to these employees. MINUTES of the Regular and Special Meetings of July 1, 1985 were approved as submitted by motion of Member Turner, seconded by.Member Kelly. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -262 (W. 44TH STREET FROM BROOKSIDE All TO T.H. 100) RECONFIRMED. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved and ordered placed on file. Engineer Fran Hoffman recalled that the Council at its meeting of May 21, 1984, approved Improvement No. BA -262 for construction of permanent street surfacing, concrete curb and gutter and sidewalk on W. 44th Street from Brookside Avenue to T.H. 100 and bridge replacement over Minnehaha Creek, subject to receipt of all approvals necessary from the Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the Department of Natural Resources and Corps of Engineers. All required approvals have been obtained and the project can proceed, subject to reconfirmation of the Council. Mr. Hoffman.than presented a review of the project. The proposed project consists of constructing a new bituminous surface with concrete curb and gutter the entire distance from the Soo Line Railroad to T.H. 100. Additionally, a concrete sidewalk adjacent to the curb would be con- structed on the north side of the roadway which would be maintained by the City. The street would be 28' wide from Brookside Avenue to T.H. 100 with parking restricted on both sides. These dimensions are minimum widths required for use of Municipal State Aid Funds. The major portion of the project would include re- placement of the current structure at the Minnehaha Creek. The new structure would have sidewalk on both sides of the street. The estimated cost of the project is $323,404.87 with an estimated $17,810.00 to be assessed. The balance of the funds will come from State Aid Funds. Mr. Hoffman advised that the estimated cost of$17,810.00 would be proposed to be assessed at $20.00 per assessable foot for single family residential units. If approved, construction of this improvement would be accomplished in 1985 or early 1986. Assessments would then be levied in 1986 with the initial installment due in 1987. This improvement is proposed to be assessed over a ten -year period, with interest not to exceed the amount allowed by law. The area proposed to be assessed for a portion of the cost includes Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Arden Park 3rd Addition; Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 4, Arden Park 3rd Addition; Lots 7, 8 and 17, Aud. Sub'd. No. 176; and Lots 10 and 11, Thielen's Brookside Add'n. James Welna, 5139 W. 44th Street, expressed his thanks and appreciation to the Council and to Mr. Hoffman for their extra efforts in.dealing.with the concerns of the residents of W. 44th Street regarding this project. No further comment being heard, Member Bredesen introduced the follow- ing resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION RECONFIRMING IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -262 BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota that this Council heretofore caused notice of hearing to be duly published and mailed to owners of each parcel within the area proposed to be assessed on the following proposed improvement: 1. CONSTRUCTION OF PERMANENT STREET SURFACING WITH CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER, SIDEWALK AND BRIDGE REPLACEMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -262 IN THE FOLLOWING: West 44th Street from Brookside Terrace to T.H. 100 and at the hearing held at the time and.place specified in said notice, the Council has duly considered the views of all persons interested, and being fully advised of the pertinent facts, does hereby determine to proceed with the construction of said improvement as described in the published notices of said hearing, including all proceedings which may be necessary in eminent domain for the acquisition of necessary easements and rights for construction and maintenance of such improve- ment; that said improvement is hereby designated and shall be referred to in all subsequent proceedings as PERMANENT STREET SURFACING WITH CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER, SIDEWALK AND BRIDGE REPLACEMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -262 and the area to be specially assessed for a portion of the cost of the proposed improvement shall include Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Arden Park 3rd Add'n.; Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 4, Arden Park 3rd Add'n.; Lots 7, 8 and 17, Aud. Sub'd. No. 176; and Lots 10 and 11, Thielen's Brookside Add'n. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner. 8/5/85 s Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT S -34 (COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT) AUTHORIZED. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved and ordered placed on file. Pursuant.. to due notice given, a public hearing was conducted and action taken as herein- after set forth: A. SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. 5 -34 IN THE FOLLOWING: Country Club District (Fairway and Brown Sections) Mr. Hoffman presented total estimated cost of construction for P -S -34, Sidewalk Replacement, Country Club District, at $115,338.88, proposed to be assessed against 596 assessable lots at an estimated cost of $190.00 per lot, plus $2,098.88 to Wooddale Park. He advised that the proposed sidewalk replacement project consists of replacing cracked, raised or sunken sidewalk panels similar to projects that were done in 1967 and 1973 in the Country Club District. The project assessment is proposed to be spread over a three year period. If approved, the project would be done this fall, with the assessment in 1986 and the first installment due in 1987. Mr. Hoffman noted that four letters regarding the project ,had been received as well as a number of telephone calls. Michael Lewis, 4601 Drexel Avenue, asked what is going to be done with the trees that are contin- ing to push up the sidewalk panels. Mr. Hoffman responded that at previous hearings on sidewalk replacement the Council had felt that it was less costly to replace panels versus damaging the tree structure and replacing trees. The sidewalk panels would be laid to fit the trees. Peter Pappas, 4614 Casco Avenue, asked if cracked panels would be replaced. Mr. Hoffman replied that if the cracks are small, the panels flat and it appears that there will be no problem in the next few years, those panels will not be replaced. Helen Rockwell, 4203 Country Club Road, asked what should be done if her property was not listed for sidewalk replacement and she felt there was a sidewalk problem. Mr. Hoffman explained that there are some marginal panels and that when staff is working on her street she should identify the questionable panels and a decision would be made at that time. Joe Jennings, Country Club, asked who will do the work and how it will proceed. Mr. Hoffman responded that bids would be taken from concrete contractors and the work would be done in sections. Robert DeBrey, 4502 Browndale Avenue, advised that there has been some .damage to the new curbs by snowplows and asked if those will be replaced. Mr. Hoffman clarified that damaged curbs normally are replaced by the Public Works Department as part of their ongoing maintenance.and would not be a part of this project. Such damage should be reported to the Public Works Department. No further comments or objections being heard, Member Bredesen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ORDERING SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. S -34 BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that this Council heretofore caused notice of hearing to be duly mailed to .owners of each parcel within the area proposed to be assessed on the following proposed improvement: 1. CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. 5 -34 IN THE FOLLOWING: Country Club District, Fairway and Brown Sections and at the hearing held at the time and place specified in said notice, the Council has duly considered the views of all persons interested, and being fully advised of the pertinent facts, does hereby determine to proceed with the con- struction of said improvement as described in the published notice of said hearing, including all proceedings which may be necessary in eminent domain for the acquisition of necessary easements and rights for construction and maintenance of such improvement; that said improvement is hereby designated and shall be referred to in all subsequent proceeings as SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. 5 -24 and the area to be specially assessed therefor shall include the County Club District, Fairway and Brown Sections. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. WOODDALE PARK.IMPROVEMENT HEARING CONTINUED TO 8/19/85; REFERRED TO PARK BOARD. Mr. Rosland presented the proposed improvements for Wooddale Park at the Wooddale School site. He noted that Robert Kojetin, Director of Parks & Recreation has met twice with the Wooddale neighborhood committee to review and comment on the design and layout of the park. A graphic was presented illustrating a softball diamond, football /soccer field, tot lot, hard surface area, pathways and the proposed parking lot. Mr. Rosland advised that the proposed park plan generally met with the committee's approval with the exception of the parking lot. As pro- posed, 42 parking spaces will be constructed on approximately one -half of the land on which the school building is sited. Presently, the hard surface area to the west of the building can accommodate 88 parking spaces, 58 of which are north of the fence and 30 of which are south of the fence. Mr. Rosland pointed out that Utley Park to the South presently has 39 parking spaces. It is proposed.to also 8/5/85 redesign the parking space in Utley Park and to construct a total of 52 spaces, for an additional 13 parking spaces. It was noted that the number of parking spaces in the proposed plan for Wooddale Park would be less then is there now. Normally, 25 parking spaces are provided for a neighborhood park. Mr. Rosland explained that staff has attempted to work out a combined parking plan for the two parks that would ease the parking problem for St. Stephens Episcopal Church and would provide parking for the people who will use the parks. If approved, the proposed parking plan would be presented to the church vestry whereby St. Stephens Church would be assessed for the total cost of construction of the parking lots estimated at $100,000.00, of which $80,000.00 would be for actual construction and $20,000.00 would be for extensive landscaping at Wooddale Park. Both parking lots would be lighted using the same type of lights as are in the Country Club area. Mr. Rosland pointed out that the,.net result for the church would.be retention of the parking that is.available to them now as they would be losing approximately 17 parking spaces along the south side of West-50th Street west of Wooddale Avenue where there would be no parking after 50th Street is reconstructed. If the proposed park plan is approved by the Council, the plan will be presented to St. Stephens Church next week and if approved by them the final design will be prepared, bid and bid awarded with construction of the park- ing lots this fall. In 1986 further improvements are proposed to be constructed in Wooddale Park according to funds available. Member Kelly commented that she would need time to study the proposed park plan before making a decision and asked how the hard surface area was decided as opposed to some other layout and how it would be used. Mr. Kojetin explained that the hard surface is a wide open play area and that the park is not proposed to be a scheduled facility except possibly for T -ball. Member Turner asked if the Wooddale neighborhood committee had looked at Utley Park in terms of the parking and plan for Wooddale Park. Mr. Rosland recalled that the Council's direction was to activate a committee to review and comment on the Wooddale School site. The committee generally agreed on the Wooddale Park plan but felt that the parking area should be less. Mayor Courtney.then called for.public comment. Jane Fuegner, 5225 Kellogg Avenue, stated that she was on the Wooddale neighborhood committee and that the majority of the members felt that Utley Park should be left as is and that any development of parking space should be on the Wooddale Park site... She eommented that Utley Park was a small and idyllic area by the creek and should not be changed; that the whole idea of putting Wooddale and Utley parks together was to make it available .for neighborhood use. Michael Lewis, 4601 Drexel Avenue, asked how the proposed parking lots would be maintained. In response, Mr. Rosland stated that he had advised the church that the parking lots would be plowed after the city streets were completely plowed. Janie Paulus, 4617 Moorland Avenue, said she had worked on the Wooddale neighborhood committee and felt_that.the main issue should be to provide a place for the neighborhood children to play, that she was concerned that the openness of the park as pro- posed would make it unsafe for small children, and that not enough area is designed for.smaller children to play in which would be separated from the hard surface play area for older children. Wendy Powell, 4612 Moorland Avenue, pre- sented a petition with 175 signatures requesting that Wooddale Park include a facility for ice skating. Peter Pappas, 4614 Casco Avenue, said he felt that parking should be enlarged on West 50th Street, and that he was opposed to the parking lot entrance being located.on Wooddale Avenue, and that he questioned the legal ramifications of St. Stephens Church paying for construction of the parking lots. Patricia Carlson, 4229 Country Club Road, said she too was opposed to the parking lot entrance being on Wooddale Avenue and that it should be on W. 50th Street. Michael Lewis, 4601 Drexel Avenue, suggested the possi- bility that the church parishoners use the city ramp at 50th and France and run shuttle buses to the church. Mary Kluesner, 4409 Country Club Road, asked if the church had ever considered acquiring the small, empty space beside Edina Court at.50th and Wooddale for parking purposes. She added that this was the first she had heard about lighting in Wooddale Park. Joan Cornwell, 4905 Browndale Avenue, said she was concerned that Wooddale Park is being planned around the church's parking needs, that it should be planned for the neighborhood's use as a park and that she was strongly opposed to the proposed parking plan for Utley Park. Marilyn Curtis, 4400 W. 50th Street, asked if the W. 50th Street improvement plan still included a parking bay along the church property and pointed out that the proposed turn lanes would shorten the avail- able parking on the street. Dave Duhaime, 4401 Country Club Road, reiterated that at the committee meeting several weeks ago there was significant opposition by residents in the immediate area for use of the park to benefit the church and that they would like to see as small an amount of paving as possible in Wood - dale Park. He also suggested that the church be approached as to participating to a lesser extent in funding only 25 parking spaces on the Wooddale Park site. Charles Paulus, 4617 Moorland Avenue, said he would like to see berms constructed around the parking lot with plantings of coniferous trees to hide the vehicles. Corky Webber, 4303 Country Club Road, said he was opposed to construction of 42 8/5/85 spaces and thought it should be no more than 24 spaces; also, that the park entrance should be off W. 50th Street. Beverly Casserly, 4611 Bruce Avenue, recalled that about seven years ago there was a proposal by St. Stephens Church to expand the parking lot in Utley Park by the tennis courts and at that time the residents in the Wooddale area were very opposed about the proposal to take green space and pave it. She added that the committee was very concerned about the entrance to the park on Wooddale, that it was not safe and would not work; also, that 42 parking spaces on the Wooddale site and 52 spaces in Utley Park was too many. Helen Rockwell, 4203 Country Club, asked if another mailing would be made to the Wooddale neighborhood if the Wooddale Park plan is continued to the next Council meeting, and if so, that a diagram of the proposed park be included so that the neighbors would be informed. Mr. Kojetin informed the Council that he has received a number of phone calls regarding the proposed park. There was one request that a tennis court be included and another that some type of wading pool be considered. Member Kelly commented that she would like to continue this matter and and would like to have the Park Board review the pro- posed plan at their next meeting taking into consideration the concerns of the neighborhood residents as expressed. Member Kelly then made a motion to continue the public hearing on the proposed Wooddale Park to August 19, 1985, to refer the park plan to the Park Board for review at their August 13, 1985 meeting and to bring the Board's recommendations back to the Council for consideration at their August 19 meeting. Motion was seconded by Member Richards, who commented that the parks are the community's assets and that he felt it important to have input from everybody, but that he wanted to hear the Park Board's opinion as an advisory body before the Council took action. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. In response to a question as to whether the Park Board would be considering the proposed parking, Member Bredesen commented that the parking is a City policy question and that the Park Board should address the uses and the configuration of the facility, given the very limited amount of park land. It should also consider whether the proposed plan will make Wooddale Parka focal.point for the neighborhood again as was the Wooddale School. Member Turner said that the Park Board should look at both park areas concept -wise, and although there are no funds available to develop Utley Park at this time, the Board should also consider an ultimate use for Utley Park in the future and what impact the pro- posed 52 parking spaces would have if any. Mr. Rosland clarified for the public that the proposed Wooddale Park plan would be reviewed by the Park Board on August 13, 1985 at 7:30 p.m. at City Hall and then would be again discussed by. the Council on August 19, 1985,.that no letters would be sent to neighborhood residents and suggested that those in attendance should spread the word. LOT DIVISION APPROVED FOR LOT 5, BLOCK 1, GLEASON COURT. Planner Craig Larsen presented the request for division of Lot 5, Block 1, Gleason Court, located at 6500 -02 Gleason Court. The proponent is requesting a party wall lot division of an existing double bungalow. The proposed division meets Zoning Ordinance requirements for the division of R -2 properties and staff would recommend approval. No objections being heard, Member.Turner introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RF.SnT.TTTT0N WHEREAS, the following described property is at present a single tract of land: Lot 5, Block 1, Gleason Court, and WHEREAS, the owners have requested the subdivision of said tract into separate parcels (herein called "Parcels ") described as follows: Parcel A: That part of Lot 5, Block 1, Gleason Court, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying easterly of the following described line and its northerly and southerly extentions to wit: Commencing at the northwest corner of said Lot 5, thence on an assumed bearing of North 88 degrees 06 minutes 13 seconds East along the north line of said Lot 5 a distance of 70.36 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; then South O1_.degree 58..minutes.14 seconds East a distance of 111.07 feet to the southerly line of said Lot 5 and there terminating, and Parcel B: That part of Lot 5, Block 1, Gleason Court, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying westerly of the following described line and its northerly and southerly extensions to wit: Commencing at the northwest corner of said Lot 5; thence on an assumed bearing of North 88 degrees 06 minutes 13 seconds East along the north line of said Lot 5 a distance of 70.36 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; then South 01 degree 58 minutes 14 seconds East a distance of 111.07 feet to the southerly line of said Lot 5 and .there terminating, WHEREAS, it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and said 8/5/85 Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purposes of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Ordinance Nos. 801 and 825; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina that the conveyance and ownership of said Parcels as separate tracts of land is hereby approved and the requirements and provisions of Ordinance No. 801 and Ordinance No. 825 are hereby waived to allow said division and conveyance thereof as separate tracts of land but are not waived for any other purpose or as to any other provision thereof, and subject, however, to the provision that no further subdivision be made of said Parcels unless made in compliance with the pertinent ordinances of the City of Edina or with the prior approval of this Council as may be provided for by those ordinances. HEARING DATE SET FOR VARIOUS PLANNING MATTERS. As recommended by staff, Member Turner's motion was seconded by Member Bredesen setting August 19, 1985 as hearing date for the following Planning matters: 1) Zoning Change - PRD -4 Planned Residence District to PSR -4 Planned Seniors Residence - Generally located west of Vernon Avenue and north of Gleason Ct. 2) Preliminary Plat Approval - Indian Hills 3rd Addition - Gustafson and Associates - Generally located south of Crosstown Highway and west of Gleason Road 3) Final Development Plan - Richard Page - Planned Commercial District, PCD -4 - Generally located east of Highway 100 and north of West 78th Street 4) Final Development Plan - Hoyt Construction - Planned Industrial District - Generally located south of West 78th Street and east of Cahill Road 5) Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Ten Year Capital Improvement Program Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. PORTION OF RYAN AVENUE RIGHT OF WAY, UTILITY AND-DRAINAGE EASEMENT VACATION GRANTED. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved and ordered placed on file. Mr. Hoffman advised that the request is to vacate a portion of the Ryan Avenue right of way adjoining-Lot 1, Block 1, Normandale Carr Replat and the.drainage and..utility easement thereon-to allow construction of a dwelling unit on the subject property. The plans have been submitted to the Board of Appeals and Adjustments and a variance has been approved. The proposed vacation is acceptable to the utility companies. Staff would recommend that only the drainage and utility easement,be vacated because the proposed street vacation lies within the 10 -foot utility easement of the Ryan Avenue cul -de -sac. No objections being heard, Member Bredesen introduced the following resolution and moved adoption: RESOLUTION VACATING DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council, adopted the first day of July, 1985, fixed a date for a public hearing on a proposed vacation of easements for street and drainage-and utility easement purposes; and WHEREAS, two weeks' published and posted notice of said hearing was given and the hearing was held on the 5th.day of August, 1985, at which time all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon; and WHEREAS, the Council has considered the extent to which the vacation affects existing easements within the area of the vacation and the extent to which the vacation affects the authority of any person, corporation, or municipality owning or controlling electric or telephone poles and lines, gas and sewer lines, or water pipes, mains, and hydrants on or under the area of the proposed vacation, to continue maintaining the same, or to enter upon such easement area or portion thereof vacated to maintain, repair, replace, remove, or otherwise attend thereto; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota, that the following described drainage and utility easement be and is vacated effective as of August 20, 1985: That part of the 10 foot drainage and utility easement comprising part of Lot 1, Block 1, NORMANDALE CARR REPLAT according to the recorded plat thereof lying Southeasterly.of a curved line concave to the Northwest with a radius of 55.00 feet the center of which curve is the intersection of the Westerly extension of the South line of Lot 2, Block 18, "Normandale" and the centerline of Ryan Avenue according to the recorded plat of "Normandale" all in Hennepin County, Minnesota. and that the City Clerk is authorized and directed to cause a notice of completion of proceedings to be prepared, entered in the transfer record of the County Auditor, and filed with the Register of Deeds, in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.851. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. 8/5/85 SKATEBOARD RAMP AT 60TH AND FRANCE AVENUE DISCUSSED. Betty Parsons, 5912 Grimes Avenue, stated that she and her neighbors object to the construction of a skate- board ramp on the rental property at 6000 France Avenue. Mayor Courtney stated that he had accompanied the Building Official to the address and that it has been red tagged as a non - conforming structure. Following some discussion, Mr. Rosland advised that staff will monitor the property to see that it is taken down. No formal action was taken. AWARD OF BID FOR ENGINE ANALYZER CONTINUED.TO. MEETING OF AUGUST 19, 1985. As recom- mended by Mr. Rosland, Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by Member Turner to continue the award of bid for an engine analyzer to the Council meeting of August 19, 1985. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. REPORT GIVEN BY EDINA RECYCLING COMMISSION ON SOLID WASTE. Ardythe Buerrose Chairman of the Edina Recycling Commission, stated that the Commission has been involved in the study of recycling and management of solid waste since initiating the drop -off collection center in 1970. The Commission has been represented on various committees and associations and at present are represented on Metro Council's Solid Waste Public Education Steering Committee, and have also been meeting through Metro Council's Solid Waste Abatement Assistance Team with the directors of other city sponsored recycling programs. Household pickup of recyclable materials has been discussed with several haulers servicing Edina. Mrs. Buerrose pointed out that the Xinnesota.Legislature has mandated that by 1990 no unprocessed refuse can be deposited in any landfill in Minnesota. Further, the Metropolitan Council is discussing mandatory recycling after 1988. Therefore, the Commission is recommending that the City of Edina establish and control household pickup of recyclable materials in the City, using City personnel and equipment and to implement this program as soon as practical. She then briefly reviewed the Commission's written report of the details of the recommendation together with options that might be considered. Revenues for the present_drop- off center for 1986 are estimated at $16,837.20 with an estimated yearly rebate of $4.00 per ton from the Metro Council estimated at $6,000.00. Present budgeted cost to the City is $16,150.00. The Commission estimated that a total partici- pation of 58% of the City's households can be expected if household pickup is established. Issues raised by the Council members were cost of the program to the City, the possibility of locating a second drop -off center in the southern part of the City, containers, and grants that may be available to assist the program. Virginia Bodine, Nancy Grimsby, DeLores Paul and Bob Reid, all members of the Commission, and Janet Chandler, associate member, voiced their support of-the recommendation. Member Turner advised that the AMM Board recently voted to form a task force, along with the Metro Council people and other resources in the area, to help cities implement separation of recyclables in anticipation of the 1990 mandatory recycling. She commented that the report gave some good information but that specific costs were missing and suggested the Council direct the Edina Recyling Commission and staff to develop and bring back a budget so that the Council would know costs involved in a. household pick -up. program. Member Bredesen suggested that the budget should show cost of curb- side pick -up and also additional cost to pick up from refuse location per present ordinance. Member Turner then made a motion that the Commission and staff be directed to develop a proposed budget of costs to implement a household pick -up program of recyclables showing costs for curbside pick -up and regular pick -up and bring it back to the Council. Motion was seconded by Member Kelly. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. BOARD /COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS DISCUSSED; PROCEDURE TO BE DEVELOPED. Mayor Courtney recalled that vacancies exist on the Community Development and Planning Commission and the Board of Appeals. Member.Turner commented that there has been a resignation on the South Hennepin Human Services Council also. After some discussion as how to evaluate and select individuals who have indicated they are willing to serve, Member Turner said she would be willing to draft a procedure that the Council could follow in making appointments and have it ready for the next Council meeting. No formal action was taken. RISK REDUCTION PROGRAM REVIEWED. Mr. Rosland advised that, as requested by Member Bredesen, a report has been prepared on the City's risk reduction program with documentation regarding policies and practices. He noted that the City has always had some form of risk reduction program and that the major goals have remained the same: 1) identify and evaluate hazards or risks, 2) safety and loss control, 3) claims control, and 4) maintain a sound insurance program. The City is _currently operating under the philosophy and belief that reduction of risks should result directly in reduction of our insurance costs and also result in a more productive work force. The present policy was developed with 8/5%85 the input of department heads from Police, Fire, Public Works, Park and Recrea- tion and Administration, as the most labor intensive departments. An outgrowth of the development of the risk reduction policy has been the formation of a committee that meets on an as- needed .basis to review losses, discuss various programs and issues. The committee's goals for 1984/85 were to: 1) develop an "Employee Right to Know" program whose elements included a survey to identify hazardous material as outlined by State regulations and develop a training program, 2) make available to all City vehicle operators the Minnesota Safety Council's defensive driving course, 3) make CPR training available, 4) introduce a back injury reduction program, and 5) introduce a hearing conservation program. Mr. Rosland noted that the insurance company provides the City with numerous services including regular visits of a technical specialist in industrial hygiene and written material to use in program development. Insurance agents have been very helpful in maintaining a solid insurance program, they continue to serve as excellent resource persons and the information received from them many times is factored into decisions made assessing risk potential. Member Bredesen commented that he was pleased to see that the City has an active risk reduction program in place. He suggested that an individual should be designated as community safety officer who would be responsible with working with each department head in seeing that safety programs are implemented and evaluated. Secondly, he suggested that perhaps safety performance standards should be taken into consideration when looking at department head compensation. Thirdly, he said he would like to involve all City employees to identify anything unsafe in their work space and have it addressed. Mr. Rosland responded that each employee participating in risk reduction programs is interviewed for comments. Member Kelly asked that the Council members be provided with brief minutes of the safety committee. No formal action was taken. REPORT GIVEN ON AIRCRAFT NOISE MEETING. Member Turner asked for a report on the July 25, 1985 meeting regarding aircraft noise held at Richfield City Hall. Mr. Rosland advised that Mr. Velde, Health Officer, had attended and that repre- sentatives of the Metropolitan Airport Commission (MAC), an employee of MPCA, State and local officials as well as affected citizens were at the meeting. MAC stated that the volume of air traffic has increased possibly due to deregula- tion of the air line industry; that the airport is utilizing parallel runways to handle the traffic and most aircraft take off to the northwest; that during warm summer months jet engines are less efficient taking longer for aircraft to gain altitude and that MAC recognizes the severity of the noise problem in certain areas. MAC has set a goal that within five years.43% of the aircraft using the airport will be the quieter third generation aircraft. The audience was advised that a task force is being formed by representatives from the state legislature, Minneapolis, Richfield, Bloomington, Burnsville and the Metropolitan Council to address the problem and identify possible solutions. The citizens who spoke at the meeting had a number of suggestions for reducing the noise level. It was concluded that the prospect for a quick solution does not.look good. A sliding landing fee, adjusted for the noise level of the aircraft, appears to be the most feasible solution. Member Turner asked that staff monitor the actions of the task force and pass on that information to the Council. No formal action taken. PROSECUTING COSTS DISCUSSED. Mr. Rosland advised that, as a follow -up to the Council's discussion on prosecution fees at the last meeting, he had written Senator Donald Storm and Representatives Mary Forsythe and Sidney Pauly regarding the additional costs imposed on the cities as a result of strict enforcement of DWIs. A response has been received from Mrs. Forsythe acknowledging the problem and that she would keep attuned to see what could be done. She suggested that we write a letter to her husband, Judge Forsythe who could possibly convey this concern to the Hennepin County Municipal Court judges. Mr. Rosland said he would attend a meeting on August 16 with Hennepin County regarding using fees generated by the Sheriff's office for stronger enforcement and would bring up the issue of cost of enforcement by the cities. No formal action was taken. BRAEMAR CLUBHOUSE REMODELING DISCUSSED. Mr. Rosland advised final working plans are being drafted for the Braemar Clubhouse addition and remodeling project and that it is felt -that use of a construction manager would be best for the project. He explained that a construction manager would work closely with the contractor in preparing bids and would act as the superintendent on the job. Three con- struction companies have been interviewed and low quote for a construction manager is $35,000. He explained that would not be in addition to the cost of the project and that selection would be made by interviewing candidates, similar to architectural services. After some discussion it was informally agreed to continue a decision until the next Council meeting on August 19, 1985. (Member Richards left the meeting at this point on the agenda.) REQUEST TO KEEP THREE DOGS GRANTED. Mr. Rosland presented the request of Mr. and Mrs. Matheos Balafas, 6121 York Avenue South, to waive the.ordinance 8/5/85 requirement and permit them to keep three dogs until such time that they are left with only two dogs. Their letter explained that one of the dogs is old and quite ill. The Animal Control Officer has upon complaint inspected the property and has found that the yard is cleaned daily, the back yard is fenced and the dogs are well behaved and would recommend that the requirement be waived as requested. Motion of Member Turner to waive the ordinance requirement and permit Mr. and Mrs. Balafas to keep the three dogs until such time as they are left with only two dogs was seconded by Member Kelly. Ayes: Kelly, Turner, Courtney Nays: Bredesen Motion carried. REQUEST TO PURCHASE PARK LAND PARCEL REFERRED TO PARK BOARD. Mr. Rosland presented the request of Gunnar H. Danielson, 4720 West 66th Street, who by letter has asked to purchase a'parcel of City park land which abuts his property for $28,000 with the provision that'he is allowed to then subdivide his property to provide two new building lots. Mr. Hughes presented a graphic of the subject property and explained that it was acquired at the same time that Lake Cornelia Park was acquired. Instead of running West Shore Drive straight through to W. 66th Street, due to grade problems the street was diverted to easterly and therefore this parcel became separated from the rest of the park. If the Council wishes to consider the request, staff would suggest the matter be referred to the Park Board, that a public notice be mailed to the same property owners that would receive notice of a subdivision of this type, that the Park Board then conduct a hearing to determine whether it would recommend that the property be sold. The matter then would be passed on in public hearing to the Council and if Council agrees that the property be sold it is suggested a purchase agreement be entered into with Mr. Danielson and he would then be responsible for pursuing the subdivision of the property through normal channels. Mr. Hughes advised that the Assessing Department did an analysis of the subject parcel and the value was estimated at $28,000 based on its size and what could be done with it and that was backed into a sales price of the lot that would be created of about $62,000. Mr. Daniel- son has found that price for the raw land acceptable and he would be responsible for the platting as well as the installation of all utilities to serve the two lots. Member Turner stated it should be made clear to Mr. Danielson that there: are two separate issues; the sale of park property if approved does not approve the subdivision as designed, that is another process. Member Bredesen then made a motion to refer the matter to the Park Board for their recommendation and to then bring it back to the Council for action. Motion was seconded by Member Kelly. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 434 -A9 (DEFINING SPECIAL PURPOSE POOLS) ADOPTED; SECOND READING WAIVED. Mr. Rosland explained that presently the definition of a special purpose pool includes all small backyard wading pools. By including these pools in the definition, the City also would require fencing around the wading pool. By adding a depth requirement to the definition, the small children's wading pools can be excluded from the definition and the fencing requirement and staff would recommend that the ordinance be amended. No objection being heard, Member Turner introduced Ordinance No. 434 -A9 and moved its adoption, waiving Second Reading, as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 434 -A9 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 434 TO DEFINE SPECIAL PURPOSE POOLS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 1 of Ordinance No. 434 is hereby amended by changing the definition of Special Purpose Pools to read as follows: "Special` Purpose Pool" is any basin for holding water, designed for human use, 100 square feet or less in water surface area with a water depth greater than 24 inches at any point. This definition includes, but is not limited to, treatment pools, therapeutic pools, whirlpools, spa pools, hot tubs and wading pools. Sec. 2. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its passage and publication. Motion.for adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Member Kelly. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Turner, Courtney Ordinance adopted. ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor 8/5/85 LIQUOR FUND REPORT as of June 30, 1985 was presented, reviewed and ordered placed on file by motion of Member Turner, seconded by Member Kelly. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. CLAIMS PAID. Motion of Member Kelly was seconded by Member Turner for payment of the following claims dated 8/5/85: General Fund $208,712.48, Art Center $3,112.93, Swimming Pool Fund $4,449.40, Golf Course Fund $14,570.45, Recreation Center Fund $457.99, Gun Range Fund $183.75, Utility Fund $18,506.68, Liquor Dispensary Fund $4,669.95, Construction Fund $390,828.02, IMP Bond Redemption #2 $135.00, Total $645,626.65; and for confirmation of payment of the following claims dated 6/30/85: General Fund $181,960.04, Art Center $150.13, Swimming Pool Fund $711.51, Golf Course Fund $14,564.55, Recreation Center Fund $1,085.31, Gun Range Fund $37.94, Utility Fund $1,589.53, Liquor Dispensary Fund $341,539.35, Total $541,638.36. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. There being no further business on the agenda, Mayor Courtney declared the meeting adjourned at 10:20 p.m. City Clerk MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL AUGUST 12, 1985 7:00 P.M. Answering rollcall were Members Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner and Mayor Courtney. STRATEGIC PLAN - KEY ISSUES AND SHORT TERM OBJECTIVES FOR 1986 DISCUSSED. Mayor Courtney stated that Member Turner would act as chair for the Strategic Plan workshop portion of the meeting. Member Turner then stated the purpose of the workshop and that a team approach method would be used. She reviewed the short term objectives for 1985 and the Mission Statement which had been developed during 1984. The Council Members then identified current trends observed in the community and elsewhere that affect the City of Edina. These trends were catagorized as external and internal, and both negative and positive trends were noted. The next step was to draft a list of key issues which were as follows: 1) Need to strengthen management capability. 2) Continue and strengthen long range planning /budgeting process. 3) Develop involvement by broader range of people in community. 4) Defining role of Council. 5) Defining extent of City government support of development /housing. 6) Should we attempt to direct /redirect what community wants to be. 7) Need to respond to impact of other communities' actions. 8) What are the services and level of service we should provide - how to finance and definition of service level. The Council Members agreed to continue the discussion at the September 9, 1985 regular meeting. No formal action was taken. BID AWARDED FOR IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -262 (BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND BITUMINOUS STREET SURFACING FOR W. 44TH STREET. Mr. Rosland presented tabluation of bids for Improve- ment No. BA -262, Bridge Replacement and Bituminous Street Surfacing with Concrete Curb & Gutter, W. 44th Street from Soo Line R.R. Bridge to 724' East, showing C. S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. at $281,677.88; D. H. Blattner & Sons, Inc. at $287,748.75; Richard Knutson, Inc. at $288,179.30; Progressive Contractors, Inc. at $340,184.85; and Cy Con, Inc. at $395,795.00. Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by Member Kelly for award of bid for Improvement No. BA -262 to recommended low bidder, C. S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. at $281,677.88. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. Mayor Courtney declared the meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. City Clerk MINUTES OF JOINT MEETING EDINA CITY COUNCIL EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AUGUST 19, 1985 Answering rollcall were Councilmembers /Commissioners Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner and Courtney. PUBLIC HEARING CONDUCTED ON AMENDMENT TO 1985 AMENDMENT TO SOUTHEAST EDINA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SALE OF LAND TO THE HRA. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved and ordered placed on file. Attorney Erickson explained.that this public hearing is for the purpose of approving an Amendment to the 1985 Amendment to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan for the sale of land to the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority. The amendment is necessary to add three lots which were not included in the 1985 project area and to increase the bond issue from $11,000,000 to $12,000,000 for the Edinborough project. The additional action by the City would be to authorize the sale of that land, which is owned by the City, to the HRA so it can be included in the project. The sale price listed in the resolution is the same sale price at which the balance of the land is being sold to the developers, less some interest. factor. Mr. Erickson recommended adoption of the resolutions. No objections being heard, Commissioner Turner introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE 1985 AMENDMENT TO THE SOUTHEAST EDINA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Edina, Minnesota (the "HRA "), as follows: 1. The HRA and the Edina City Council have previously approved a redevelopment plan, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.421, subdivision 15, designated as the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan (the "Plan "), which also constitutes a redevelopment project, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 445.421, subdivision 13, and a tax increment financing plan, pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.74. The Plan established a tax increment financing district, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73, subdivision 9. The HRA and the Edina City Council have previously approved amendments to the Plan, designated as the 1985 Amendment to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan (the "1985 Amendment "). It has been proposed that the HRA approve additional amendments to the Plan designated as the First Amendment to the 1985 Amendment to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan (the "First Amendment"). 2. The First Amendment is described in the document entitled "First Amendment to the 1985 Amendment to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan" which has been presented to this Board, and the First Amendment as so described is hereby approved, and the Executive Director of the HRA and the attorney for the HRA are hereby authorized and directed to proceed with the implementation of the 1985 Amendment as amended by the First Amendment. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Commissioner Bredesen. Rollcall: Ayes: Commissioners Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. ATTEST: Chairman Executive Director Councilmember Kelly then introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE 1985 AMENDMENT TO THE SOUTHEAST EDINA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SALE OF LAND TO THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Recitals. This Council and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Edina, Minnesota (the "HRA ") have previously approved a redevelopment plan and rede- velopment project, under Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.411, et. sue., and a tax increment financing plan, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73, subdivision 9, designated as the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan (the "Plan). The Plan established a tax increment financing district, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73, subdivision 9 (the "District "). This Council and the HRA have previously approved amendments to the Plan designated as the 1985 Amend - ment to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan (the "1985 Amendment "), which include, among other things, the establishment of an interest reduction program under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.445, subdivision 11. The HRA has approved additional amendments to the Plan designated as the First 8/19/85 Amendment to the 1985 Amendment to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan (the "First Amendment ") and has requested that this Council approve the First Amendment. This Council held a public hearing on the First Amendment on August 19, 1985, after notice of the public hearing was published in The Edina Sun, the official newspaper of the City, on August 7, 1985, at which time all persons desiring to be heard on the subject were given an opportunity with respect thereto. 2. Approval. The First Amendment is hereby approved. 3. Findings Under the Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.521, it is hereby found that: (A) The land located within the 1985 Project Area, as defined in the First Amendment would not be made available for redevelopment without financial aid sought; (B) The redevelopment plans for the 1985 Project Area as set forth in the 1985 Amendment as amended by the -First Amendment will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the.sound needs of.the City as whole, for the redevelopment of the 1985 Project Area by private enterprise; and (C) The 1985 Amendment as amended by the First Amendment conforms to the general plan for the development of the City as a whole. 4. Tract 5 as described in the First Amendment is hereby authorized to be sold to the HRA for a price equal to $5.94 per square foot, and the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute and deliver a quit claim deed to said Tract 5, in exchange for the sale price, and to execute and deliver such other documents, and to take such other action, as may be necessary or desirable to consummate such sale. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilmember Turner. Rollcall: Ayes: Councilmembers Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. There being no further business on-the agenda for the Joint City Council and HRA Meeting, Councilmember /Commissioner Kelly's motion to adjourn was seconded by Councilmember /Commissioner Turner and carried unanimously. City Clerk MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL AUGUST 19, 1985 Answering rollcall were Members Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner and Mayor Courtney. EMPLOYEE NEIL JAHR COMMENDED. Mr. Rosland introduced Neil Jahr advising that he has worked for the City since February of 1982 at the York Avenue Liquor Store and is responsible for stocking of all liquor items. Mr. Jahr was commended for his very professional manner in working with customers. Mr. Rosland presented him with a silver pen bearing the Edina Logo. The Council extended their thanks and appreciation to Mr. Jahr. MINUTES of the Regular Meeting of July 15, 1985 and Special Meetings of July 22, 1985 were approved as submitted by motion of Member Kelly, seconded by Member Turner. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. AWARD OF BIDS - $12,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1985; $1,200,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION GOLF COURSE BONDS, SERIES 1985. The City Clerk presented affidavits showing publication of the Notice of Sale of $12,000,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1985 and $1,200,000 General Obli- gation Golf Course Bonds, Series 1985, of the City in The Edina Sun - Current, the official newspaper of the City, and in Commercial West, as required by law and as directed by a resolution of the City Council adopted July 15, 1985. The affidavits were examined, found to comply with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475 and directed to be filed in the office of the City Clerk. It was reported that two sealed bids had been received by the City prior to 7:00 P.M., Central Daylight Time for the purchase of the Bonds in accordance with the Notice of Sale and Terms and Conditions of Sale. The bids have been opened, read and tabulated, and the terms of each have been determined to be as follows: Name of Bidder First National Bank of Minneapolis The First National Bank of Chicago Bid For Principal $12,982,200 $12,970,320 Interest Rates 1988 -6.25% 1989 -6.50 1990 -6.75 1991 -7.10 1992 -7.30 1993 -7.60 1994 -7.80 1995 -8.00 1996 -8.10 1997 -8.25 1998 -8.40 1999 -8.60 2000 -8.70 2601 -8.80 2002 -8.90 2003 -8.90 2004 -9.00 2005 -9.00 2006 -9.00 1988 -6.25% 1989 -6.75 1990 -7.00 1991 -7.30 1992 -7.50 1993 -7.70 1994 -7.90 1995 -8.10 1996 -8.30 1997 -8.50 1998 -8.70 1999 -8.80 2000 -8.90 2001 -9.00 2002 -9.10 2003 -9.20 2004 -9.25 2005 -9.25 2006 -9.25 Total Interest Cost -Net Average Rate $16,347,975 - 8.789% $16,788,963.33 - 9.026324% V/ 17/ UJ Member Turner introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION RELATING TO $12,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1985 AND $1,200,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION GOLF COURSE BONDS, SERIES 1985; AWARDING THE SALE THEREOF _ BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina,:Minnesota (the - City)., as follows: 1. This Council by a resolution adopted on July 15, 1985, authorized and deter- mined to issue $12,000,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1985 and $1,200,000 General Obligation Golf Course.Bonds, Series 1985 of the City (together, the Bonds) and ordered that a public sale of the Bonds be held on this date. Notice of the public sale of the Bonds was duly given as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60. In accordance with the Terms and Conditions. of Sale, two (2) sealed bids were received by the City prior to 7:00 o'clock P.M. on this date. Those bids have been opened, read and considered by this Council and the terms of each have now been determined. 2. The bid of First National Bank of Minneapolis, of Minneapolis, Minnesota, and associates (the Purchaser), for the purchase of the Bonds on the terms set forth in the Terms and Conditions of Sale, at a price of $16,347,975 plus accrued interest from the date of the Bonds to the date of delivery thereof, the Bonds to bear interest at specified rates resulting in a net interest cost (determined by the addition of any discount to and the deduction of any premium from the total. interest on all Bonds from their date to their stated maturity) of $16,347,975, which is the lowest net interest cost of all bids received pursuant to the Notice of Sale and the Terms and Conditions of Sale and is therefore declared to be the. best bid received, and is hereby accepted. The Mayor and the City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute a contract for the sale of the Bonds to the Purchaser in accordance with the terms of said bid, the Terms and Conditions of Sale and this resolution. 3. The City Manager shall retain the good faith check of the Purchaser, pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of Sale, and shall return the good faith checks of the unsuccessful bidders forthwith. 4. The Official Statement relating to the Bonds, prepared by the City, is.approved, and its distribution to prospective bidders for the Bond ratified. The City Manager is authorized, in behalf of the City, to sign and deliver to the Purchaser a certificate as to the accuracy and completeness of the Official Statement. ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member Richards, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney and the following voted against the same: None whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted and was signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk. Member Turner then introduced the following resolution and moved its.adoption: RESOLUTION RELATING TO $12,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION . TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1985; FIXING THE FORM AND DETAILS, PROVIDING FOR THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY THEREOF AND THE SECURITY THEREFOR BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota (the City), as follows: Section 1. Authorization and Sale. 1.01. Authorization: Pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections'273.77(a) and 462.581 and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, the City Council of the City has authorized the issuance and sale of its General Obliga- tion Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1985 (the Bonds) in the principal amount of $12,000,000 for the purpose of providing funds for the payment of the public redevelopment costs needed for a redevelopment project (the Project), to be undertaken in accordance with the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan, previously established by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Edina (the Authority) and approved by the City. $231,818 of the principal amount of the Bonds represents interest as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.56. For the payment of the Bonds the Authority has agreed to segregate and to pledge and appropriate tax increments resulting from redevelopment of a project area, designated as the Southeast Edina Project Area (the Project Area), as certified by the County Auditor of Hennepin County from year to year, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.585, Subdivision 4. 1.02. Outstanding Bonds. The City has previously issued its General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, dated October'l,._1981 in the principal amount of $4,500,000 (the 1981 Bonds) pursuant to a resolution duly adopted on October 5, 1981 (the Bond Resolution). The 1981 Bonds are general obligations of the City payable primarily from tax increments derived from the Project Area and are issued pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.77. Pursuant to Section 4.04 of the Bond Resolution the City reserved the right to issue ad- ditional bonds payable from the 1981 General Obligation Tax Increment Bond Fund (the Bond Fund) established pursuant to Section 4.02 of the Bond Resolution to finance costs of the project to be undertaken by the City within the Project. Area pursuant to the Plan. 1.03. Project Costs. The cost of the Project is estimated to be as follows: Construction $ 9,839,928 Capitalized Interest 1,952,072 Cost of Issuance 10,000 Bond Discount 198,000 $12,000,000 1.04. Sale. This Council, by resolution adopted on August 19, 1985,accepted the bid of the First National Bank of Minneapolis, of Minneapolis, Minnesota (the Purchaser), to purchase the Bonds at a price of $11,802,118 plus accrued interest from the date of the Bonds to the date of delivery thereof, the Bonds to bear interest from September 1, 1985 until paid at the rates specified by the Purchaser and upon the further terms and conditions set forth in the Terms and Conditions of Sale. 1.05. Issuance of Bonds. All acts, conditions and things which are required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed prior to the issuance of the Bonds having been done, existing, and having happened, it is now necessary for this Council to establish the form and terms of the Bonds, to provide for the security thereof, and to issue the Bonds forthwith. Section 2. Form of Bonds. 2.01. Form of Bonds. The Bonds shall be prepared in substantially the following form: [Face of the Bond] UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF EDINA GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BOND, SERIES 1985 Date of Rate Maturity Original Issue CUSIP September 1, 1985 SEE REVERSE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS REGISTERED OWNER: PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: DOLLARS THE CITY OF EDINA, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the City), acknowledges itself to be indebted and, for value received, hereby promises to pay to the registered owner above named, the principal amount indicated above, on the maturity date specified above, with interest.thereon from the date hereof at the annual rate specified above, payable on January 1 and July 1 in each year, commencing January 1, 1986, to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the 15th day (whether or not a business day) of the immediately preceding month, all subject to the provisions referred to herein with respect to the redemption of the principal of this Bond before maturity. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof, t1le principal hereof, are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft of First Trust Company of Saint Paul, in St. Paul, Minnesota, as Bond Registrar, Transfer Agent and Paying Agent (the Bond Registrar), or its successor designated under the Resolution described herein. Additional provisions of this Bond are contained on the reverse hereof and such provisions shall for all purposes have the same effect as though fully set forth hereon. This Bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any security or benefit under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon shall have been executed by the Bond Registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives. 8/19/85 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, th& -City of Edina, Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, Ly'its City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed-by-the facsimile signatures of the Mayor and the City Manager and by a printed facsimile of the official seal of the. City and has caused this Bond to be dated as of the date set forth below. Dated: (Facsimile Signature) (Facsimile Signature) City Manager Mayor (Facsimile Seal) CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within. FIRST TRUST COMPANY OF SAINT PAUL By Authorized Representative (Reverse of the Bondsl This Bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of $12,000,000 (the Bonds), issued pursuant to a resolution adopted on August 19, 1985 (the Resolution) for the purpose of providing moneys in aid of a redevelopment project to be undertaken in accordance with the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan, in anticipation of the collection of tax increment resulting from the redevelopment of the Project Area, as certified annually by the County Auditor of Hennepin County,, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.585, Subdivision 4; and is issued pursuant to and in full conformity with the provisions of the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota thereunto enabling, including Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.581, Section 462.585 Section 273.77(a) and Chapter 475. This Bond is payable primarily from a portion of the moneys in the "1981 General Obligation Tax Increment Bond Fund" (the Bond Fund) of the City, but the City is required by law to pay maturing principal hereof and interest hereon from any available funds of the City if moneys on hand in the Bond Fund pledged to the payment of the Bonds are insufficient therefor. The Bonds are issuable only as fully registered bonds, in denominations.of $5,000 or any multiple thereof, of single maturities. Bonds maturing in the years 1989 through 1996 are payable on their respective stated maturity dates without option of prior payment, but Bonds having stated maturity dates in the years 1997 through 2006 are each subject to redemption and prepayment, at the option of the City and in whole or in part, and if in part in inverse order of maturities and by lot, assigned in proportion to their principal amount, within any maturity, on January 1, 1996 and on any interest payment date thereafter, at a price equal tQ the principal amount thereof to be redeemed plus interest accrued to the date of redemption. At least thirty days prior to the date set for redemption of any Bond, notice of the call for redemption will be published in a daily or weekly periodical, published in a Minnesota city of the first class or its metropolitan area, which circulates throughout the state and furnishes financial news as a part of its service, and will be mailed to the Bond Registrar and to the registered owner of each Bond to be redeemed at his address appearing in the Bond Register, but no defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond. Upon partial redemption of any Bond, a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered to the registered owner without charge, representing the remaining principal amount outstanding. As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office of the Bond Registrar, by the registered owner hereof in person or by his attorney duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Bond Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or his attorney; and may also be surrendered in exchange for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange, the City will cause a new. Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the transferee or registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee-or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. The City,and the Bond Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this Bond is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Bond Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this Bond in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation of the City according to its terms have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed in regular and due form, time and manner; that all taxable property within the City is subject to the levy of a direct, annual, ad valorem tax, which the City covenants it will levy and which is required to be extended, assessed and collected for the years and in such amounts as may be required to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds of this issue when due, which levy is not limited as to rate or amount; and that the issuance of this Bond did not cause the indebtedness of the City to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation. The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to the applicable laws or regulations:. TEN COM -- as tenants UNIF GIFT MIN ACT.....Custodian....... in common (Cust) (Minor) TEN ENT -- as tenants by the entireties under Uniform Gifts to JT TEN -- as joint tenants Minors with right of survivorship and Act...... . ... ....... not as tenants in (State) common Additional abbreviations may also be used. ASSIGNMENT FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and hereby irrevocably constitutes and appoints attorney to transfer the within Bond on the books kept for registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER NOTICE: The signature to this OF ASSIGNEE: assignment must correspond with the name as it appears upon the face of the within Bond in every particular, without alteration or any change whatsoever. Signature(s) must be guaranteed by a commercial bank or trust company or by a brokerage firm having a membership in one of the major stock exchanges. 2.02. Form of Certificate. A certificate in substantially the following form shall appear on the reverse side of each Bond, following a copy of the text of the. legal opinion of Bond Counsel: We certify that the above-is a full, true and correct copy of the legal opinion rendered by Bond Counsel on the issue of 'Bonds of the City of Edina which includes the within Bond, dated as of the date of delivery of and payment for the Bonds. (Facsimile signature) (Facsimile signature) City Manager Mayor Section 3. Bond Terms, Execution and Delivery. 3.01. Maturities, Interest Rates, Denominations, Payment. The City shall forth- with issue and deliver the Bonds, which shall be denominated "General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1985" and shall be payable primarily from the Bond Fund created in Section 4.02 hereof. The Bonds shall be issuable in the denomi- nation of $5,000 each or any integral multiple thereof, shall mature on January 1 in the years and amounts set forth below, and Bonds maturing in such years and amounts shall bear interest from date of issue until paid or duly called for redemption at the rates per annum shown opposite such years and amounts as follows: is /IV /25� Year Amount Rate Year Amount Rate 1989 $ 150,000 6.50% 1998 $ 900,000 8.40% 1990 150,000 6.75 1999 900,000 8.60 1991 150,000 7.10 2000 900,000 8.70 1992 150,000 7.30 2001 1,000,000 8.80 1993 200,000 7.60 2002 1,000,000 8.90 1994 200,000 7.80 2003 1,000,000 8.90 1995 400,000 8.00 2004 1,000,000 9.00 1996 900,000 8.10 2005 1,050,000 9.00 1997 900,000 8.25 2006 1,050,000 9.00 The Bonds shall be issuable only in fully registered form. The interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof, shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein. 3.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Each Bond shall be dated as of the last interest payment date preceding the date of authentication to which interest on the Bond has been paid or made available for payment, unless (i) the date of authentication is an interest payment date to which interest has been paid or made available for payment, in which case such Bond shall be dated as of the date of authentication, or (ii) the date of authentication is prior to January 1, 1986 in which case such Bond shall be dated as of September 1, 1985. The interest on the Bonds shall be payable on January 1 and July 1 in each year, commencing January 1, 1986, to the owner of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the immediately preceding month, whether or not such day is a business day. 3.03. Registration. The City shall appoint, and shall maintain, a bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the Registrar). The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the Registrar with respect thereto shall be as follows: (a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its principal corporate trust office a bond register in which the Registrar shall provide for the registration of ownership of .Bonds and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged. (b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of any Bond duly endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceeding each interest payment date and until such interest payment date. (c) Exchange of Bonds. Whenever any Bond is surrendered by the registered owner for exchange, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the registered owner or the owner's attorney duly authorized in writing. (d) Cancellation. All Bonds surrendered upon any transfer or exchange shall be promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City. (e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When any Bond is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endoresement on such Bond or separate instrument of transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur no liability for its refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized. (f) Persons Deemed Owners. The -City and the Registrar may treat the person in whose name any Bond is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of such Bond, whether such Bond shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on account of, the principal of and interest on such Bond and for all other purposes, and all such payments so made to any such registered owner or upon the owner's order shall be valid and effectual-to satisfy and discharge the liability of the City upon such Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (g) Taxes, Fees and Charges. For every transfer or exchange of Bonds, the Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. (h) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. In case any Bond shall become mutilated or be lost, stolen or destroyed, the Registrar shall deliver a new Bond of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitu- tion for and upon cancellation of any such mutilated Bond or in lieu of and.in substitution for any such Bond lost, stolen or destroyed, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a Bond lost, stolen or destroyed, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that such Bond was lost, stolen or destroyed, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it, in which both the City and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. All Bonds so surrendered to the ___- Regis.trar shall be cancelled by it -and evidence of such cancellation shall be given to the C'ti y-. - -If the mutilated, lost, stolen or destroyed Bond has already matured or been called for-redemption in accordance with its terms, it shall not be necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment. 3.04. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City hereby appoints First Trust Company of Saint Paul, as the initial Registrar. The Mayor and the City Manager are authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of.the City, a contract with First Trust Company of Saint Paul, as Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation of the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or trust company authorized by law to conduct such business, I such corporation shall be authorized to act as successor Registrar. The City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges of the Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves the right to remove any Registrar upon thirty (30) days notice and upon the appoint- ment of a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar shall deliver all cash -and Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar and shall deliver the bond register to the successor Registrar. On or before each principal or interest due date, without further order of this Council, the City Manager shall transmit to the Registrar from the Bond Fund described in Section 4.02 hereof, moneys sufficient for the payment of all principal and interest then due. 3.05. Redemption. (a) Bonds maturing in the years 1989 through 1996 shall not be subject to redemption prior to maturity, but Bonds maturing in the years 1997 through 2006 shall each be subject to redemption and prepayment, at the option of the City, in whole or in part, and if in part, in inverse order of maturities and, within any maturity, in $5,000 principal amounts selected by the Registar by lot, on January 1, 1996 and on any interest payment date thereafter at a price equal to the principal amount thereof to be redeemed plus interest accrued to the date of redemption. At least thirty days prior to the date set for redemption of any Bond, the City Manager shall cause notice of the call for redemptionto be published in a daily or weekly periodical published in a Minnesota city of the first class or its metropolitan area, which circulates throughout the state and furnishes financial news as a part of its service, and to be mailed to the Registrar and to the registered owner of each Bond to be redeemed, but no defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. 3.06. Preparation and Delivery. The Bonds shall be prepared under the direction of the City Manager and the City Finance Director - Treasurer and shall be executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of the Mayor and the City Manager, and shall be sealed with the official corporate seal of the City; provided that said signatures and the corporate seal may be printed, engraved, or lithographed facsimiles thereof. In case any officer whose signature, or a facsimile of whose signature, shall appear on the Bonds shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of any Bond, such signature or facsimile shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if such officer had remained in office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, no Bond shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this resolution unless and until a certificate of . authentication on such Bond has been duly executed by the manual signature of an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates of authentication on different Bonds need not be signed by the same representative. The executed certificate of authentication on each Bond shall be conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this resolution. When the Bonds have been so executed and authenticated, they shall be delivered by the City Manager to the purchaser thereof upon payment of the purchase price in accordance with the contract of sale heretofore made and executed, and the purchaser shall not be obligated to see to the application of the purchase price. Section 4. Security Provisions. 4.01. Construction Fund. A construction Fund is hereby created, as a special fund and designated on the books of the City as the "Southeast Edina Redevelopment Area Construction Fund" (the Construction Fund), to be held and administered by the City Finance Director - Treasurer separate and apart from all other funds of the City. The City hereby appropriates to the Construction Fund all of the proceeds received from the sale of the Bonds, less the amount to be deposited in the Bond Fund, as herein- after defined, pursuant to Section 4.02 hereof. Moneys on hand in the Construction Fund from time to time shall be used solely to pay public redevelopment costs in connection with the Project as set forth in the Plan, as amended. Any amounts remaining in the Construction Fund upon completion of the Project and.payment of all of the costs thereof shall be transferred to the Bond.Fund. 4.02. Bond Fund. The principal and interest on'the Bonds shall be payable from the Bond Fund. So long as any of the 1981 Bonds, the Bonds, or any additional bonds issued pursuant to Section 4.04 of the Bond Resolution and made payable from the Bond Fund, are outstanding and any principal thereof or interest thereon unpaid, the 8/19/85 , City Finance Director - Treasurer shall maintain the Bond Fund as a separate and special account to be used for the payment of the principal of, premium,. if any, and interest on the 1981 Bonds, the Bonds and any additional bonds issued pursuant to Section 4.07 of the Bond Resolution and made payable from the Bond Fund. The City hereby irrevocably appropriates to the Bond Fund (a) $1,952,072 of the proceeds of the Bonds representing capitalized interest, (b) the accrued------ — interest and any amount in excess of $11,768,182 bid for the Bonds and received from the Purchaser upon delivery of the Bonds, and (c) any other moneys appropriated or pledged by the terms of this Resolution to the Bond Fund. 4.03. Full Faith and Credit Pledged. The full faith and credit and taxing power of the City are hereby irrevocably pledged for the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds.and on all other bonds made payable from the Bond Fund, as such principal and interest become due. It is estimated that the tax increment revenue and other funds herein pledged for the payment of the Bonds will be collected in amounts not less than five percent in excess of the amounts needed to meet when due the principal of and interest on the 1981 Bonds, and the Bonds as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61. Con- sequently, no ad valorem taxes are now levied to pay the Bonds or the interest to come due thereon, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.77(a). If the money on hand in the Bond Fund should at any time be insufficient to pay principal and interest due on all bonds payable therefrom, such amounts may be paid from any other fund of.the City and such other fund shall be reimbursed therefor when sufficient moneys are available in the Bond Fund. If on October 1 in any year the sum of the balance in the Bond Fund plus the amount of tax increment revenue collectible through the end of the following calendar year is not sufficient to pay when due all principal and interest to become due on all bonds payable therefrom in the following calendar year, or the Bond Fund has. incurred a deficiency in the manner provided in this Section 4.03, a direct, irrepealable, ad valorem tax shall be levied on all taxable property within the corporate limits of the City for the purpose of restoring such accumulated or anticipated deficiency in accordance.with the provisions of this Resolution. Section 5. Defeasance. When all of the Bonds have been discharged as provided in this Section 5, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this Resolution to the holders of the Bonds shall cease. The City may discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds which are due on any date by irrevocably depositing with the paying agent on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full; or, if any Bond should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be discharged by depositing with the paying agent a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with interest accrued to the date of such deposit. The City may also at any time discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds, subject to the provisions of law now or hereafter authorizing and regulating such action, by depositing irrevocably in escrow, with a bank qualified by law as an escrow agent for this purpose, cash or securities which are general obligations of the United States or securities of United States agencies which are authorized by law to be so deposited, bearing interest payable at such time and at such rates and maturing on such dates as shall be required, without reinvestment, to pay all principal and interest to become due thereon to maturity. Section 6. Registration, Certification of Proceedings, Investment of Moneys and Arbitrage. 6.01. Registration. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the County Auditor of Hennepin County, together with such other information as he shall require, and to obtain from said County Auditor a certificate that the Bonds have been entered on his bond register as required by law. 6.02. Certification of Proceedings.' The officers of the City and the County Auditor of Hennepin County are hereby authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to Dorsey & Whitney, Bond Counsel, certified copies of all proceedings and records of the City, and such other affidavits, certificates and information as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Bonds as the same appear from the books and records under their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and all such certified copies, certificates and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the City as to the facts recited therein. 6.03. Covenant. The City covenants and agrees with the holders from time to time of the Bonds that it will not take or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or agents any action which would cause the interest on the Bonds to become subject to taxation under the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended (the Code), and the Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder. 6.04. Arbitrage. The Mayor and City Manager, being the officers of the City charged with the responsibility for issuing the Bonds pursuant to this resolution, are authorized and directed to execute and deliver to the Purchaser a certificate in accordance with the provisions of Section 103(c) of the Code, and Treasury Regulations, Sections 1.103 -13, 1.103 -14 and 1.103 -15, stating the facts, estimates and circumstances in existence on the date of issue and delivery of the Bonds which make it reasonable to expect that the proceeds of the Bonds will.not be used in a manner that would cause the Bonds to be arbitrage bonds within the meuning of the Code and Regulations. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member Richards, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney and the following voted against the same: None whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, and was signed by the Mayor, which signature was attested by the City Clerk. Member Turner introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION RELATING TO $1,200,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION GOLF COURSE BONDS, SERIES 1985; FIXING THE FORM AND DETAILS, PROVIDING FOR THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY THEREOF AND THE SECURITY THEREFOR BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. Authorization. This Council by its resolution adopted July 15, 1985, which resolution is entitled "Resolution Relating to $12,000,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1985 and $1,200,000 General Obligation Golf Course Bonds, Series 1985 Authorizing the Issuance and Providing for the Public Sale Thereof," pursuant to Minnesota Laws 1961, Chapter 655 (the Act), authorized the issuance and sale of $1,200,000 General Obligation Golf Course Bonds, Series 1985 of the City (the Bonds), to be dated as of September 1, 1985, in order to finance the acquisition and betterment of certain improvements (the Improvements) to its municipal recreation facilities. $23,182 of the principal amount of the Bonds represents interest as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.56. The Improvements consist generally of an improvement to the Municipal Golf Center of the City described in Section 4 of the Resolution adopted by this Council on November 4, 1963, entitled "Resolution Establishing the Form and Terms and Covenants Securing the Payment of $825,000 Golf Course Bonds of 1963" (Resolution of November 4, 1963). The Bonds are to be payable primarily out of the net revenues to be derived from the operation of the Municipal Golf Center and the Municipal Liquor Dispensary established by Ordinance No. 131 (the Municipal Liquor Dispensary). 1.02. Outstanding Bonds. There is currently payable out of net revenues to be derived from the Municipal Golf Center and the Municipal Liquor Dispensary the Municipal Golf Course Bonds of the City, dated as of December 1, 1963 (the Golf Course Bonds), authorized by the Resolution of November 4, 1963, and the Municipal Liquor Dispensary the Recreation Center Bonds, Series D of the City, dated as of November 1, 1978 (the Recreation Center Bonds, Series D) authorized by the resolution adopted by this Council on November 6, 1978, entitled "Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of $370,000 Recreation Center Bonds, Series D, Prescribing Their Form and Details and Covenants with Respect Thereto" (Resolution of November 6, 1978). The Golf Course Bonds and the Recreation Center Bonds, Series D are hereinafter referred to in the aggregate as the Outstanding Bonds. The Bonds shall be subordinate to the first lien and charge thereon, including a reserve, of the Golf Course Bonds, on the net revenues of the Municipal Golf Center and to the second lien and charge thereon, including a reserve, of the Recreation Center Bonds, Series D on the net revenues of the Municipal Golf Course. The Bonds shall be payable from the net revenues of the Municipal Liquor Dispensary on a parity with the Outstanding Bonds, as to both principal and interest. 1.03. Findings. It is hereby found, determined and declared that net revenues derived from the operation of the Municipal Golf Center and the Municipal Liquor Dispensary, in excess of the costs of operation and maintenance thereof in the fiscal year which ended December 31, 1984, were in excess of $355,886, which amount exceeds-the maximum amount of principal and interest to become due in any future fiscal year on all of the Outstanding Bonds and on the Bonds herein authorized. By Section 4.02 hereof the sum of $145,445 from the net revenues derived from the operation of the Municipal Golf Center is appropriated and credited to the Bond Account, created pursuant to Section 4.02 hereof, which amount exceeds the average annual amount of principal and interest to become due on the Bonds. The City is therefore authorized by the Act to secure the Bonds by the covenants.and agreements hereinafter set forth. In accordance with the Act the Bonds may be issued by resolution of this Council. All acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and o/ ty/ o-) to be performed preliminary to the issuance of and sale of the Bonds to provide moneys to pay for the Improvements have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed in due form, time and manner as so required. 1.04. Sale. Pursuant to a resolution adopted July 15, 1985, this Council determined to issue and sell $1,200,000 principal amount of General Obligation Golf Course Bonds, Series 1985, of the City (the Bonds) to defray the expense incurred and estimated to be incurred by the City in making the Improvements, including every item of cost of the kinds authorized in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.65, and $23,182 representing interest as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.56. A public sale of the Bonds was held on August 19, 1985 and this Council, by resolution adopted on that date, accepted the bid of First National Bank of Minneapolis, of Minneapolis, Minnesota (the Purchaser), to purchase the Bonds at a price of $1,180,082 plus accrued interest from the date of the Bonds to the date of delivery thereof, the Bonds to bear interest from September 1, 1985 until paid at the rates specified by the Purchaser and upon the, further terms and conditions set forth in the Terms and Conditions of Sale. 1.05. Issuance of Bonds. All acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws-of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed prior to the issuance of the Bonds have been done, do exist, have happened, and have been performed, wherefore it is now necessary for this Council to establish the form and terms of the Bonds, to provide for the security thereof, and to issue the Bonds forthwith. 1.06. Maturities. This Council finds and determines that the maturities of the Bonds, as set forth in Section 3.01 hereof, are warranted by the anticipated collection of the assessments and ad valorem taxes to be levied for the cost of the Improvements. Section 2. Form of Bonds. 2.01. Form of Bonds. The Bonds shall be prepared in substantially the following form: [Face of Bonds] UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF EDINA GENERAL OBLIGATION GOLF COURSE BOND, SERIES 1985 Date of Rate Maturity Original Issue CUSIP September 11 1985 SEE REVERSE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS REGISTERED OWNER: PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: DOLLARS THE CITY OF EDINA, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the City), acknowledges itself to be indebted and, for value received, hereby promises to pay to the registered owner above named, the principal amount indicated above, on the maturity date specified above, with interest thereon from the date hereof at the annual rate specified above, payable on January 1 and July 1 in each year, commencing January 1, 1986, to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the 15th day (whether or not .a business day) of the immediately preceding month, all subject to the provisions referred to herein with respect to the redemption of the principal of this Bond before maturity. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof, the principal hereof, are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft of First Trust Company of Saint Paul in St. Paul, Minnesota, as Bond Registrar, Transfer Agent and Paying Agent (the Bond Registrar), or its successor designated under the Resolution described herein. Additional provisions of this Bond are contained on the reverse hereof and such provisions shall for all purposes have the same effect as though fully set forth hereon. This Bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any security or benefit under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon shall have been executed by the Bond Registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives. O/ 17/ OJ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Edina, Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, by its City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed by the facsimile signatures of the Mayor and the City Manager and by a printed facsimile of the official seal of the City and has caused this Bond to be dated as of the date set forth below. Dated: (Facsimile Signature) (Facsimile Signature) City Manager Mayor (Facsimile Seal) CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within. FIRST TRUST COMPANY OF SAINT PAUL By Authorized Representative [Reverse of the Bonds] This Bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of $1,200,000 (the Bonds), all of like date and tenor except as to serial number, maturity date and interest rate, issued to finance the acquisition and betterment of recreational facilities of the City, and is issued pursuant to and in full conformity with the provisions of the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota thereunto enabling, including Minnesota Laws 1961, Chapter 655, and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475. This Bond is payable primarily from Bond Account (Series 1985) (the Account) of the Golf Course Fund of the City, but the City Council is required by law to pay maturing principal hereof and interest thereon out of any funds in the treasury if moneys on.hand in the Account are insufficient therefor. The Bonds are issuable only as fully registered bonds, in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof, of single maturities. Bonds maturing in the years 1988 through 1996 are payable on their respective stated maturity dates without option of prior payment, but Bonds having stated maturity dates in the years 1997 through 2000 are each subject to redemption and prepayment, at the option of the City and in whole or in part and if in part, in inverse order of maturities and by lot, assigned in proportion to their principal amount, within any maturity, on January 1, 1996 and on any interest payment date thereafter, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof to be redeemed plus interest accrued to the date of redemption. At least thirty days prior to the date set for redemption of any Bond, notice of the call for redemption will be published in a daily or weekly periodical, published in a Minnesota city of the first class or its metropolitan area, which circulates throughout the state and furnishes financial news as a part of its service, and will be mailed to the Bond Registrar and to the registered owner of each Bond to be redeemed at his address appearing in the Bond Register, but no defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond. Upon partial redemption of any Bond, a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered to the registered owner without charge, representing the remaining principal amount outstanding. As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office.of the Bond Registrar, by the registered owner hereof in person or by his attorney duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Bond Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or his attorney; and may also be surrendered in exchange for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange, the City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the transferee or registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. The City and the Bond Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this Bond is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Bond Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. 0/17/03 IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to-- exist, to happen and to be performed precedent to and in-the- issuance of this Bond in order to make it a, valid and binding general obligation of the City according to its terms have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed as so required; that the City has pledged and appropriated to the Account so much of the net revenues to be derived from the operation of the municipal golf center and of the municipal liquor dispensary as shall be required opay the hereof and interest thereon-when due, provided such revenues should at any time prove insufficient for these purposes the City is required to levy ad valorem taxes upon all taxable property within its corporate limits, without ..limitation as to rate or amount, for the payment of the Bonds and interest thereon when due; and that the issuance of this Bond does not cause the indebtedness of the City to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation. The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to the applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM -- as tenants UNIF GIFT MIN ACT ..... Custjstodianinor) in common TEN ENT -- as tenants by the entireties under Uniform Gifts to JT TEN -- as joint tenants Minors with.right of survivorship and Act .........:............ not as tenants in (State) common Additional abbreviations may also be used. ASSIGNMENT FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and hereby irrevocably constitutes and appoints attorney to transfer the within Bond on the books kept for registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER NOTICE: The signature to this OF ASSIGNEE: assignment must correspond with the name as it appears upon the face of the within Bond in every particular, without alteration or any change whatsoever. Signature(s) must be guaranteed by a commercial bank or trust company or by a brokerage firm having a membership in one of the major stock exchanges. 2.03. Form of Certificate. A certificate in substantially the following form shall appear on the reverse side of each Bond, following a copy of the text of the legal opinion of Bond Counsel: We certify that the above is a full, true and correct copy of the legal opinion rendered by Bond Counsel on the issue of Bonds of the City of Edina which includes the within Bond, dated as of the date of delivery of and payment for the Bonds. (Facsimile signature) (Facsimile signature) - City Manager Mayor Section 3. Bond Terms, Execution and Delivery. 3.01. Maturities, Interest Rates, Denominations, Payment. The City shall forthwith issue and deliver the Bonds, which shall be denominated "General Obligation Golf Course Bonds, Series 1985" and shall be payable primarily from the Bond Account created in Section 4.02 hereof. The Bonds shall be issuable in the denomination of $5,000 each or any integral multiple thereof, shall mature on January 1 in the years and amounts set forth below, and Bonds maturing in such years and amounts shall bear interest from date of issue until paid or duly called for redemption at the rates per annum shown opposite such years and amounts as follows: The Bonds shall be issuable only in fully registered form. The interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof, shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein. 3.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Each Bond shall be dated as of the last interest payment date preceding the date of authentication to which interest on the Bond has been paid or made available for payment, unless (i) the date of authentication is an interest payment date to which interest has been paid or made available for payment, in which case such Bond shall be dated as of the date of authentication, or (ii) the date of authentication is prior to January 1, 1986 in which case such Bond shall be, dated as of September 1, 1985. The interest on the Bonds shall be payable on January 1 and July 1 in each year, commencing January 1, 1986, to the owner of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the immediately preceding month, whether or not such day is a business day. 3.03. Registration. The City shall appoint, and shall maintain, a bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the - Registrar). The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the Registrar with respect thereto shall be as follows: (a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its principal corporate trust office a bond register in which the Registrar shall provide.for the registration of ownership of Bonds and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged. (b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of any Bond duly endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar shall,authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after'the'fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until such interest payinent date. (c) Exchange of Bonds. Whenever any Bond is surrendered by the registered owner for exchange, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the registered owner or the owner',s attorney duly authorized in writing. (d) Cancellation. All Bonds surrendered upon any transfer or exchange shall be promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City. (e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When any Bond is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endorsement on such Bond dr separate instrument of transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur no liability,for its refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or un- authorized. (f) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat.the person in whose name any Bond is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of such Bond, whether such Bond shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on account of, the principal of and interest on such Bond and for all other purposes, and all such payments so made to any such registered owner or upon the owner's order shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability of the City upon such Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (g) Taxes, Fees and Charges. For every transfer or exchange of Bonds, the Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. (h) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. In case any Bond shall become mutilated or be lost, stolen or destroyed, the Registrar shall deliver a new Bond of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of any such mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in substitution for any such Bond lost, stolen or destroyed,, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a Bond lost, stolen or destroyed, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that such Bond was lost, stolen or destroyed, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar.of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form,- substance and amount satisfactory to it, in which both the City and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. All Bonds so surrendered to the Registrar Year Amount Rate Year Amount Rate 1988 $ 50,000 ­6.25% 1995 $ 100,000 8.00% 1989 50,000 6.50 1996 100,000 8.10 1990 50,000 6.75 1997 100,000 8.25 1991 50,000 7.10 1998 150,000 8.40 1992 50,000 7.30 1999 150,000 8.60 1993 100,000 7.60 2000 150,000 8.70 1994 100,000 7.80 The Bonds shall be issuable only in fully registered form. The interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof, shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein. 3.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Each Bond shall be dated as of the last interest payment date preceding the date of authentication to which interest on the Bond has been paid or made available for payment, unless (i) the date of authentication is an interest payment date to which interest has been paid or made available for payment, in which case such Bond shall be dated as of the date of authentication, or (ii) the date of authentication is prior to January 1, 1986 in which case such Bond shall be, dated as of September 1, 1985. The interest on the Bonds shall be payable on January 1 and July 1 in each year, commencing January 1, 1986, to the owner of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the immediately preceding month, whether or not such day is a business day. 3.03. Registration. The City shall appoint, and shall maintain, a bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the - Registrar). The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the Registrar with respect thereto shall be as follows: (a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its principal corporate trust office a bond register in which the Registrar shall provide.for the registration of ownership of Bonds and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged. (b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of any Bond duly endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar shall,authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after'the'fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until such interest payinent date. (c) Exchange of Bonds. Whenever any Bond is surrendered by the registered owner for exchange, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the registered owner or the owner',s attorney duly authorized in writing. (d) Cancellation. All Bonds surrendered upon any transfer or exchange shall be promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City. (e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When any Bond is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endorsement on such Bond dr separate instrument of transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur no liability,for its refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or un- authorized. (f) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat.the person in whose name any Bond is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of such Bond, whether such Bond shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on account of, the principal of and interest on such Bond and for all other purposes, and all such payments so made to any such registered owner or upon the owner's order shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability of the City upon such Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (g) Taxes, Fees and Charges. For every transfer or exchange of Bonds, the Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. (h) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. In case any Bond shall become mutilated or be lost, stolen or destroyed, the Registrar shall deliver a new Bond of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of any such mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in substitution for any such Bond lost, stolen or destroyed,, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a Bond lost, stolen or destroyed, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that such Bond was lost, stolen or destroyed, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar.of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form,- substance and amount satisfactory to it, in which both the City and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. All Bonds so surrendered to the Registrar 8/19/85 shall be cancelled by it and evidence of such cane& -1 ation shall be given to the City. If the mutilated, lost, stolen or.destroyed Bond has already matured . or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms, it shall not be necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment. 3.04. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City hereby appoints First Trust Company of Saint Paul, as the initial Registrar. The Mayor and the City Manager are authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of the City, a contract with First Trust Company of Saint Paul, as Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation of the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or trust company authorized by law to conduct such business, such corporation shall be authorized to act as successor Registrar. The City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges of the Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves the right to remove any Registrar upon thirty (30) days notice and upon the appointment of .a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar shall deliver all cash and Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar and shall deliver the bond register to the successor Registrar. On or before each principal or interest due date, without further order of this Council, the City Finance Director- Treasurer.shall transmit to the Registrar from the Bond Account (Series 1985) described in Section 4.02 hereof, moneys sufficient for the payment of all principal and, interest then due. 3.05. Redemption. Bonds maturing in the years 1988 through 1996 shall not be subject to redemption prior to maturity, but Bonds maturing in the years 1997 through 2000 shall each be subject to redemption and prepayment, at the option -of the City, in whole or in part, and if in part, in inverse order of maturities and, within any maturity, in $5,000 principal amounts selected by the Registrar by lot, on January 1, 1996 and on any interst payment date thereafter at a price equal to the principal amount thereof to be redeemed plus interst accrued to the date of redemption. At least thirty days prior to the date set for redemp tion of any Bond, the City Manager shall-cause notice of the call for redemption, to be published in a daily or weekly periodical published in a Minnesota city of the first class or its metropolitan area, which circulates throughout the state and furnishes financial news as a part of its service, and to be mailed.to the .Registrar and to the registered owner of each Bond to be redeemed, but no defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. 3..06. Preparation and Delivery. The Bonds shall be prepared under the direction of the City Manager and the City Finance Director - Treasurer shall.be executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of the Mayor and the City'Manager, and.shall be sealed with the official corporate seal of the City; provided-that said signatures and the corporate seal may be printed, engraved, or lithographed facsimiles thereof. In case any officer whose signature, or a facsimile of whose signature shall appear on the Bonds shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of any Bond, such signature or facsimile shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if such officer had remained in office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, no Bond shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this resolution unless and until a certificate of authentication on such Bond has been duly executed by the manual signature of an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates of authentication on different Bonds need not be signed by the same representative. The executed certificate of authentication on each Bond shall be conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this resolution..1dhen the Bonds have been so executed and authenticated, they shall be delivered by the City Manager to the purchaser thereof upon payment of the purchase price in accordance with the contract of sale heretofore made and executed, and the purchaser shall not be obligated to see to the application of the purchase price. Section 4. Security Provisions. 4.01. Series 1985 Golf Course Construction Fund. There is hereby created. a special fund to be designated as the "Series 1985 Golf Course Construction Fund" (hereinafter referred to as the Construction Fund), to be held and administered by the City Finance Director - Treasurer separate and apart from all other funds of the City. The City appropriates to the Construction Fund the proceeds of the sale of the Bonds. The Construction Fund shall be used solely to defray expenses of the Improvement. Upon completion and payment of all costs of the Improvement, any balance of the proceeds of Bonds remaining in the Construction Fund shall be credited and paid to the Bond Account, Series 1985. 4.02. Bond Account (Series 1985). So long as any of the Bonds are outstanding and any principal of or interest.thereon.unpaid, the City Finance Director - Treasurer shall maintain the Golf Course Fund and.Operating Account therein in accordance with the provisions of the Resolution of November 4, 1963. In addition, the City Finance Director - Treasurer shall maintain in the.Golf Course Fund a separate and special Bond Account (Series 1985) to be used for no other purpose '6/19 /d5 other than the payment of the principal and interest on the Bonds and on such other bonds of the City as have been or may be directed to be paid therefrom. The City irrevocably appropriates to the Bond Account (Series 1985) (a) the sum of $145,445 from the net revenues derived from the operation of the Municipal Golf Center, which amount shall be credited forthwith to Bond Account (Series 1985) and which amount exceeds the average annual amount of principal and interest to become due on the Bonds and shall be used to pay interest on the Bonds to become due in 1986 and such other principal and interest to become due on the Bonds as provided in Section 4.03 hereof; (b) the accrued interest and any amount in excess of $1,176,818 bid for the Bonds and received from the Purchaser upon delivery of the Bonds; (c) all such other moneys which are payable to Bond Account (Series 1985) pursuant to Section 4.03 hereof; and (d) all such other moneys as shall be received and appropriated to Bond Account (Series 1985) from time to time. 4.03. Pledge of Net Revenues. The Resolution of November 4, 1963 provided that net revenues of the Municipal Golf Center could be pledged to pay bonds issued to finance improvements to the Municipal Golf Center if the pledge of such revenues is expressly made'subordinate to the first lien on and pledge of said revenues for the payment of principal and interest due and the maintenance of the reserve securing the Golf Course Bonds. The Resolution of November 6, 1978, provided that net revenues of the Municipal Golf Center could be pledged to pay bonds issued to finance improvements to the Municipal Golf Center if the pledge of such revenues is expressly made subordinate to the second lien and pledge of said revenues for the payment of principal and interest due and the maintenance of the reserve securing Recreation Center Bonds, Series D. The net revenues of the Municipal Golf Center are hereby pledged for the payment of the principal and interest on the herein authorized Bonds, subject to the lien and charge thereon for the payment of principal and interest due, and the maintenance of a reserve, for the Outstanding Bonds. The resolutions authorizing the issuance of the Outstanding Bonds provided that net revenues of the Municipal Liquor Dispensary could also be pledged for the payment of additional bonds on a parity with the lien in favor of the Outstanding Bonds, if the net Municipal Liquor Dispensary revenues received in the fiscal year immedi- ately preceding the issuance of such additional bonds shall have been at least 1 -1/4 times the,maximum amount of principal and interest to become due in any subsequent fiscal year on the Outstanding Bonds and on the additional bonds. It is hereby found, determined and declared that the net Municipal Liquor Dispensary revenues received in the fiscal year which ended December 31, 1984 were sufficient to satisfy such condition, wherefore the herein authorized bonds may be made payable from the.-net Municipal Liquor Dispensary revenues on a parity with the Outstanding Bonds as to both principal and interest without preference or priority of one bond over any other; except that if the net Municipal Liquor Dispensary revenues on hand at any time are not sufficient, with other funds then on hand for the payment of all such bonds; to pay in full the principal then due, the balance of net Municipal Liquor Dispensary revenues then available shall be allocated to the Bond Account (Series 1985) of the Golf Course Fund, to the Bond Account of the Golf Course Fund established by the Resolution of November 4, 1963 for the payment of principal and interest on the Golf Course Bonds Bond Account (Series D) established by the Resolution of November 6, 1978 for the payment of the Recreation Center Bonds, Series D in proportion to the principal amount of bonds of each issue then out- standing. From the net revenues of the Municipal Golf Center on hand in the Operating-Account of.the Golf Course Fund, there shall be transferred to the Bond Account (Series 1985) each month beginning January 1, 1986 after all transfers and credits required to be made to the Bond Account of the Golf Course Fund for payment of principal and interest of the Golf Course Bonds and the Bond Account (Series D) of the Recreation Center Fund for payment of principal and interest on the Recreation Center Bonds, Series D, a sum equal to not less than one -sixth of the interest to become due on the next succeeding interest payment date plus one - twelfth of the principal to become due on the next succeeding maturity date of the Bonds plus out of any net revenues remaining after the above payments for principal and interest into Bond Account (Series 1985) an amount equal to the amount of the net revenues of the Municipal Liquor Dispensary deposited in Bond Account (Series 1985) pursuant to Section 4.02 hereof which have previously been used for the payment of any principal or interest on the Bonds, including interest paid on the Bonds during 1986, and any advances from the net revenues on hand in the Municipal Liquor Dispensary for the payment of principal and interest on the Bonds. If the net revenues on hand in the Operating Account of the Golf-Course Fund in any month are not sufficient to transfer to the Bond Account (Series 1985) the amounts required herein for the payment of principal and interest on the Bonds and there is not then on hand in Bond Account (Series 1985) sufficient moneys for payment of principal and interest on the Bonds, the amount of the deficiency shall then be advanced.from the net revenues then on hand in the Municipal Liquor Dispensary fund. Any amounts trans- ferred to Bond Account (Series 1985) in repayment of any amounts of the net revenues of the Municipal Liquor Dispensary deposited in Bond Account (Series 1985) pursuant to Section 4.02 hereof which were used for the payment of principal or interest on the Bonds and any amounts transferred to Bond Account (Series 1985) in repayment 8/19/85 of any advances from the net revenues then on hand in the Municipal Liquor Dispensary fund for the payment of principal and interest shall be transferred to the Municipal Liquor Dispensary fund as they are received. 4.04. Additional Bonds. The City reserves the right to issue additional bonds payable in whole or in part from the net revenues.of the Municipal Golf Center, to finance costs of an improvement thereto, for the acquisition, betterment, operation or maintenance of other recreational facilities of the City, or for any other purpose for which such revenues may be appropriated by the Council in accordance with law; provided, however, that no additional obligations shall be issued to and made payable from the net revenues of the Municipal Golf- Center unless the pledge of such revenues for payment of such additional obligations is expressly made subordinate to the lien and charge. thereon in favor of payment of principal and interest when due, and maintenance of reserve balances required for the Outstanding Golf Course Bondso the lien and charge thereon in favor of payment of principal and interest when due on the Recreation Center Bonds, Series.D, and the lien and charge thereon in favor of principal and interest when due on the Bonds. Nothing herein shall prevent the future issuance of bonds payable in whole or in part from the net revenues of the Municipal Liquor Dispensary, whether pursuant to the Act or any other applicable law, provided that the pledge of the net Municipal Liquor Dispensary revenues for the payment of such bonds is expressly made subordinate to the lien on and pledge thereof for the payment of the principal and interest and the maintenance of the agreed reserve securing such payments on the Outstanding Bonds and the Bonds, unless the net Municipal Liquor Dispensary revenues received during the fiscal year immediately preceding such issuance shall have been not less than 1 -1/4 times the maximum amount of principal and interest to become due in any subsequent fiscal year on all outstanding bonds then payable from such net revenues, including the additional bonds then proposed to be issued._ In the event that the net revenues received in the fiscal year preceding any such issuance have conformed to the condition prescribed in the preceding sentence, the additional bonds so issued may be payable from the net Municipal Liquor Dispensary revenues on a parity with the Outstanding Bonds and the Bonds as to both principal and interest, without preference or priority of one bond over any other, except that if net Municipal Liquor Dispensary revenues on hand at any time are not sufficient, with other funds then on hand for the payment of all such bonds, to pay in full the principal and interest then due, the balance . of net liquor revenues then available shall be allocated to the Bond Account of the Recreation Center Fund, the Bond Account (Series D) of the Recreation Center Fund, the Bond Account of the Golf Course Fund and the Bond Account (Series 1985) of the Recreation Center Fund and to the respective accounts established for the payment of other bonds, in proportion to the principal amount of bonds of each issue which are then outstanding. 4.05. Tax Levy. Pursuant to the Act, the full faith, credit and taxing powers of the City are also irrevocably pledged for the prompt and full payment of the principal and interest on the Bonds, as such principal and interest respectively become due. The appropriations and covenants contained in this resolution are deemed to be sufficient to assure the payment of such principal and interest. Accordingly, no tax is presently levied for this purpose. If at any time it appears that the net revenues of the Municipal Golf Center and Municipal Liquor Dispensary which are pledged for the payment of the Bonds and the net revenues of the Municipal Liquor Dispensary deposited in Bond Account (Series 1985) pursuant to Section 4.02 hereof shall not be sufficient to pay the principal and interest on the Bonds the City covenants and agrees that it will levy a tax sufficient, with the net Municipal Liquor Dispensary revenues, and net Municipal Golf Center revenues then on hand in Bond Account (Series 1985), to pay all such principal and interest, which tax shall be levied upon all taxable property within the corporate limits of the City, without limitation as to rate or amount_. Section 5. Defeasance. When all of the Bonds have been discharged as provided in this section, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this resolution to the holders of the Bonds shall cease. The City may dis- charge its obligations with respect to any Bonds which are due on any date by depositing with the_ paying agent on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full; or, if any Bond should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be discharged by depositing with the paying agent ,a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with interest accrued to the date of such deposit. The City may also at any time discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds, subject to the provisions of law now or hereafter authorizing and regulating such action, by depositing irrevocably in escrow, with a bank qualified'by law:as an escrow agent for this purpose, cash or securities which are general obligations of the United States or securities of United States agencies which are authorized by law to be, so deposited, bearing interest payable at such time and at such rates and maturing on such dates as O/ 17/ O.l shall be required, without reinvestment, to pay all principal and interest to become due thereon to maturity. Section 6. Registration, Certification of Proceedings, Investment of Moneys and Arbitrage. 6.01, Registration. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the County Auditor of Hennepin County, together with such other information as he shall require, and to obtain from the County Auditor a certificate that the Bonds have been entered on his bond register and that the tax required for the payment thereof has been levied and filed as required by law. 6.02. Certification of Proceedings. The officers of the City and the County Auditor of Hennepin County are hereby authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser, and to Dorsey & Whitney, Bond Counsel, certified copies of all proceedings and records of the City, and such other affidavits, certificates and information as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Bonds as the same appear from the books and records under their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and all such certified copies, certificates and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the City as to the facts recited therein. 6.03. Covenant. The City covenants and agrees with the holders from time to time of the Bonds that it will not take or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or agents any action which would cause the interest on the Bonds to become subject to taxation under the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended (the Code), and Regulations promulgated thereunder. 6.04. Investment of Moneys on Deposit in Bond Account (Series 1985). Unless and until the regulations under Section 103 (c) of the Code which have been promul- gated by the Internal Revenue Service prior to the date hereof have been modified or amended in pertinent part, the City Manager shall ascertain monthly the amount on deposit in the Bond Account (Series 1985). If the amount on deposit therein ever exceeds by more than $180,000 the aggregate amount of principal and interest due and payable from the Bond Account (Series 1985) within 12 months thereafter plus a reasonable carryover amount not exceeding the greater of one year's earnings on the Bond Account (Series 1985) or one - twelfth of the annual debt service payable therefrom, such excess shall not be invested except at a yield less than or equal to the yield on the Bonds, based upon their amount, maturities and interest rates on their date of issue, computed by the actuarial method. If any additional bonds are ever issued and made payable from the Bond Acccount (Series 1985) pursuant to Section-4.03 hereof, the dollar amount in the preceding sentence shall be changed to equal fifteen percent (15 %) of the aggregate original principal amount of all bonds,..including the Bonds, which are then outstanding and payable therefrom. The City reserves the rights to amend the provisions of this Section 6.04 at any time,- whether prior to or after the delivery of the Bonds, if and to the extent that this Council determines that the provisions of this Section 6.04 are not necessary in order to assure that the Bonds are not arbitrage bonds.under Section 103 (c) of the Code and the applicable Regulations. 6.05. Arbitrage. The Mayor and City Manager; being the officers of the City charged with the responsibility for issuing the Bonds pursuant to this resolution, are authorized and directed to execute and deliver to the Purchaser a certificate in accordance with the provisions of Section 103 (c) of the,Code, and Treasury Regulations, Sections 1.103 -13, 1.103 -14 and 1.103.15, stating the facts, estimates and circumstances in existence on the date of issue and delivery of the Bonds which indicate that the proceeds of the Bonds will not be used in a manner that would cause the Bonds to be arbitrage bonds within the meaning of said Code and Regulations. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member Richards, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney and the following voted against the same: None whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted; and was signed by the Mayor, which was attested by the City Clerk. WOODDALE PARK IMPROVEMENT HEARING, CONTINUED TO 9/9/85. Mr. Rosland recalled that there have been a number of public meetings on the proposed Wooddale Park. On March 18 the Council instructed staff to look at some alternatives and to discuss with St. Stephens Episcopal Church their financial participation for proposed 8/19/85 parking. On April 1, 1985, the Council took several actions, one of which was to proceed with the initial park development after input from the neighborhood. That input was obtained from a committee of neighborhood residents. At its meeting of August 5, 1985 the Council referred the proposed park plan to the Edina Park Board for their- recommendation, and also advised the Park Board of the comments made by the neighborhood residents at the last Council Meeting. Mr. Rosland said that the park plan under consideration is the plan approved conceptually by the Council on April 1st. Robert Kojetin, Director of Parks and Recreation, reported.. that at the Park Board meeting on August 13 the Board had suggested several modifications: 1) enlargement of the tot lot to include two areas, one for children under five years of age and one for children over 5 years; 2) some type of fence along the West 50th Street side, and 3).a pathway along the east and south sides of the park and possibly along the west and north sides that would have some type of light fixtures similar to that in the Country Club District. Also discussed was the wall and the fence on top of the wall on the north side. It was felt that the wall and fence should be replaced. There would be entrances to the park at the northwesterly and northeasterly corners. The hard surface area was discussed with the possibility that it should be enlarged to accommodate a small skating sheet of ice. It was pointed out that there would be no warming house.facility, just some type of shelter for changing skates. The present fence along Williams Park would be taken down and the pathways extended into Williams. Utley Park.was not discussed at the Park Board meeting. Mr. Kojetin reported that the Park Board made a motion that Plan E as presented be accepted with the enlarged playground . equipment area and that there be no more than 25 parking spaces in Wooddale Park. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Rosland then reported that staff has met with St. Stephens Episcopal Church regarding their possible financial participation in the proposed parking. He noted that presently.there are 88 .spaces in Wooddale Park and 39 spaces in Utley Park that are used by the church. It is proposed that 42 parking spaces be constructed in Wooddale Park and that parking be increased to 52 spaces in Utley Park which the churcli could use. It was pointed out that the. concept approved for construction of W. 50th Street west of Wooddale Avenue would prohibit parking on either side. Mr. Rosland reported that St. Stephens Church is willing to participate in the amount of $100,000 for construction of the parking; $40,000 for each parking lot and $20,000 for landscaping and amenities in Wooddale Park. Member Kelly asked if the Park Board had considered locating the parking in Wooddale Park along W. 50th Street. Mr. Kojetin said they had and recommended that the parking be along Wooddale Avenue as recommended by the consultant. Mayor Courtney stated that the Council has reviewed the petition submitted by residents of the area requesting the Council to accept the recommendation of the Park Board. He then called for comment from the public. Appearing on behalf of St. Stephens Episcopal Church were Jim Curry, 4817 Upper Terrace, Patrick Rile, 4506 Moorland Av. and Hugh Wooldridge, 6021 Arbour Lane. Mr. Curry stated that St. Stephens is 48 years old and has 1,500 members of which at least 80Z live in Edina. He then reviewed the events leading to the Council's decision that the Wooddale School be demolished and commented that the Council had recognized the church's parking problem. He cited the Colonial Church parking on City property as precedent. . Mr. Curry advised that at both an open meeting of the congregation and a vestry meeting there were unanimous votes to participate financially in the amount of $100,000 plus interest for construction of parking in Wooddale and Utley Parks. Mr. Rile presented graphics showing the parking available to the church before demolition of Wooddale School and the proposed parking and pointed out that if only 25 spaces are constructed in Wooddale Park and no additional spaces in Utley, the net loss would be 36 spaces. In addition no parking is proposed on W. 50th Street when that is reconstructed. Mr. Wooldridge showed graphics illustrating an average monthly attendance by outside groups of 7,000 and average monthly attendance of parish groups at 3,000. He emphasized that more than half of the church's use each month is for community acitivies and services. In summary Mr. Curry stated that 1) the church has a traffic problem due to a parking problem, 2) the church is far more than a church and is used by thousands of Edina people, and 3) the church recommends that the Council approve the BRW plan with 42 parking spaces in Wooddale Park and 52 spaces in Utley Park, and 4) losing the 36 spaces would definitely hurt St. Stephens and the thousands of people who use the building. Speaking in support of the proposed parking was Paul Marx, 4621 E. Sunnyslope Rd. Speaking in opposition to the proposed parking were: Mrs. Ritchie; Virginia Morris; Charles Paulus, 4617 Moorland Av.; Mary Kluesner, 4409 Country Club Road; Jane Paulus, 4617.Moorland Avenue; Jack Curtis, 4400 W. 50th Street; Jane Bennett, 4901 Browndale Avenue; Art Heiman, 5020 Arden; Toni O'Rourke, 4600 Drexel Avenue; George Psihos, 4607 Wooddale Avenue; Robert,Strickland, 4908 Arden Avenue; Don Hart; and several unidentified persons. The following persons suggested that the parking be sited along W. 50th Street:, Wendy Powell, 4612 Moorland Avenue; Kathy Stassen, 4406 Sunnyside Road; and Marilyn Curtis, 4400.W. 50th Street. Member Bredesen then stated that he agreed that the park should be the focal point of the neighborhood and that the proposed park configuration does not maximize that objective. He pointed out that the church.is also a focal point of the neighborhood and is being 8/19/85 used by a broad segment of the Edina community and so a compromise must be worked out. He said he liked the suggestion that the parking in the Wooddale Park be put along W. 50th Street and out of the park area. Regarding Utley Park, Member Bredesen said he agreed there should be no parking south of the tennis courts and that he liked the idea of doing a mirror image for parking south of W. 50th Street from the tennis courts over to Wooddale Avenue. He pointed out that it would preserve a larger area of Utley for public use and would help alleviate the parking problem for the church. Member Bredesen added that he supports only 25 parking spaces on the north side of W. 50th Street. Mr. Rosland responded that staff has looked at siting the parking in Wooddale Park along W. 50th Street and presented a graphic illustrating that concept. He said it may be possible to re- configure the parking planned for south of the tennis courts in Utley Park along W. 50th Street "also. Member Bredesen then made a motion to direct the staff to draft a jparking plan for Wooddale Park along W. 50th Street on the north and from the tennis courts to Wooddale Avenue on the south to arrive at a compromise and to bring the plan back to the Council on September 9. Motion was seconded by Member Kelly. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. FIRST READING GRANTED FOR PSR -4 PLANNED SENIORS RESIDENCE ZONING (ORDINANCE NO 825 -A8) FOR BILTMORE SITE, 5212 VERNON AVENUE. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved and ordered placed on file. Planner Craig Larsen presented the petition for rezoning of the closed.Biltmore Motel site, generally located west of Vernon Avenue and south of West 52nd Street. The 3.5 acre site is surrounded by single family properties to the north, R -2 District residences to the west, commercial development across Vernon Avenue to the east, and multi- family units further to the.west and immediate south. Mr. Larsen recalled that the Council approved a Planned Residential District rezoning on the property in the fall of 1985 for the construction of an 88 -unit, 4 story condominium project. A new development team has acquired the property and has submitted a rezoning request to Planned Seniors Residence, PSR -4 to allow the construction of a 152 -unit building containing 4, 5 and 6 story sections. The building would contain 70 one bedroom units, 74 two bedroom units and 8 three bedroom units. Exterior materials would be brick except for some trim. The Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum of 2,500 square of lot area per unit in PSR -4 with the possibility of reducing this requirement to 1,000 square feet per unit through a series of allowances. The proposed.plan.would be able to achieve the maximum allowance through credits for underground parking, type I or II construction, accessibility to freeways, and for providing senior citizen units. As a result the density as proposed conforms to Ordinance requirements for the PSR -4 district. Mr. Larsen pointed out that the Zoning Ordinance establishes special requirements for unit types, sizes and for community facilities in a senior citizen apartment building. A variance to Ordinance unit size requirements and a variance to allow 3 bedroom units would be necessary. The Ordinance requires that parking be provided at a rate of .25 space per unit enclosed, and .5 space per unit surface parking. For a 152 -unit building this results in 38 enclosed spaces and 76 surface spaces. The subject proposal provides 76 enclosed spaces and 51 surface spaces. A variance for surface spaces would be required. Traffic would access the site on Vernon Avenue opposite the major intersection recommended by the Grandview Traffic Study for Link Road. In PSR zoning district has no height limits; setbacks are determined by the height of the building and the proposal does comply. Lot coverage in the-PSR-4 District allows a maximum building coverage of 35 %. The proposed building would cover 21% as compared to 27% building coverage for the previous approved project on the site. The project concept is to provide housing for seniors who are not eligible for the .HUD type housing with income limits. It would offer a high level of services to residents such as meals provided on site, cleaning and laundry services, on call nursing and emergency medical assistance and increased security. Mr. Larsen noted several land use issues concerning this proposal: Height the building containd 4, 5 and 6 story sections with respective heights of 36, 45 and 54.feet. The increased height allows a reduction in building coverage and provides shorter corridors and a more efficient delivery of services. Properties most impacted by the building's height are to the west along Grandview Lane. Setbacks along this line vary from 45 to 90 feet compared to a constant 40 feet of the earlier plan. Zoning - the City's PSR Zoning District was designed in response to HUD requirements for Section 202 project. Since this project would not be controlled by HUD it would be necessary for the City /HRA to limit occupancy. Staff believes this could be accomplished through a redevelopment contract and deed restrictions. .Unit Sizes - The developers contend that their experience indicates a need to offer slightly larger units with more bedroom options than HUD projects would allow. The one and two bedroom units are within or very near Ordinance requirements; the three bedroom units would not be allowed. Staff supports a variance to allow the proposed unit sizes and unit mix provided the City can exercise control B /19/6j over building occupancy. Parking and Traffic - The Ordinance requires .75 park- ing space per unit, of which .25 must be enclosed in the PSR -4 District. The proposal would provide .84 space per unit, of which .5 would be enclosed. The most comparable existing project in the City would seem to be 7500 York. Parking provided at 7500 York is nearly identical to the subject proposal with a total parking ratio of .82, of which .47 is. enclosed. Management has indicated that there is a waiting list for enclosed parking. The Community Development and Planning Commission and staff suggests an increase in the amount of enclosed parking. Regarding traffic, BRW, Inc. has done a study comparing the traffic generation on this site in light of the Grandview Traffic Study and have determined that this is the lowest possible traffic generator that-.the site could have. Staff would suggest that the entry from Vernon Avenue be-redesigne.d at aright angle to Vernon. The proposed location is shown in the Comprehensive Plan as suitable for elderly housing, and in staff's opinion represents an excellent reuse of this property. The Planning Commission at its meeting of July 31, 1985 recommended approval of the preliminary development plan with an increase in the underground parking, a proof of parking agreement to handle any future shortage in surface parking and a realignment of the entry from Vernon Avenue. Mr. Larsen stated that Frank Dunbar was present representing the deve- lopment team. Mr. Dunbar introduced the members of the partnership called Grand - vies Development Company, including Dale E. Barlage, Robert A. Johnson and himself. Dunbar Development Company will be the entity assigned to implement the redevelop- ment project. The partnership considered four factors.in analyzing the develop- ment potential of the Biltmore site: 1) propose a market acceptable program, 2) Develop an.economically feasible building, 3) Respond to the goals and objectives for the Redevelopment District Plan, and 4) Propose a development that is con- sistent with the City's Land Use Plan. Various consultants were brought on the development team to analyze those factors. Mr. Dunbar.explained that the history of the site was reviewed and the team tried to respond.to the concerns that were expressed by the Council previously. He introduced Patricia A. McCullough, of Health Planning and Management Resources, Inc:, who presented graphics highlight- ing the features of the market research that was done for the proposed project. The market research concluded that the rental senior retirement complex is a marketable product and that there is very concrete evidence for potential demand for the project. Peter Van Hauer, of Health Central Corporation, briefly stated their credentials, the projects they have been involved in and advised that they will be providing marketing services and post- construction management on behalf of the owners and the occupants. He stated the.i.r philosophy is to support and enhance an independent lifestyle to its fullest r.hrough the delivery of essential support services. Wayne Winsor, of Winsor /Faricy Architects, Inc., was then introduced as architect for the proposed project. Mr. Winsor pointed out design features of the project: landscaping, exterior materials and features, and- floor- plans. Mr. Dunbar advised that they had met with neighborhood residents on July 29, 1985 and concensus was that it was a proposal that was acceptable to the community. He stated that the request before the Council is for rezoning and. concept approval. A financial analysis has been submitted requesting financial participation by the City in this redevelopment project in the amount of $1,000,000. The objective was to request less than what the increment itself could support so that the off -site improvements could be incorporated into the bond sale. In conclusion, Mr. Dunbar requests the Council's support for these reasons: 1) Development proposed addresses a market determined need in the community and will prevent long -term citizens from leaving, 2) It allows for revitalization of a current non - productive site in the redevelopment district, 3) It allows for the senior households to be converted over to younger families, 4) It provides for the best use on the site from the standpoint of market, financing, traffic, and land useage, 5) It realized the objectives of the Grand- view Redevelopment Program, and 6) It may provide the revitalization necessary within the district to spur further development activities complementary to the area and development plan. Mr. Dunbar stated they are prepared to enter into a mutually agreed upon•redevelopment contract and are prepared to expedite the project. Member Turner asked what impact this request for City participation would have on the other goals for the district. Mr. Larsen said if the City participates as requested, there would not be enough to do the public improve- ments we looked at initially. Member Richards stated his understanding of the financing was that the City would sell one million in bonds, do the improvements and then from the capture of taxes the City would retire those bonds, and at that point the City no longer is involved or has an interest in the project. Mr. Dunbar said that was correct. Member Richards then asked what would happen to the project is it does not receive Council approval for participation. Mr. Dunbar responded that they do not feel they could proceed without parti- cipation of the City and that they have not developed other alternatives. Jeff Anderson, 5124 William Avenue, ! stated he was concerned about the height of the building and that it was a very ambitious plan and questioned the ability of the developers to carry it on into the future. Russ Moore, 5129 Bedford Avenue, asked about the price range of the rental units. Mr. Dunbar stated that it is a market rate rental proposal and that rents,are anticipated to be in the range V/ 17/ UJ of $800/`850 for one bedroom units up to $1,300 for three bedroom units. Floyd Johnson, 5137 William Avenue, asked what would happen if it is not marketable and it becomes just another apartment building. He said he was concerned about possible traffic problems in the future and that there is a high population in the immediate six block area now. Member Turner asked if PSR -4 zoning limits the age of residents and if we could restrict first choice of units to Edina residents. Mr. Larsen said the Zoning Ordinance defines PSR -4 zoning for occupancy by persons 62 years of age or over. Mr. Erickson explained that in the Edinborough project we asked that preference be given to Edina citizens but only to the extent that it can be done without violating some federal /state regulations and the City could require that for this project also. He reviewed for the Council the City participation in the elderly housing for Edinborough. Member Turner stated she supports the land use and rezoning request because it is a good re -use of the property, it meets the Comprehensive Plan and the Grand- view Redevelopment District goals. She added that there is not enough support for the degree of City participation being requested but would be willing to look at some lesser degree.of support. Member Bredesen said he felt it was a good project for the district; that what might done on that site with no public support might be less satisfactory than what is proposed, so that there is some public benefit that comes not withstanding the fact that the project will produce an increment for the district. He added that the City is committed to a long range strategy aimed at getting young families into the community, that this type of facility will encourage the elderly to move out of their homes in Edina to free up the housing stock and that the project will in turn provide housing for those people who have incomes of $20,000 or more that don't qualify for subsidized housing. Member Kelly stated that she was concerned about the City's participation in the project, that it would preclude some other development for the district. That, although it is a-good project for the site, she did not feel it would cause homes to be turned over to younger families as it is anticipated that the market for the units will be 1/3 from people returning from the sun belt and 1/3 from parents of Edina citizens, and that we should take a stronger approach to bring in I younger families with second mortgage monies or some other strategy rather than this kind of project. Mayor Courtney said he felt it was a fine project for the area but that he too was troubled with the amount of the City participation requested; that this is a new experience to subsidize housing but that perhaps that time has come. Member Turner pointed out that the Metro- politan Council, the Citizens League and the State have all been discussing the issue of long term care of the elderly and they have all suggested that this kind of- housing be made available so that there is not unnecessary use of nursing homes. This type of project would provide an in- between stage for the elderly with some of the support services which is much less costly for all taxpayers. Mr. Rosland stated-that staff is studying the rest of the tax increment district and.that some of the Council's questions may be answered with that study regard - ing other .project within the district. Mr. Erickson pointed out that the Council is being asked -to approve the zoning, that City participation is another question and would addressed when the redevelopment contract is approved. Member Turner stated that the proponents should understand that some of the Council members are concerned.about the degree of City participation. Member Turner then introduced Ordinance No. 825 -A8 for First Reading, subject to: 1) execution of a satisfactory redevelopment contract, 2) increased enclosed parking as recom- mended by staff, and 3) realignment of the driveway as recommended by staff, as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 825 -A8 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE (NO. 825) BY REZONING PROPERTY TO PSR -4 PLANNED - SENIORS RESIDENCE FROM PRD -4 PLANNED RESIDENCE DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 6 of Ordinance No. 825 of the City is amended by adding the following thereto: "The - extent of the Planned Seniors Residence District (Sub- District PSR -4) is enlarged by the addition of the following property: : Lots 1, 2, 3, and 12, Block 1, Grandview Plateau, and that.part of the Service Road originally dedicated in the plat of GRANDVIEW PLATEAU, according to the recorded plat thereof, described as follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of Block 1, said GRANDVIEW PLATEAU, thence on an assumed bearing of East along the easterly extension of the north line of said Block 1, a distance of 33.50 feet; thence southwesterly a distance of 326.96 feet along a nontangential curve, concave to northwest having a radius of 3087.95 feet and a central angle of 6 degrees 04 minutes, said curve has a chord bearing of South 21 degrees 58 minutes West; thence South 25 degrees West to the southeasterly line of said Block 1; thence northeasterly along said Block 1 to the point of beginning. The extent of the PRD -4 Planned Residence District is reduced by removing the property described above from the PRD -4 District." is /ly /uD Sec. 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and publication. Motion for First Reading of the ordinance was seconded by Member Bredesen. Member Richards commented that he would support the motion but saw no reason to believe that the subject property would not develop totally.in the private sector and therefore could not support public participation in the project. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen Richards, Turner, Courtney Nays: Kelly Motion carried. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVED FOR INDIAN HILLS 3RD ADDITION. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved and ordered placed on file. Mr. Larsen-presented the request for preliminary plat approval for Indian Hills 3rd Addition, generally located south of the Crosstown Highway and west of Gleason Road. He recalled that the Council granted final plat approval to Indian Hills 2nd Addition in April, 1985. The plat consisted of 7 R -2 lots along McCauley Trail and 8 R -1 lots on a new cul-de-sac extending south from McCauley Trail. Since that time the proponent has acquired Lot 11 of The Timbers and is requesting a subdivision which would add portions of this lot to the R -1 lots in Indian Hills 2nd Addition. No new lots are contemplated by this plat. Lots 1 through'7 remain unchanged from the previously approved plat. Mr. Larsen stated that Lot 11 of The Timbers is an extremely large neck lot.which has access to Timber Ridge Road. The lot also has frontage on Arrowhead Lake. The proposed plat would add approximately 75 feet of depth to Lots 9, 10, 11 and 12, and would provide lake access to Lots 13 and 14. A large irregularly shaped piece would be added to Lot 8 by the proposed plat. The remaining lot from The Timbers, which would become Lot 16 of Indian Hills 3rd Addition, would continue to provide a large building site. Mr. Larsen pointed out that at the time The Timbers plat was approved a deed restriction was placed on Lot 11 which prevented further subdivisions which would create additional building sites. This restriction would need to be released prior to recording the new plat. Staff supports the concept of the proposed preliminary - plat as the proposal greatly enhances the potential of the lots along Timber Trail while causing no harm to Lot 16 as a building site. The proposal also represents a more efficient use of property. Mr. Larsen said that a revised grading plan has been submitted which is satisfactory and some of the lot lines have been corrected as suggested.by staff. The Community Development and Planning Commission gave preliminary approval at its meeting of July 31, 1985 and staff would recommend approval subject to release of t-he deed restriction on Lot 11 of The Timbers. Mr. Larsen noted that the conservation restriction on Lots 13 Lots 13 and 14 which abut.Arrowhead Lake would remain. Frank Matthews, 6400 Timber Ridge, said he felt the enlarged lots are favorable and asked if the roadways of Timber Ridge and Timber Trail would be connected in any way. Mr. Larsen said.there are no plans to connect them. There being no further comment, Member Turner introduced the following resolution and moved adoption: PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL GRANTED FOR INDIAN HILLS 3RD ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED by the City'Council of the City of.Edina, Minnesota, that that certain plat entitled "Indian Hills 3rd Addition ", platted by Gustafson and Associates, and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of August 16, 1985 be and is hereby granted preliminary plat approval. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Kelly. Rollcall• Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVED FOR 7711 NORMANDALE ROAD (EDINA CARWASH) PCD -4 PLANNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file. Mr. Larsen presented the request for final development plan approval for 7711 Normandale Road, generally located east_- of.Highway 100: , and north of West 78th Street. The subject property measures 175 feet by 175 `. feet, contains 30,625 square feet, and is zoned Planned Commercial District, PCD -4. The property is developed with an authomobile service center, which offers gasoline sales, parts and service. The proponent is requesting approval of a Final Development Plan to redevelop the site.as a car wash, with related car cleaning service and gasoline sales. Mr. Larsen explained that the Plan would require the granting of a number-of variances. Car washes are required to maintain a 45 foot setback from both the front street and any side street. The proposed plan would maintain a 45 foot setback from Viking Drive, but would maintain a 35 foot setback from West 78th Street. Thus a 20 foot side street setback variance is requested. The Zoning Ordinance requires that parking maintain a 20 foot setback from a street and 10 feet from an interior side lot line. Parking is proposed within 8 feet of West 78th Street, conse- quently, a.12 foot parking setback variance is also requested. On the north- easterly portion of the site a 5 foot parking setback variance would be required. a/17/aD Since the Ordinance allows only one entry or exit per street frontage, a var- iance to allow the second exit to W. 78th Street is necessary. The final variance in required spacing of driveways. The Ordinance requires that driveways be 50 feet from intersections and be 20 feet from other driveways as measured from the end of the .returns. The large returns result in a request for a 30 foot drive aisle spacing variance. Mr. Larsen said that the plan as proposed would provide the required number of parking spaces and stacking spaces. The proposed exterior materials mply with Ordinance standards. Except for the West 78th Street side, the_buld "ing meets all required setbacks. The proponent has submitted a landscape plan and schedule which meets Ordinance requirements. The proposed car wash is a deluxe facility which should be much more aesthetically pleasing than a typical car wash and would provide an improvement over the existing use on the site. The Plan would provide green areas and landscaping where there is now none. The build - ing proposed is the smallest possible size in which to house the conveyor wash system. Several alternative site plans were reviewed in an attempt to minimize the need for variances and provide smooth function and traffic flow. The proposed site plan provides the best arrangement on the site. Staff would suggest that parking number 12 be removed. At its meeting of July 31, 1985 the Community Deve- lopment and Planning Commission recommended Final Development Plan approval. Richard Page, the developer, pointed out that the City lacked a full service car wash in that area. He presented photos and renderings of the site showing the exterior material of glazed brick aggregate. Mr. Page assured the Council that the car wash would be a long term facility and that the capital financing is from private investors. No comment being heard, Member Kelly. introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RRC(1T.11TT0N BE IT RESOLVED by the City.Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that the Final Development Plan for the Edina Carwash, 7711 Normandale Road, be and is hereby approved. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Richards. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVED FOR 5555 W. 78TH STREET (HOYT CONSTRUCTION) PID PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved and ordered placed on file. Mr. Larsen presented the request for final development plan approval of Hoyt Development for 5555 W. 78th Street, generally located east of Cecelia Circle and south of West 78th Street. The subject property is a 5 acre parcel zoned Planned Industrial District, PID. The site is developed with a small warehouse building located in the south central portion of the lot. PID properties are located to the west and northeast of the site . Property to the north is vacant, but was recently zoned for townhouses and apartments. Property to the south is in the City of Bloomington and is developed with similar uses. The proponent has sub - mitted plans which for the redevelopment of the site with an office- warehouse building of 72,390 square feet and are requesting Final Development Plan approval. Mr. Larsen explained that the proposed building would be.evenly aplit between office and warehouse uses. In the PID zone office space must provide parking at a rate of 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area and warehouse space must provide parking at a rate of one space for each 2,000 square feet of gross floor area. The proposed plan would provide 209 parking spaces where 199 are required. Exterior materials of the building would be brick with copper trim and would meet Ordinance requirements. Mr. Larsen explained that the redevelopment of the site would require a number of variances. The most northerly corner of the building maintains a setback of 56 feet where 75 feet is required. Parking and drive aisles encroach into required setbacks along the northerly portion of the site. Also, the required 10 foot parking to building setback is not provided at several points along the north and east sides of the building. At its meeting of July 31, 1985 the Community Development and Planning Commission recommended Final Development Plan approval and the requested variances. Bruce Hoyt, of Hoyt Development Company, commented that the subject area has a large amount of natural vegetation and combined with the slope of the land makes the visual impact of the site minimal from the proposed residential area -on the north. He stated that the building design is very attractive and.to maintain the geometry of the structure the variance is requested for the most northerly corner. Member Turner asked Mr. Larsen if the similar type warehouse building to the west had required variances and why the Planning Commission felt the variance was justified. Mr. Larsen said that the building to the west did not require variances and that the Planning Commission based their recommendation on lack.of impact of the building.because of the grade drop -off from the northerly portion of the site. No further comment being heard, Member Kelly introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that the Final Development Plan of Hoyt Development Company for 5555 W. 78th Street, be and is 8/19/85 hereby approved. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Bredesen. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Courtney Nays: Turner Resolution adopted. TEN YEAR CAPITAL PLAN ADOPTED; TO BE SUBMITTED TO METROPOLITAN COUNCIL. Mr- Rosland recalled that the Council granted preliminary approval of the Ten Year Capital'plan_______' on July 1, 1985. Because a capital improvement plan is considered.to be part of the City's Comprehensive Plan, it must go through the same adoption process as the Plan itself. The Community Development and Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on July 31, 1985 and approved the Ten Year Capital Plan and staff would now recommend adoption by the Council and authorization for transmittal to the Metro- politan Council for review. Those items in the Plan which constitute new con- struction or major additions have been identified as requested by the Council. Member Turner introduced the following resolution and moved adoption: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Edina adopted the Comprehensive Plan 1980 on December 31, 1981, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.864; and WHEREAS, the Community Development and Planning Commission of the City of Edina has approved an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan 1980 on July 31, 1985; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Edina has reviewed such amendment to the Comprehensive Plan 1980 and is in concurrence with the decision.of the Com- munity Development and Planning Commission; - NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Edina, that the City Council hereby adopts the amendment to the Comprehensive.Plan.1980 as as it applies to the Ten Year Capital Plan. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Kelly. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen,- Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. BIDS REJECTED FOR ENGINE - ANALYZER. Mr. Rosland recalled that the award of bid for an engine analyzer had been continued from the meeting of August 5, 1985 and that staff would recommend all bids submitted be rejected and that it be re -bid. Motion of Member Bredesen was seconded by Member Turner to reject all bids submitted for the engine analyzer. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. BID AWARDED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE VEHICLE. Mr. Rosland presented tabulation of quotes for an administrative vehicle, 1984 Citation II 4 -door hatchback sedan, showing Iten Chevrolet at $6,888.00, Jay Kline Chevrolet at $7,200.00 and Suburban Chevrolet at $8,011.00. Motion of Member Bredesen was seconded by Member Turner for award of bid to Iten Chevrolet at $6,888.00. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turners Courtney Motion carried. TRAFFIC SAFETY C01%24ITTEE MINUTES OF AUGUST 13, 1985 APPROVED. Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by Member Kelly to approve the following recommended action as listed in Section A of the Traffic Safety Committee Minutes of August 13, 1985: 1) That the City remove the brush and weeds at the railroad crossing on [Jest 49th Street near Brookside Avenue and that the Committee endorse the citizen's petition to MNDOT for warning signals at the railroad crossing. and to acknowledge Sections B and C of the Minutes. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. BOARD /COMMISSIONS APPOINTMENT PROCESS DISCUSSED. Member Turner asked for the Council's comment on the board /commission appointment process she had drafted following discussion at the last Council meeting. She suggested the new application forms be sent to those individuals who have submitted their names for appointment to the boards /commissions on which there are now vacancies together with a letter asking that the applications be returned by.September 1, 1985 so that.the Council could interview applicants and appoint on September 9th. After discussion, it was informally agreed to approve the appointment procedure as drafted and to interview candidates for the Community Development and Planning -�- Commission at 5:30 p.m. on September 9, 1985 prior to the Regular Council Meeting. BUDGET HEARING DATES SCHEDULED: Mr. Rosland advised that state statute requires the 1986 City Budget to be submitted to the Council at its first regular meeting in September which date is September 9, 1985 and suggested that budget hearing dates be set. Following discussion, Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by Member Turner and dates: September at 7:00 p.m. 1. U /17 /U.J carried unanimously, ,setting the following as budget hearing 16 at 5:00 p.m., September 17 at 7:00 p.m. and September 23 REVIEW OF E.I.S. - HOMART DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERED. (Member Richards excused himself. from the meeting for this agenda item because of a possible conflict of interest.) Mr. Erickson advised that on July 23; 1985 the City submitted a letter to the City of Bloomington summarizing its comments and recommendations concerning Homart's Draft Environment Impact Statement (D.E.I.S.) in accordance with the Council's direction. Bloomington has now released a Final E.I.S. which is scheduled for. approval by the Bloomington City Council on August 26, 1985. Their decision will be based on an E.I.S. which we do not consider adequate to the objections the City raised. Mr. Erickson advised that there are two actions the Council may take: 1) seek a Metropolitan Significance Review by the Metropolitan Council, and 2) to contest the adequacy decision in District Court. In seeking a Metropolitan Significance Review the initiating step would be a resolution by the requesting municipality along with some accompanying information asking for the review. If the chairman of the Metropolitan Council determines that it is made in good faith and complies with the requirements and is not exempt, then the review is ordered for hearing. Timing is important for the question of good faith and therefore the resolution should be submitted shortly after the August 26, 1985 Bloomington Council meeting.when their decision will be made. Regarding possible court action, the City has 30 days after the Bloomington decision is published in which to com- mence action. That can be done concurrently with the Metropolitan Significance Review and if there is an adverse decision, that can be appealed by Edina to the district court. Mr. Erickson said it is also recommended that the City submit a letter to the Bloomington Council advising .them that these actions will be taken if they find that the E.I.S. is adequate. He pointed out that these actions may possibly affect the City's Edinborough project. Member Bredesen then made a motion to submit the letter to the Bloomington Council as recommended and introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION REQUESTING METROPOLITAN SIGNIFICANCE REVIEW BY THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL OF THE HOMART DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Recitals. (a) The Homart Development Company is proposing a project within the City.of Bloomington involving the construction of four office buildings with a total.-area of 1,500,000 square feet, a 350 -room hotel and 5,100 parking spaces in five -level ramp facilities. The project will occupy 26.3 acres in the northwest quadrant of Interstate Highway 494 and France Avenue. The project site is adjacent to the southern boundary of the City of Edina. (b). The density of the Homart project is inconsistent and incompatible with zoning of adjacent property within the City of Edina. (c) Traffic generated by the Homart project will have a substantial impact on existing roadways within and adjacent to the City of Edina and on planned land use development within the City of Edina. (d) The City of Bloomington has prepared a final Environmental Impact State- ment on the Homart Development. The City of Edina submitted written comments on the draft Environmental Impact Statement. The final Environmental Impact State- ment, as approved by the City of Bloomington, does not provide an adequate analysis of the environmental impacts of the Homart project, especially traffic, nor an adequate review of feasible and prudent alternatives as discussed in the comments of the City of Edina on the draft Environmental Impact Statement. (e) Neither the draft nor the final Environmental Impact Statement for the Homart project adequately analyzes the.impact of this project on I -494 nor the interrelationship of this project with others planned along I -494. 2. The City of Edina requests the Metropolitan Council to conduct a metro- politan significance review pursuant to Minn. Stat. §473.173 and Minn. Rules Chapter 5700 on the Homart Development within the City of-Bloomington and as it relates to other planned development along I -494 on the basis that the Homart . project will have a substantial effect on existing and planned land use within the City of Edina and other jurisdictions. Passed by the City Council this 19th day of August, 1985. Attest: C. Wayne Courtney, Mayor City Clerk The motion for adoption of the foregoing was duly seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Turner, Courtney Nays: None Resolution adopted. 8/19/85 . The Council then briefly discussed Bloomington's proposed mega -mall for the former baseball stadium site and asked the staff to contact the City of Minnea- polis to advise them that the City also has concerns about that project and to gather as much information as is available so that the.Council could reach a conclusion as to their position on the mega -mall project. (Member Richards returned to the meeting at this point:.) CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AUTHORIZED FOR THE BRAEMAR CLUBHOUSE PROJECT. Mr. Rosland recalled that the use of a construction manager for the Braemar Clubhouse project was discussed at the last Council meeting with no decision made. He reiterated that staff feels this will be a cost effective way to remodel the clubhouse and that the complexities of the addition to the clubhouse.seem to merit this.. approach. Following discussion, Member Richards introduced the following reso- lution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that it hereby directs and authorizes the City Manager to enter into an agreement, on behalf of the City, with a construction manager to supervise and manage the construction of the Braemar Clubhouse addition. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Turner, Courtney Nays: Kelly Resolution adopted. ATTENDANCE RECORDS REQUESTED FOR ADVISORY BOARD MEETING HEARINGS. Member Kelly, asked that an attendance roster be kept for advisory board meetings that are attended by citizens of the community. Mr. Rosland pointed out that a list of residents attending the recent Edina Park Board meeting regarding Wooddale Park was attached to the Park Board minutes. HRC NO -FAULT BROCHURE QUESTIONED. Member Kelly asked about the No -Fault Brochure which was being mailed out to approximately 3,000 businesses in Edina by the Human Relations Commission. Member Turner responded.that the brochure was approved by the Council in November, 1984, and it was suggested that the Human Relations Commission contact the Edina Chamber of Commerce to help defray the cost of printing the brochure. STRATEGIC PLANNING SESSION DISCUSSED. Member Turner asked the__Council_to: review the summary of the Strategic Planning session held on August 12th in preparation for continued planning at the Council Meeting of September 9,.1985. EDINA ART CENTER REVENUES DISCUSSED. Member Richards commented that the Edina Art Center minutes of June 19, 1985, made reference to a profit from the Juried Art Show held recently. He suggested that because the Art Center operates at a deficit and is subsidized by the City, that the Council should decide what to do with revenues and asked that the Art 'Center board discuss how to get the Center into a profit- making situation.,-rather than determining what to do with . revenues. No formal action'was taken. TEMPORARY RE- ROUTING OF MTC BUSES ON WOODDALE NOTED. Mr. Rosland reported that MTC buses have been re- routed on Wooddale Avenue because of the construction project on.W. 44th Street and that staff has had a number of telephone—''l- calls from residents regarding this. Mr..Hoffman explained that during peak hours in the morning and evenings MTC buses go east /west on W. 44th Street to and from Minneapolis and during the day MTC runs buses on W. 44th Street from Southdale to Ridgedale and back. MTC has asked that during the construction on W. 44th Street that they be allowed to re -route the buses on Wooddale Avenue. Mr. Hoffman said that the passenger load on that route during the morning and evening would justify the temporary re- routing of five buses during those times,_ but that he had asked MTC to use other routing for the daytime buses going between Southdale and Ridgedale. He added that unless the Council had objections that would be his recommendation unless the residents on Wooddale raised strong objection. Member Bredesen commented that he concurred with the recommendation. No formal action was taken. BIDS TO BE TAKEN FOR SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT (COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT - CONTRACT #85 -9) AND FOR TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL SYSTEM (W. 70TH STREET & CORNELIA DR.- CONTRACT 485 -10). As recommended by the City Engineer, Member Turner introduced the following re- solutions and moved their adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS-AND. DIRECTING ADVERTISEMENT FOR-BIDS, SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT INPROVEMENT NO. S -34) BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA: 1. The plans and specifications for the proposed improvements set forth in the following Advertisement for Bids form, heretofore prepared by the City Engineer and now on file in the office of the City Clerk are hereby approved. 2. The Clerk shall cause to be published in the Edina Sun and Construction Bulletin the following notice of bids for improvements: (Official Publication) CITY OF EDINA 4801 W. 50TH STREET EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 HENNEPIN COUTY, MINNESOTA ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. S -34 CONTRACT #85 -9 (ENG) BIDS CLOSE SEPTEMBER 5, 1985 SEALED BIDS will be received and opened in the Council Chambers in Edina City Hall, 4801 W. 50th Street at 11:00 A.M., Thursday, September 5, 1985. The Edina City Council will meet at 7:00 P.M., Monday, September 9; 1985 to consider said bids. The following are approximate major quantities: 2500 S /Y, Sod with 4" Black Dirt 32000 S/F Sidewalk, Concrete 15 Tons, Cl. 2 Gravel 32000 S /F, Sidewalk, Removal Bids shall be in a sealed envelope with a statement thereon showing the work covered by the bid. Bids shall be addressed to the City Engineer, City of Edina, 4801 W. 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota 55424, and may be mailed or sub- mitted personally to the City Engineer. Bids received by the City Engineer, ..either through the mail or by personal submission, after the time set for receiving them may be returned unopened. Work must be done as described in plans and specifications on file in the office of the City Clerk. Plans and specifications are available.for, a deposit of $25.00 (by check). Said deposit to be returned upon return of the plans and speci- fications with a bona fide bid. No bids will be considered unless sealed and accompanied by bid bond or certified check payable to the City Clerk in the amount of at least ten (10) percent of amount of base bid. The City Council reserves the right to reject any or all bids. All plans mailed, enclose separate check for $5.00 payable to the City of Edina for postage and handling. BY ORDER OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL. Marcella M. Daehn, City Clerk RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND DIRECTING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT #85 -B BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA: .1. The plans and specifications for the proposed improvements set forth in the following Advertisement for Bids form, heretofore prepared by the City Engineer and now on file in the office of the City Clerk are hereby approved. 2. The Clerk shall cause to be published in the Edina. Sun and Construction Bulletin the following notice of bids for improvements: (Official Publication) CITY OF EDINA 4801 W. 50TH STREET EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 HENNEPIN.COUNTY, MINNESOTA. ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL SYSTEM CONTRACT 485 -10 (ENG) IMPROVEMENT #85 -B BIDS CLOSE SEPTEMBER 5, 1985 SEALED BIDS will be received and opened in the Council Chambers in Edina City Hall, 4801 W.. 50th Street at 11:00 A.M., Thursday, September 5, 1985. The Edina City Council will meet at 7:00 P.M., Monday, September 9, 1985 to consider said bids. The following are approximate major quantities: 1 Traffic Control Signal System 1 Re- construct Radius of Intersection Bids shall'be in a sealed envelope with a statement thereon showing the work covered by the bid. Bids should be addressed to the City Engineer, City of Edina, 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota 55424,-and may be mailed or submitted .personally to.the City Engineer. Bids received by the City Engineer, either through the mail or by personal submission, after the time set for receiving them may be returned unopened. 8/19/85 Work must be done as described in plans and specifications on file in the office of the City Clerk. Plans and specifications are available for a deposit of $25.00 (by check). Said deposit to be returned.upon. return of the plans and specifications with a bona fide bid. No bids will be considered unless sealed and accompanied by bid bond or certified check payable tp- the City Clerk in the amount of at least ten (10) percent of amount of base.bid. The City Council reserves the right to reject any or all bids. All plans mailed, enclose separate check for $5.00 payable to the City of Edina for postage and handling. BY ORDER OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL. Marcella M. Daehn, City Clerk Motion for adoption of the resolutions was seconded by Member Kelly. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Resolutions adopted. RESOLUTION ADOPTED AUTHORIZING DISPATCH /USE OF CITY EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES BY CITY MANAGER IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS. Mr. Rosland presented a draft resolution which would-authorize dispatch and.use of City equipment and services by the City Manager in emergency situations occurring outside of the City when it would be impossible or impractical for the City Council to meet and authorize such dispatch. He explained that the resolution is recommended to insure that the City's worker compensation and liability insurance coverage would apply to. such situations. Member Kelly introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING DISPATCH AND USE OF CITY EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES BY CITY MANAGER IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS WHEREAS, the City Council finds that instances have occurred in the past and can be anticipated in the future wherein there is a danger of fire,.hazard, casualty or other similar occurrences taking place or occurring outside the territorial limits of the City of Edina and within the State of Minnesota; and by the suddenness thereof it would.be impossible or impractical for the City Council to meet and authorize the dispatch and use of City equipment and personnel to combat such fire, hazard, casualty or other similar occurrence; therefore, BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council as follows: The Council finds it desirable and necessary to authorize the City Manager or his designee to exercise discretion,.considering at all times and in each case the internal needs of the City of Edina and its inhabitants, to dispatch City equipment and personnel as deemed necessary to combat such occurrence whether it takes place within or without the City limits. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that such dispatch and use.as directed by the City Manager or his designee shall be fully authorized as an act of the City of Edina and all provisions for compensation of personnel, rental of equipment, liability insurance coverage, workman's.compensation insurance and all other safeguards and matters pertaining to the City, its equipment and personnel, shall apply in each case as if specifically authorized and directed by this City Council at such time, whether or not the governing body or authority of the place in which' the fire, hazard, casualty or other similar. occurrence exists, has previously requested and provided for assistance and'the use of the Edina equipment and. personnel under a mutual protection agreement or other type protection agree- ment with the City of Edina. FURTHER, the City Manager or his designee shall recall, order and terminate the use of such equipment and personnel when the need for their use no longer exists, or earlier, when at his descretion it appears in the best interest of the City of Edina. FURTHER, if the provisions of this resolution shall ever conflict with the pro- visions of the City's Civil Defense Ordinance, Ordinance No. 502, the provisions of said ordinance shall control. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 118 (MORATORIUM ON SKATE BOARD RAMPS) ADOPTED; SECOND READING WAIVED. Mr. Rosland recalled that the subject of skate board ramps had been discussed at the Council Meeting of August 5, 1985 following complaints regarding a non - conforming ramp at 60th and France Avenue So._ Staff would recommend adoption of an ordinance placing a moratorium on skate board ramps during the time studies are being made regarding accessory uses as directed by the Council. Member Kelly then introduced Ordinance No. 118 and moved its adoption, waiving Second Reading, as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 118 AN ORDINANCE IMPOSING A MORATORIUM ON THE CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION OF SKATE BOARD RAMPS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA UKDAINS: 8/19/85 Section 1. Purpose. Pursuant to applicable Minnesota statutes, Edina is now conducting studies for the purpose of considering adoption and /or amendment of official controls, including a zoning ordinance, an accessory use ordinance and a nuisance ordinance. The ordinances or amendments being studied will consider, and regulate and control, among other things, the desirability of, and the size, location, number -and kind of, skate board ramps, installed or constructed, or to be installed or constructed, in Edina. However, while the new ordinances and amendments are being considered, proposals for, and applications for permits to allow, construction and installation of new skateboard ramps continue to be made. Therefore, in order to protect the planning process and the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Edina, it is necessary and desirable to impose the following moratorium. Sec. 2. Moratorium. From the effective date of this ordinance to and including the first anniversary of such effective date, subject to earlier termination or extension by the Edina City Council, the Edina City Council and the Edina City staff shall riot: (1) accept.any applications for, or continue to process or issue, any permits of any kind for any skate board ramps; or .(2) accept any application for, or continue to process, any variances from any existing City ordinances for the purpose of installing or constructing any skate board ramps. Sec. 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full -force and effect upon ..its.passage and publication. Motion for adoption of the ordinance was.seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Ordinance adopted. ATTEST_: - Mayor City Clerk CLAIMS PAID. Motion of Member Turner was seconded by Member Kelly for payment of the following claims dated 8/19/85: General Fund $232,087.25, Park Fund $60.00, Art Center $785.17, Swimming Pool Fund $1,529.15, Golf Course Fund $19,994.38, Recreation Center Fund $9,207.41, Gun Range Fund $29.40, Utility Fund $19,622.75, Liquor Dispensary Fund $116,594.43, Construction Fund $214,184.99, Total $614,134.92. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. There being no further business on the agenda, Mayor Courtney declared the meeting adjourned at 11:50 p.m. City Clerk Members of the City Council and Mr. Kenneth E. Rosland, City Manager City of Edina 4801 West 50 Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Re: Wooddale School and Utley Park Areas; First Amendment Concerns Dear Members of the City Council and Mr. Rosland: At the various council meetings regarding creation of public parking spaces on the above areas, the concern has been raised that the proposed City action would violate the establishment of religion clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. This concern has been raised because the Church of St. Stephen the Martyr (located near the subject areas) would contribute essentially the total cost of constructing the parking spaces on the school and park sites. The purpose of this letter is to give you our opinion on the First Amendment concern. The establishment clause of the First Amendment provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting establishment of religion." By virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment, the First Amendment applies to state and municipal legislative bodies as well as the United States Congress. Of similar effect is Article I, Section 16 of the Constitution of the State of Minnesota which provides that there shall be "no preference to be given to any religious establishment or mode of worship." There is perhaps no other single area of constitutional law which is more rapidly changing and less certain than that of the establishment of religion clause. Each term of the United States Supreme Court yields new decisions with the Court's most recent interpretations of the clause. Often these decisions are by bare five -four majorities with strongly worded dissents. A number of the recent decisions are in conflict with each DORSEY & WHITNEY A Partnership Including Professional Corporations 2200 FIRST BANK PLACE EAST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 880 WEST-FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING (612) 340 -2600 201 DAVIDSON BUILDING ST. PAUL,MINNESOTA 55101 8 THIRD STREET NORTH (612) 227-8017 TELEX: 29-0605 GREAT FALLS, MONTANA 59401 TELECOPIER o (612) 340 -2868 (406) 727 -3632 P. O. BOX 848 340 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING SUITE 675 NORTH ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA 55903 1800 M STREET N. W. (507) 288-3156 WASHINGTON, D. C. 20036 ( 202) 296 -2780 312 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 30 RUE LA BOETIE (612) 475-0373 75008 PARIS, FRANCE TEL- (1) 562 32 50 August 29, 1985 Members of the City Council and Mr. Kenneth E. Rosland, City Manager City of Edina 4801 West 50 Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Re: Wooddale School and Utley Park Areas; First Amendment Concerns Dear Members of the City Council and Mr. Rosland: At the various council meetings regarding creation of public parking spaces on the above areas, the concern has been raised that the proposed City action would violate the establishment of religion clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. This concern has been raised because the Church of St. Stephen the Martyr (located near the subject areas) would contribute essentially the total cost of constructing the parking spaces on the school and park sites. The purpose of this letter is to give you our opinion on the First Amendment concern. The establishment clause of the First Amendment provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting establishment of religion." By virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment, the First Amendment applies to state and municipal legislative bodies as well as the United States Congress. Of similar effect is Article I, Section 16 of the Constitution of the State of Minnesota which provides that there shall be "no preference to be given to any religious establishment or mode of worship." There is perhaps no other single area of constitutional law which is more rapidly changing and less certain than that of the establishment of religion clause. Each term of the United States Supreme Court yields new decisions with the Court's most recent interpretations of the clause. Often these decisions are by bare five -four majorities with strongly worded dissents. A number of the recent decisions are in conflict with each DORSEY A WHITNEY Members of the City Council and Mr. Kenneth E. Rosland, City Manager August 29, 1985 Page Two other, and there are few clear doctrinal trends. Thus, it is not possible to state with certainty how the United States Supreme Court or another court would rule on a First Amendment challenge to the proposed action of the City of Edina. Never- theless, on the basis of an examination�of the most recent United States Supreme Court precedents, it is our opinion that the proposed action of the City in constructing the parking spaces with funds contributed by the Church would not violate the establishment of religion clause of the First Amendment nor the parallel provision of the Minnesota Constitution. Our opinion is based upon the existence of the following conditions and facts: (1) The City has a secular purpose for the construction of the parking. The parking spaces would produce parking for the public and help the City achieve its parking needs and its plan for the area. Specifically, the parking would help provide access for park users by easing congestion during periods of heavy church use and would help prevent parking congestion on City streets. The construction of the parking would promote the public health, safety, and welfare and serve the public interest for the area. (2) The principal or primary effect of the construction of the parking would neither advance nor inhibit religion. The Church would contribute essentially the total cost of constructing the parking spaces. The parking would be for public use, both park and non -park purposes, without any exclusive use rights given to any person or group, including the Church. No special effort -would be made to plow snow from the lots to suit the Sunday morning service schedule or any other activities of the Church. (3) The construction of the parking would not foster an excessive governmental entanglement with religion. The Church would not receive nor be given any commitment as to the duration of the existence of the public parking to be constructed with the donation from the Church. After the receipt of the gift from the Church, there would be no further dealings between the City and the DORSEY & WHITNEY Members of the City Council and Mr. Kenneth E. Rosland, City Manager August 29, 1985 Page Three Church with respect to the parking. The gift by the Church would be analogous to contributions made by churches in many cities to help support municipal services such as police and fire protec- tion. These contributions are made with the expectation, but without any commitment, that such services will continue. On the basis of these facts and conditions, it is our opinion (subject to the concerns resulting from the uncertainty of the law as above stated) that the proposed City action would not violate the prohibitions on the establishment of religion. Finally, we note in closing that comments have been made that a format for constructing parking for churches in the City of Edina has been established by the transaction between The Colonial Church of Edina and the City in 1977. We believe, however, that The Colonial Church of Edina transaction is not, and should not be considered as, a precedent for the Wooddale School and Utley Park development. In The Colonial Church transaction, The Colonial Church contributed to the City a tract of land adjoining the Countryside Park that was owned by The Colonial Church. The Colonial Church imposed on the gift the requirement that the City allow use of the land as and for church parking in conjunction with the use of the land for public parking, mostly for the adjoining park. Also, The Colonial Church agreed to pay for the cost of constructing public parking on that land. The City Council determined that it was in the best interests of the City to accept the gift with the imposed requirement so as to provide desired land for, and develop needed public parking for, the adjoining public park. In our opinion, the facts in The Colonial Church transaction (most notably that the land was contributed to the City by The Colonial Church) are so different from those in the Wooddale School and Utley Park areas as not to be a precedent for any action the Council may desire to take. If you have any questions concerning the opinion expressed in this letter, please contact us. Very truly yours, DORSEY WHITNEY I By: I Thomas S. Erickson August 28, 1985 To the Editor: In last week's Edina Sun - Current my position on adding more park- ing at Utley Park was incorrectly stated. The view I expressed at the council meeting was that this issue had already been brought up several years ago when the church sought to expand and pad- for more pavement and parking in Utley at that time. It was, even then, the consensus of those attending the meeting that they did not want any more green space given over to concrete and cars. The request ended there. Many of us still feel that the 39 present parking spaces at Utley are more than adeauate for a nark that size with an area of 4.7 acres. (The maximum recommendation for the 5.0 Wooddale site is for 25 parking spaces, and that is for an area that will be ac- tively used for playground and practice fields.) Surely, that small "gem" of grass and lovely bic? trees by the creek that was given to the city should remain a park and not be uprooted for a parking lot. Can't we plan our park land for use as parks and then wholeheartedly welcome all Edinans to use their facilities: the walks, picnic areas, play space -- -and the parking that is there? 11-ML �, Q, � Gam• Jane Fuegner 5225 Kellogg Edina (926 -6647) August 21, 1985 Dear Council Members, Mayor and City Manager, You people have me completely frustrated with your procedures and policies. This concerns (again) the Wooddale and Utley Park sites. As concerned members of the neighborhood and community we have written letters, walked the streets gathering names, attended hours and hours of information meetings, met with Bob Kotejin and Fran Hoffman a number of times in private session and asked others to do the same. We have written letters to newspapers and repeatedly to each of you on how we feel and see the issues that confront us. We have petitioned this neighborhood in the dead of winter. On January 10 of this year (wind chill 90 below) EVERY adjacent property owner on Wooddale gathered in my living room to try to form a consenus oof opinion, which we accomplished. We feel we have gathered the majority opinion on our petitions. 500 names in January and 290 recently (obviously some duplicates among those). What must we do to have you respond as our elected officials? We feel that you are simply placating and patronizing us by the game of allowing us to speak, write, try to influence and invest hours and hours of our time and in the long run it really makes no difference at all. The majority opinion in this corner of Edina says that the land in the park areas should have a maxiumum of green space and a minimum of hard surface. It doesn't seem all that difficult to me. It means that-we put in the number of spaces that are reasonable for park use on both sides. At least, LET'S TRY IT. If we find that is not workable - -we can change it. We are wondering how many more times we are going to meet? Quite frankly, we feel that you are trying to wear us down. We have resented having to work on this issue each Christmas for the past two years. Are you continuing to postpone for reasons that we are not aware of? I personally really resented St. Stephen's Church membership not being involved in all the major issues concerning this piece of property over the past 6 years. I am sympathetic to their parking problem. What city council ever allowed them to build an addition rather than a parking lot' on their own property? Have they been asked by the city to give up their own green space around their own building to park front bumper in along the 50th Street side of the church? Should they be asked to give up their green space before asking the community to give up park space? Please keep in mind that the 25 spaces recommended by the Park Board is ALREADY our (500 names) compromise position on parking. Mr. Bredesen seemed to indicate that something above 25 could be worked out on the Wooddale Site as a 'compromise'. I would also strongly suggest that the church be asked to curtail their community services. There is plenty of space for Boy Scouts and other service organizations to meet in the Community Center. ON those ocassions of church holidays, weddings and funerals -- neighborhood streets will have to be used - -I thought the suggestion of the City Hall and library parking was a good one. I urge you to come to decisions that reflect a fair appraisal of opinions expressed by over 500 people in this corner of the city. X \0 Sr i5.7 A^ � L �SACES . ,4 ` ' 4.5 A � / - 80:0 t ' � 185.,,E — (4.3 AC.yS ' 20 ASS \ - . �o '^ I23 ACF� r y[� FOOTBALL/ A, V I SOCC R FErD o NZA 6U6 STOP PASS iCANX DOO( SKATWIIZ4tr +�/ t LAGDC \Z9 HARD SURFACE AREA CC] 101, Vi - A IA Q C� cl C�l C) I SOLE sl 50 co 0 Omot A 'we CO) Vi - A IA Q C� cl C�l C) I SOLE r l ' I / 1 • TOT LOT O FIELD HA_ _ 1 suRFA E AREA �1 E o- c�L f LL // f ) 7 ot 1 r O La`s \ r° '• _— �.p us�E ® � ��. / / Q'r .s O `i" LL1 s'Cj i —poi J r� r ❑ �Ji / �� t E^ I p r f o gCAI E 00 it N HARD URFACE AREA cr o oe Vi ®d 0 Lu- (0 >-- _0 Iq 0 ®R Ir I.. .Ff ".04. 0 SUBDIVISION DEDICATION REPORT 70: Planning Commission Park Board Environmental Quality Commission FROM: Planning Department SUBDIVISION NAME: rQ:5 r- 6 K EC%V LAND SIZE: �' % /7<�' LAND (BY: Q Subdivision No. �ION Date: The developer of this subdivision has been required to ElA. grant an easement over part of the land B. dedicate % of the land C. donate $ as a fee in lieu of land_ As a result of applying the following policy: A. Land Required (no density or intensity may be used for the first 50 of land dedicated) 11 1. If property is adjacent to an existing park and the addition beneficially expands the park. 2. If property is 6 acres or will be combined with future dedications so that the end result will be a minimum of a 6 acre park. r--T3. If property abuts a natural lake, pond, or stream. 4. If property is necessary for storm water holding or will be dredged or otherwise improved for storm water holding areas or ponds. n 5. If the property is a place of significant natural, scenic or his- toric value. n 6. B. Cash Required Q1. In all other instances than above. 11 2. 7/15/85 Member Turner commented thar�ea -af-th Ctitnmdi -1= Members- was _listened to the concerns expressed, has viewed the property and area, and reviewe the land- scape plan. The proposed project is consistent with the Zon_ing�Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan and the density is approte: Regarding the traffic concerns raised, Member Turner stated t if` warranted we have measures for reviewing increased traffic _ a a need for some kind of control. Member Kelly commented that the Co n must be guided by the Comprehensive Plan in attempting to deliver va ' .. s types of housing for the a is satisfied that it w' be a first Ject. There were no further comments. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVED FOR FOSTER GREEN ADDITION. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved and ordered placed on file. Planner presented the AVproposed plat for the Foster Green Addition, generally located west of Cahill Road and south of Dewey Hill Road, which illustrated a lot for each individual building and all other property would remain as an outlot and be controlled by a condominium association. The site plan illustrates 26 townhouse units and 24 condominium units for a total of 50 dwelling units in seven buildings. Albert Levine, 5501 Dewey Hill Road, stated his objections to the proposed plat. He said there should only be one curb cut onto Cahill Road, that guest parking was at a bare minimum, that the northwest building should be set back further, and that there was an intense use of ground cover and urged the Council to limit the number of units to be placed upon the site. No further comments being heard, Member Bredesen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR FOSTER GREEN ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain plat entitled "Foster Green Addition ", platted by Brutger Companies, Inc., and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of July 15, 1985, be and is hereby granted preliminary plat approval. I-lotion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVED FOR WARDEN ACRES AUSTIN REPLAT. Affidavits of Notice were pre ented by _Clerk - azerl= ard=or -- arsen presented ition for preliminary plat approval noting that the ject property is located south of Grove Street and on the east end of . e cul -de -sac on Oak Lane. The property is part of an earlier subdivision the area and measures 138 feet in width, 239 feet in depth and is 33,05 square feet in size. The proponent is requesting a subdivision which would ate one buildable lot of 12,237 square feet with the remaining 20,830 squ feet designated as an outlot. A previous replat of this property incl, d the dedication of an extension of Oak Lane east to Garden Avenue. ditional right of way must be acquired before this could take place. The operty is now accessed by a temporary cul -de -sac which terminates in a northwesterly corner of the property. Mr. Larsen pointed out that the proponeRes intent is to create one buildable lot while reserving the balance of the pr erty for future subdivision. Since the balance of the property would be de gnated as an outlot, it would not be buildable without replatting. The lot size the proposed lot is similar to other lots in the vicinity. At its June 26 1985 meeting, the Community Development and Planning commission approved t. preliminary plat. No comment being heard, Member Kelly introduced the followi resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUT GRANTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL ARDEN ACRES AUSTIN REPLAT BE IT RESOLVED by the Cit Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain plat entitled "W den Acres Austin Replat", platted by Curtis E. Austin, and presented at the re lar meeting of the City Council of July 15, 1985, be and is hereby granted reliminary plat approval. Motion for adoption the resolution was seconded by Member.Turner. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL GRANTED FOR.FOSTER GREEN.ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain plat entitled "Foster Green Addition ", platted by Foster Green, single, owner and proprietor, and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of September 9, 1985, be and is hereby granted final plat approval. ADOPTED this 9th day of September, 1985. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of September 9, 1985, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 12th day of September, 1985. City Clerk LOT DIVISION NUMBER LD-85-10 L 0 C A T 10 N The Habitat, 6112 -14 4 Habitat Court Lot 6, Block 1., The Habitat EDINA -PLANNING DEPARTMENT The landscape plan be subject to staff approval. Mr. T Silver owner of Mail Handlin , Inc. was present along with Mr. Peter Beck, attorney for ail Handling, Inc. and Mr. Dennis 'ller architect of th roposed addition. John Skagerbe asked Mr. employees would incr a with stated that there woul a one that the proposed additi w space. Gordon Johnson dire d asked him what would happ Bec if the number of h new addition. Mr. Beck dditional employee added and mostly warehouse and storage a question to Mr. Larsen and the building was sold in regards to parking cond ions. Mr. Larsen informed the Commission that Mail dling, I . was owned by Mr. Silver and staff expect Mai Handling, In to be long term tenants of the building. ohn Skagerberg w dered if staff could be sure that the roposed warehouse s ce was used strictly for warehouse ace and not converted to office space. Mr. Larsen said t if the space is used for then than warehouse s ce it would be a violation of a variance. n Skagerberg moved for approval of the al Dev opment Plan with conditions recommended by s ff. Mr. Ph' Sked seconded the motion. All were in favor. The tion carried. LD -85 -10 The Habitat 6112 -14 Habitat Court Lot Division Mr. Larsen informed the Commission that the proponent is requesting a lot division of an existing double bungalow. The proposed lot division satisfies all conditions of the v Q Zoning Ordinance for dividing R -2 properties. John Palmer motioned to approve the lot division. Helen McClelland seconded the motion. Gordon Johnson abstained. The motion carried. LD- -11 The Habitat 6108 -10 Waterfo ourt Lot Divisio Mr. Larsen inf he Commission that the proponent is requesting a divisi` f. an existing double bungalow. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AUGUST 28, 1985 LD -85 -10 The Habitat 6112 -14 Habitat Court Lot 6, Block 1, The Habitat Refer To: Attached Survey The proponent is requesting a lot division of an existing double bungalow. The proposed lot division satisfies all conditions of the Zoning Ordinance for dividing R -2 properties. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval. CALVIN H. HEDLUND Land Surveyor Civil Engineer 7 714 Morgan Avenue South Richfield, Minnesoto 55423 Phone d 866 -2523 Surveyor`s G'ertif�ate JOB xo PAGE i SURVEY FOR: The Habitat DESCRIBED AS: See Page 2 LU • A 01 v z may^ o oti 1� 0 FPO � 1 1 1 1 I N 1 al N 1 PARCE0A 0 I 1 � 1 b V Ck 1 I a, 1 ` 1 1 1 � 1 895 ,N � O � 1 i 65 R= 8 9 /• Z � it oo ° 23.31 89f lo• r 6 a N M � N �N P Cq� r Top of Folmdations = 896• I Garage Floor. =895.7 Basement Floor =888.0 Proposed Elevations O Existing Elevations Drainage Directions Denotes Lot Corners O Lot size = 32.091 at BIJ5. size-= 5494 0' /�s s 17. °/o 6F��a 9� Wa. t-e r Bss.9 PARCEL B' "¢ C l�DE \ \ \ 61 /c qL s9sZ � d =22 °p2�49- ., o.oe f\ h Olt• N°R o # 001 3 I' qo 1��P►$1TAT:._ CD(J 9� CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY• tH ✓: yo.48 �� I hereby certify that on /3018' s I surveyed the 4 85 y property described above and that the above plot is a correct representation of sold survey Calvin H. Hedlund, Minn. Reg. No. 5942 .. LOCATION MAP LOT DIVISION NUMBER LD -85 -11 L O C A T 10 N The Habitat, 6108 -19 Waterford Court Lot 1, Block 1, The Habitat EDINA - PLANNING DEPARTMENT The landscape plan be subject to staf pproval. Mr. T Silver owner of Mail and in , Inc. was present along with Mr. Peter Beck, attorney for ail Handling, Inc. and Mr. Dennis 'ller architect of th roposed addition. John Skagerbe asked Mr. Bec if the number of employees would incr a with th new addition. Mr. Beck stated that there woul a one dditional employee added and that the proposed additi w mostly warehouse and storage space. Gordon Johnson dire. d a question to Mr. Larsen and asked him what would hap the building was sold in regards to parking cond' ions. Mr. Larsen informed the Commission that Mail dling, I . was owned by Mr. Silver and staff expect Mai Handling, In to be long term tenants of the building. ohn Skagerberg w dered if staff could be sure that the roposed warehouse s ce was used strictly for warehouse ace and not converted to office space. Mr. Larsen said t if the space is used for ther than warehouse s ce it would be a violation of a variance. n Skagerberg moved for approval of the al Dev opment Plan with conditions recommended by s ff. Mr. Ph' Sked seconded the motion. All were in favor. The tion carried. -10 The Habitat \ 6112 -14 Habitat Court Lot Division Mr. La r informed the Commesion that the proponent is requesting a >for on of xisting double bungalow. The proposed losat' ies all conditions of the Zoning Ordinanci R -2 properties. John Palmet o ap ve the lot division. Helen McClellanthe mote Gordon Johnson abstained. The ried. LD -85 -11 The Habitat 6108 -10 Waterford Court Lot Division Mr. Larsen informed the Commission that the proponent is requesting a lot division of an existing double bungalow. The proposed lot division satisfies all conditions of the Zoning Ordinance for dividing R -2 properties. Helen McClelland moved to approve the lot division. David Runyan seconded the motion. Gordon Johnson abstained. The motion carried IV. � QURNMENT John Skager'he moved for adjournmeat 8:20 p.m. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AUGUST 28, 1985 LD -85 -11 The Habitat 6108 -10 Waterford Court Lot 1, Block 1, The Habitat Refer To: Attached Survey The proponent is requesting a lot division of an existing double bungalow. The proposed lot division satisfies all conditions of the Zoning Ordinance for dividing R -2 properties. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval. 11 CALVIN H. H E D L U N D 7726 Morgan Avenue Sarah Richfield, Minnesota 55423 !.and Surveyor Civil Engineer Phone : 866-2523 S urveyor s certilkate JOB xo x3k4ior SURVEY FOR: The Habitat DESCRIBED AS: Parcel A That part of Lot 1, Block 1, THE HABITAT, lying southwesterly of a line and its extensions drawn from a point on the westerly line of said Lot 1, distant 70.00 feet south from the northwest corner thereof to a point on the easterly line of said Lot 1 distant 30.54 feet southwesterly from the most easterly corner thereof, as measured along said easterly line, and reserving easements of record. Parcel B That part of Lot 1, Block 1, TILE HABITAT, lying northeasterly of a line and its extensions drawn from a point on the westerly line of said Lot 1, distant 70.00 feet south from the northwest corner thereof to a point on the easterly line of said Lot 1 distant 30.54 feet southwesterly from the most easterly corner thereof, as measured along said easterly line, and reserving easements of record. 895,4 -sue Existing Elevations — d• Drainage Directions---,-- o � Denotes Lot Corners 0 ^oo 8 95,9 lQt size 15, 358 al 81d� size : 3,725 A F 0 u J t4 WATERFORD Cov7?T iNLA: S CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY I hereby certify that on -G/ I 18.7 I surveyed the property described above and that the above plat is a correct representation of said survey. Calvin H. Hedlund, Minn. Reg. No. 5942 _RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the following described property is at present a single tract of land: Lot 1, Block 1, The Habitat; and WHEREAS, the owners have requested the subdivision of said tract into separate parcels (herein called "Parcels ") described as follows: Parcel A: That part of Lot 1, Block 1, THE HABITAT, lying southwesterly of a line and its extensions drawn from a point on the westerly line of said Lot 1, distant 70.00 feet south from the northwest corner thereof to a point on the easterly line of said Lot 1 distant 30.54 feet south- westerly from the most easterly corner thereof, as measured along said easterly line, and reserving easements of record; and Parcel B: That part of Lot 1, Block 1, THE HABITAT, lying northeasterly of a line and its extensions drawn from a point on the westerly line of said Lot l.,distant 70.00 feet south from the northwest corner thereof to a point on the easterly line of said Lot 1 distant 30.54 feet southwesterly from the most easterly corner thereof, as measured along said easterly line, and reserving easements of record. WHEREAS, it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and said Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purposes of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Ordinance Nos. 801 and 825; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina that the conveyance and ownership of said Parcels as separate tracts of land is hereby approved and the requirements and provisions of Ordinance No. 801 and Ordinance No. 825 are hereby waived to allow said division and conveyance thereof as separate tracts of land but are not waived for any other purpose or as to any other provision thereof, and subject, however, to the provision that no further subdivision be made of said Parcels unless made in compliance with the pertinent ordinances of the City of Edina or with the prior approval of this Council as may be provided for by those ordinances. RTa..gnT.TTTTnm WHEREAS, the following described property is at present a single tract of land: Lot 6, Block 1, The Habitat; and WHEREAS, the owners have requested the subdivision of said tract into separate parcels (herein called "Parcels ") described as follows: Parcel A: That part of Lot 6, Block 1, THE HABITAT, lying southwesterly of a line, and its extensions, drawn from a point on the westerly line of said Lot 6 distant 64.44 feet southwesterly from the most northerly corner thereof to a point on the easterly line of said Lot 6 distant 65.41 feet southerly from the northeast corner thereof, as measured along said easterly line, and reserving easements of record; and Parcel B: That part of Lot 6, Block 1, THE HABITAT, lying northeasterly of a line, and its extensions, drawn from a point on the westerly line of said Lot 6 distant 64.44 feet southwesterly from the most northerly corner thereof to a point on the easterly line of said Lot 6 distant 65.41 feet southerly from the northeast corner thereof, as measured along said easterly line, and reserving easements of record. WHEREAS, it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and said Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purposes of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Ordinance Nos. 801 and 825; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina that the conveyance and ownership of said Parcels as separate tracts of land is hereby approved and the requirements and provisions of Ordinance No. 801 and Ordinance No. 825 are hereby waived to allow said division and conveyance thereof as separate tracts of land but are not waived for any other purpose or as to any other provision thereof, and subject, however, to the provision that no further subdivision be made of said Parcels unless made in compliance with the pertinent ordinances of the City of Edina or with the prior approval of this Council as may be provided for by those ordinances. REQUEST FOR PURL; ASE TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Francis J. Hoffman, City Engineer .IA: Kenneth Rosland, City Nanaver SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IPA EXCESS OF $5,000 DATE: September 5, 1985 Material Description (General Specifications): Contract #8579 (Eng) - Sidewalk Replacement - Improvement No. S -34 Country Club District - Brown & Fairway.Sections ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: $95,780.50 Quotations /Bids: Company Amount of Quote or Bid �• Victor Carlson & Sons Inc. $80,985.00. 2. Arcon Constarution Co. Inc. $98,605.00 Holst Construction Inc. .$f04;776.60 4. Gunderson Bros.-Cement Contractors Co. $118,427.50 Department P.ecommendation: Victor Carlson.& Sons Inc. .$80,985.00 • Engineering Signatu Ivy Department Finance Director's Endorsement: The recommended bid is ✓ is not within the amount budget for the purchase. . n. uaien, rinance Director City Manager's Endorsement: (/ �• I concur with the reconrnendation of the Department and recommend Council approve the purchase. 2. I recommend as an alternative: A Kennethl Rosland, -tanager WHEREAS the United Way of Minneapolis Area currently provides funding to 103 agencies offering over 370 programs ranging from counseling victims of child abuse to providing homemaker services to the elderly that will allow them to remain in their horses; and WHEREAS the efforts of thousands of community volunteers enable the United Way to maintain fundraising and administrative costs under 9(,� to every contributed dollar; and WHEREAS in 1985 allocations were made to programs that are reaching more people in high growth communities, the United Way Board of Directors has made a strong com- mitment to expanding services to suburban and out- lying growth communities; BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Council of Edina hereby support United Way Day, September 18, 1985, in the Edina area and further encourage local busi- ness and their employees to participate in this event. 15 M E M 0 R A N D U M TO: Kenneth E. Rosland DATE: September 6, 1985 FROM: Craig G. Swanson SUBJECT: On -Sale Wine Licenses The on -sale wine license applications of the below two establishments have been investigated in accordance with applicable Statutes and ordinances: 1. The New LeBistro Cafe of Edina 3433 Hazelton Rd. Edina, MN 55435 2. Dayton's Boundary Waters Restaurant Dayton - Hudson Corporation 777 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, MN 55402 The findings of these investigations do not reveal information that is contrary to the public interest for the purpose of licensing. Therefore, I recommend the Council move to approve the applications and issuance of on -sale wine licenses for the listed establishments conditioned upon approval by the State of Minnesota. And, instruct the City Clerk to forward the required documents to the State of Minnesota for their approval. CRAIG. SWANSON CHIEF' OF POLICE CGS:nah i -� M E M O R A N D U M DATE: September 9, 1985 TO: Ken Rosland, City Manager FROM: Colleen Paulus, Sanitarian SUBJECT: Approval of Wine Application The following establishments 'have been approved' for the service of wine according to the Edina Health Department requirements: 1. Daytons Boundary Water Restaurant Dayton- Hudson Corp. 777 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 2. The New I eBistro Cafe of Edina Yorktown Mall 3433 Hazelton Road Edina, Mn. The establishments have been evaluated for adequate storage space for the wine, glassware storage and- the method of dispensing. M E M O R A N D U M DATE: September 9, 1985 TO: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager FROM: Harold Sand -1 G SUBJECT: Wine Licenses I have examined the applications for wine licenses at the Dayton's Boundary Water Restaurant at Southdale and LeBistro Restaurant, 3433 Hazelton Road for conformance to the location requirements contained is sub paragraphs 1 and 2, paragraph b, section 39 of ordinance No. 902 -A1. Both establishments are located within the PC -3 planned commercial district and have exclusive entrances from the exterior of the building. Therefore they conform to the location requirements for issuance of the wine license. M E M O R A N D U M TO: Ken Rosland, City Manager FROM: Gordon Hughes, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: HOMART DATE: September 6, 1985 On August 19, 1985, I provided a report to the City Council regarding the Final Environmental Impact Statement for Homart. This report noted that the E. I. S. failed to respond to the various issues which had been raised by Edina. The City Council authorized us to send another letter to Bloomington urging that they conclude that the E. I. S. was inadequate and to pursue steps to lessen the project's impact on Edina. The City Council also authorized a resolution requesting a metropolitan significance review of this project by the Metropolitan Council. On August 21, 1985, Mayor Courtney sent the attached letter to the Bloomington Council. We are sorry to report that on August 26, the Bloomington City Council rejected our requests and adopted a resolution approving the Final E. I. S. (Refer to attached letter of August 27.) Last week, we received inquiries from Homart's attorney, Ms. Fisher, concerning the possibility of two members of each City Council meeting to discuss the issue. She asked that we offer alternate dates for a meeting and provide an agenda of the issues to be discussed. As to the latter, Ms. Fisher inferred that Bloomington may be unwilling to discuss reducing the size of the project. We stated to Ms. Fisher that Edina is very interested in meeting with Bloomington as we have been since May 15. However, we objected to any preconditions to such a meeting and stated that our interest was the density of the project. At this writing, attempts are being made to arrange such a meeting sometime during the week of September 16. We have also completed the necessary background reports needed to submit our resolution to the Metropolitan Council. We recommend that this resolution should not be submitted until a meeting with Bloomington has occurred. GH /sw Attachment rITY f)F 4801 WEST 50TH STREET, EDINA. MINNESOTA 55424 612- 927 -8861 August 21, 1985 The Honorable James Lindau, Mayor Members of the City Council City of Bloomington 2215 West Old Shakopee Road Bloomington, Minnesota 55431 Dear Mayor Lindau and Members of the City Council: We are again writing you regarding Edina's concerns related to the proposed Homart Development at I -494 and France Avenue. As you know, your staff and representatives of Homart have been undertaking the steps necessary for the project to comply with the State's environmental review process. You are scheduled to complete this process on August 26, 1985, at which time you will consider the adequacy of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the project. We urge you to conclude that this EIS is inadequate and that steps should be taken to lessen this project's impacts on Edina and other jurisdictions. The City of Edina made detailed comments and recommendations on the Draft EIS for this project. These comments and recommendations were neither frivolous nor unanswerable. Their intent was not one of delay, but rather a sincere interest on our part to have the impacts of this project on Edina and other jurisdictions identified and objectively evaluated. We were extremely dismayed to read the responses to our comments and recommendations in the Final EIS. In short, no data, analyses, or conclusions have been modified in the Final EIS due to our comments and recommendations. The responses which were provided do not adequately address the issues which we raised. After our comments and recommendations were issued to you, the City of Edina made application for an indirect source permit to the M.P.C.A. for the Edinborough project at 76th and York. As part of our application, we were requested to provide further analyses of the 76th Street and France Avenue intersection, which took into account the traffic contribution of the Homart project. Our analyses indicated that 76th and France will operate at a level of Service F at full development of the Homart and • ., August 21, 1985 Mayor Lindau and Members of the City Council Page Two Edinborough projects. Homart will contribute nearly four times the traffic volume to this intersection at the critical hour as compared to Edinborough. This issue was never addressed in the EIS and presents an intolerable impact on roadways in Edina. We must advise you of our intent to pursue available remedies, including appropriate court action, challenging the adequacy of the Final EIS as well as an initiation of a Metropolitan Significance Review by the Metropolitan Council if our concerns are not adequately addressed by Homart and the City of Bloomington. We again stand ready to'meet with you, as we have since May 15, to resolve this issue. CWC /sw Sincerely, z C. Wayne Co tney, City of Edina Mayor 1 city of bloomington, minnesota Municipal Building • 2215 West Old Shakopee Road • Bloomington, Minnesota 55431 • (612) 881 -5811 August 27, 1985 Kenneth E. Rosland, City Manager City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina MN 55424 Dear Ken: At its meeting of August 26, 1985, the Bloomington City Council found the Homart Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to be adequate. Bloomington very much appreciates the comments and concerns of Edina regarding the project. The Bloomington City Council, however, agreed with the Bloomington staff that the project EIS adequately addressed the issues raised in the scoping decision and that issues within the control of Bloomington were properly addressed. The City Council indicated that we are to work with the City of Edina in influencing Hennepin County to widen France Avenue north of 77th Street when requested and warranted, and cooperate with Edina in managing growth and development within our respective communities. The City Council indicated that the cumulative impacts of all existing and new development should be addressed as part of the comprehensive planning process rather than as a component of the Homart EIS. The Council decided it would be inappropriate to delay a project that had adequately undergone a site - specific EIS review. Please contact me if you have any questions or if I can be of any further assistance. r Very �`};'�.y yours, ty AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION /EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Telecommunications Device for the Deaf: (612) 887 -9677 . Pidgeon JOHN PRIN August 29, 1985 Mr. Gordon Hughes Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Mr. Hughes, Thank you for returning my phone call yesterday regarding the City of Edina's position on the industrial expansion taking place along Interstate #494. My wife and I are certainly against such projects as the Homart Development, too. We support you whole - heartedly in your efforts to challenge developments like these, and we encourage the City of Edina to pursue every possible legal and political channel to prevent them from becoming reality. I'm employed at Control Data headquarters and drive #494 from Highway #100 to 34th Ave. East twice a day. The number of unoccupied office buildings and hotels is alarming right now. Imagine the impact once these empty buildings fill up and the proposed developments get built and occupied. The results will be staggering. Commuting time, pollution, stress and strain on drivers and residents and roads .... the consequences are ghastly to contemplate. My family and I love our home and neighborhood, and are grateful to Edina City officials who value the green, open, fresh air environment (and, of course, who created and are maintaining it). Thank you, Mr. Hughes, and others like yourself for working diligently on our behalf. Sincerely, JOIL pjt�-� 6332 Wilryan Avenue South, Edina, MN 55435 (612) 941 -1870 dw =- G M E M O R A N D U M TO: Ken Rosland, City Manager FROM: Gordon Hughes, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: MEGAMALL DATE: September 6, 1985 On August 26, I met with Bill Barnhart of the City of Minneapolis concerning the Megamall. Mr. Barnhart provided detailed written material generated by Minneapolis and briefed me on their present lobbying activities. Mr. Barnhart later sent a copy of Minneapolis' comments on the EAW Scoping Document for the project. (You may recall from Homart that the Scoping Document outlines the issues to be addressed by the Environmental Impact Statement.) I have attached to this memo several items received from Minneapolis. Due to their volume, I have not attached the Scoping Document response or Triple Five's analysis of tourism and economic impact. (These documents are, of course, available for Council review, if desired.) The items attached include the following: 1) A brief analysis by Dayton Hudson of Triple Five's projections. This analysis suggests that the Twin Cities cannot absorb the Megamall without negatively impacting existing retail. 2) Retail Development Impact Analysis. Refer particularly to pages 6 and 11 which speculate on losses to existing retail centers. 3) Convention Center Preference Study. 4) Fiscal Disparities Memo. Refer particularly to paragraph III. 5) Fiscal Disparities Worksheet. This analysis shows that if existing formulae remained in place, Edina would forego $197,394 in new State aids if the Megamall was exempt from fiscal disparities. 6) The World of Tomorrow. F.un reading. i September 6, 1985 Ken Rosland Page Two Actions In my opinion, the City should do the following: 1) Prior to September 11, we should offer comments concerning the Scoping Document. As noted earlier, Minneapolis has already submitted its comments which are 62 pages in length. Edina could simply endorse these comments or we could select those issues which we are particularly concerned with such as transportation impacts and economic impacts. 2) We should immediately communicate with our legislators. In my view, our position ought to be: _a) Any subsidization of this project has the effect of creating a project based upon false economics that will adversely affect existing retailing; and b) The public investment needed to upgrade the transportation system to accommodate this project is excessive and not in our interests. 3) We should communicate with the Metropolitan Council urging a thorough review of the project from the standpoint of metropolitan significance. From a strategy standpoint, some alternatives are available. First, Mr. Barnhart noted that a meeting may be desirable between one of our elected officials and Mayer Fraser and /or some Minneapolis Council members. We can attempt to arrange such a meeting at your request. Second, a meeting with representatives of the Center Companies and other retailers in Edina would be desirable. Third, an attempt to develop a coalition with other suburbs could be initiated. GH /sw Attachment DA 100' 2-00 10 _ A lou�a 'ts ivxow oo gavels w!6w- -Gan ioomiccsJ. -jkuekre, ttiuvnL-V' Gf {✓ is es{iwa-fcd act Y�°GIsUYI clD t1f �I Con�e�l�icrn - io °lc rcCXeuii��'l lGc vvw v>�-E ► z5 - 30 �o l "16 V is 1 �� ..(.,� T VU k p� -ru.v1 h� p� olylku refui 65 to �c��r 4JAe 4 Wl JO p ✓� ✓� f 0- �UCShU115 aYlci i��fVlf �,�i�m�/ Noun manq visiArs p-cr qea-r ? rePres�- w� �l lu- jj 4-ju,re- VKi (,(. iM P.tOP - re c, VetLh a. Od a vvt us,c_v qtC a,vI Z . 5 °(o Y�Si�CS teu�UYl do r . v is i is wka Cana far -Iii+n tepream covni 116 W � �p� purports �l �l-ti� G.�1o..l��sis T Dui �l 0-�6 vvtiu.. vvti I.liu�l . zl '�1�,2. r�ep0(-� �Gu.�l �- $G °�o �l isi � ✓� �vo u ld �. 4j, rn;�.lro po l i fug 6cvew w 1, -% cL PoO l cth x 2 . z vn i � po p lL . � � vin OLN fi vru,U mAAS� eUL Imo. t r, Y2k YzffY1 V i 5i-� I,w y�1A IM0.�,� ►M i l,� i lm 2.2 vn 1(/l WE a.�uv ll vii �hu,� c�v_tq. P u�bt�L '' I _ Ic L 1Q.l,l l[. T j l ec �ui�� v���t -� �u �IjLg vti )vnFec ? • � Im: � 61, i �m 5�� . f �-. �t �3C��s�� �f= .$ � . z b i U.�� urn rc fu:� I .�(�� (ihC ►Udos LiftFO, as wtu as) joal-gvaccn�t vcsFouvat�t-j Au+a.►no b pus �, PGtLV Tug i C I h es �E,V5r1Y1 L�rvc -�5 • `� f i n�c-�/ raz. S 7�: v61 wi bt VY76(l — Yelui l ffl/6 ptr rr. . IUrGI.I h'i (X = ZSvni �� Ism ,f6 relt iC- 1p6 b2l5�a 28rh��t�ur►= m�u� u re,4 l +-ri �i-2 b i U icm Oui l ,SGc.W 1'}.5 wt i bt i M ✓e [U l l }Y i (o 9 rdA L �i q i Z .2 l i vYl -Tu) C t h'rs � P U- ma lCc re-fui ( � L'uOU ld tmtc- �Vtw qtw i v� �I• h L_S b0� ✓n (Av,w�w.t ..u4P.o -�ndi wrrs - rc {2�i 1 saps a� ►nc�v►�,u- �i�,{ pc.rarm �+�1 r�s�,od) '(�i t(1 C� h� S >(C fu 15�1.�s� 5 • l ZG� vn i 6 NLL V d i l WIL-s WC O L6 J J 80} a 3.5 °�o l yl ue ay- . rt {ui l }��Y Ik? l —OILts WO0d •lnCveiv -- �}�', j 4j 46011 •uLk7Luivitrhr_ 1►�IS (0 YY1 �101� �S fC btu p r {!� r}.1�lCVTi , .i {,u lr r �. V1 �' lJl.1 �� S�) VYl Is • %5� . �Gt,u. h ap l nuseA- vylatk p Uvt5 �aJA Soy- "L�6x"'�t -5 �D ve.."I l --f'1 a5l ed vv T k-n 61ove-3 ire appyv� I�P 00021. �. ea-uj Wood O\Ica as a C 40, 000 udd i hOM&k .5q. �f . 1°85 �'l• 12 82 900 —'iWih Ci h'�s p4p�. Sbrc ,Sq• ft Rj3q P10 rut a _ 9&D. coo 13, :� &&,900 by 1990 o r (o • I r can i fZA- n Ci .� o v(ct Sian = Z �b h � � • I � • f� • � v ca p � }A..� c aYn -�u.v� � �•�{ ��n l -��rz� R� hUe v' Ias su� � 4W }u win Gies) art cYvew1 uc eukFkd, ow c✓tkl p:mp¢,c{iv. lklnq .t�iSHvicl PoPulafiuvl � rro Yu hwu , -rl4t. -�W i vl Li IXs. co.n ►fit p1�b .}lu,, gloom A& (A'opDSCd eP.{tt,il �,UNMaUt y�dlivl�y 1w1�G.C,f1v1L. �xisfltY� '(wrn CititS �fuiC Q U MET STADIUM SITE RETAIL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT INTRODUCTION The size of the planned retail development as announced for the Met Stadium 1. site has raised the question of its impact on existing retail development . in the metropolitan area. This report considers the impact from the viewpoint of a competitive development at the Bloomington site, completed as sketchly advertised. As such; it would be a four million square foot retail complex including six major department stores, 800 specialty and fashion shops, two supermarkets, and many restaurants, nightclubs and theaters. Even though this analysis uses the numbers as given, their relative sizes as well l as the lack of detail evoke some comment. For example, 800 specialty and fashion shops is a higher number than the combined total retail stores, reported in the 1982 Census of Retail Trade - Major Retail Centers, in the Minneapolis Central Business District (524 stores) and the St. Paul CBD (173 stores). Neither downtown has as many as six department stores. An announced four million square foot retail complex probably means actual development of a somewhat lesser amount of gross leasable area (GLA) when the common areas (such as malls, walkways, escalators) are subtracted, but there is no indication of this figure. Likewise, it might be presumed that such a development would be phased, over time (as was the Edmonton Mall), with the final, totally developed package possibly ending up to be less than originally announced. This planned, extensive retail development is also unique in its deviation from the normal pattern of major retail site selection. In the Twin Cities area as in other parts of the U.S., major regional centers were developed in suburban rings, over time, as �- 1 population moved outwards from the central cities in sufficient number to make their construction feasible. They provided an alternative to shopping downtown, and as such intercepted shoppers who in an earlier day would have journeyed to the CBD in Minneapolis or St. Paul. For example, if one progresses south from the Minneapolis CBD, either Southdale or Southtown centers may be encountered in Bloomington and Edina. Further south, in ` the next ring, the large regional Burnsville_ shopping center is in full operation, primarily serving the growing population south of the Mississippi River. In recent years new outlying major regional center construction has abated, replaced by development of new smaller centers. These smaller centers have been developed within the perimeters created by the outlying regional centers. Again in Minneapolis for example, the Minnehaha Mall and the Calhoun Square centers on Lake Street, as well as Galleria and Yorktown centers in the Southdale area represent more of an in-fill situation. This is augmented by festive - market retail groupings such as Riverplace. In contrast, the proposed four million square foot 'Viet Site retail complex appears more as an in -fill with something equivalent to about four major retail centers in one location. Is there sufficient unsatisfied retail potential to justify such a development? The following analysis considers this question. METHODOLOGY The analysis uses the recently - released 1982 Census of Retail Trade - Major Retail Centers data as part of a hypothetical assumption that a Bloomington site's major retail development might have been proposed at that time, only as a commercial retail, office and hotel complex. The first part of the report considers the unsatisfied potential for development at the site. 2 The second part of the report accepts the premise of a four million square foot retail development as part of the larger concept (convention center, "Disneyland ", luxury hotel, office space), and considers the possible retail impact on the major retail centers from whose trade areas it would draw. PART I Trade Area For the purpose of this analysis, the met site primary trade, area is . assumed to cover south Minneapolis, south St. Paul, Richfield, Bloomington, Edina, Burnsville, Apple Valley, Eagan, Mendota Heights and Mendota. This area, delineated on the map goes beyond the normal primary zone of a trade area, whose boundaries are usually limited in part, by the presence of freeways and rivers as well as by the presence of major competition. All these barriers are present in relation to the Met Site. However in part for ease of presentation, complete communities have been included in the trade area. The normal trade area also has been extended somewhat in ,this test for major facility justification (not necessarily 4 million square feet). The result of this expanded area might be a lower than normal dollar share attractable by facilities at the Piet Stadium site. Trade Area Population And Retail Sales Expenditure The trade area had a 1980 population of 502,300 (rounded). By 1982, the suburban portions of this area had grown by 6,000- 7,000, but the Minneapolis and St. Paul portions had declined by perhaps 2,000 -3,000 persons, so there were in 1982 about 505,000 people residing in the area delineated on the map. 3 - ---------- ----- - ------ ---- ------------------- ------------- ------ ...... ... .... 10 H=-NNEP'N RAMSIEEY 11cl, -7 ------ ------------ -- ------ --- - ------ — ---- ---- -------- 20 . ..... . ... �11"",i Saint P�aui .......... l4w, A, 16 SCOTT NIET NEW MARY,E' ►, r � t F3 n ---------- --- EUREKA N..� _ i fi5 i �' Elk. Le LIJ G- L DAKOTA ;IANL)I)LPt. . ........... 96 The 1982 total retail sales potential is estimated at just over $2.7 billion, as is shown on the following table: Met Site Trade Area Total Sales Potential 1982 (rounded data) Population:. 505,000 Per Capita Retail Expenditure: - $5,400 Total Sales - Potential ($0001s) $2,727,000 *Per Capita Expenditure times population Effective Competition The 1982 Census of Retail Trade - Major Retail Centers - :Minnesota lists 13 major retail centers (MRC's) including the central business districts of Minneapolis and St. Paul, that appear to draw customers from the Met site trade area. Experience suggests that regardless of the quality or quantity of suburban facilities available to serve trade area residents from any site, some portions of total expenditure will continue to go to the central business districts (CBD's), both due to downtown employment and to continuation of previous shopping habits. Based on data contained in the 1982 Census of Retail Trade, 15 percent of the trade area's retail potential might be expected to go to the downtowns of Minneapolis and /or St. Paul, leaving 85 percent or just over $2.3 billion available for competition from other sites. The 11 other major retail centers which might be expected to provide effective competition to facilities at the Met Stadium Site are shown in the following table. Also included is each center's 1982 volume level and an estimate of the normal effectiveness of these retail centers serving the trade area population at the present time. This latter figure for each center is the estimated amount of trade area sales volume that the existing group of facilities is capable of obtaining and holding under normal competitive conditions. It does not necessarily correspond to the volume of business done by a specific center at the present time. 4 $ 1,451,000 $ 835,000 Effective competition also includes the thousands of retail outlets in small centers, small CBD's, at intersections and freestanding. Data from the 1982 Census of Retail Trade suggests that non -MRC retail volume for these stores within the trade area approximated $2.3 billion in 1982. For the purposes of this analysis it is estimated that about one -half or $1.2 billion represents effective competition to facilities at the site. Total effective competition is thus estimated at over $2.4 billion from CBD, MRC and other trade area competitive facilities. Unsatisfied Potential, Site Share and Square Footage Justified Using what might be termed a residual analysis, the total effective competition from CBD, major retail center and other facilities is subtracted from the total potential to obtain the unsatisfied potential. As is shown on the summary table, on the following 5 Met Site Trade Area Effective Competition Major Retail Centers MRC 1982 Effective Name Number Rounded Competition Volume ($0001s) ( 000's) Southdale/ 5, 16 $ 428,000 $ 340,000 Yorktown Southtown 6 185,000 150,000 _ Burnsville 3 - 191,000 95,000 Hub 26 57,000 50,000 Hi -Lake/ 18 83,000 60,000 Minnehaha Mall Eden Prairie 9 116,000 15,000 East Lake 4 75,000 50,000 Knollwood 1 75,000 20,000 Highland 13 51,000 20,000 Signal Hills 25 41,000 5,000 Southview Sq. 24 149,000 30 000 $ 1,451,000 $ 835,000 Effective competition also includes the thousands of retail outlets in small centers, small CBD's, at intersections and freestanding. Data from the 1982 Census of Retail Trade suggests that non -MRC retail volume for these stores within the trade area approximated $2.3 billion in 1982. For the purposes of this analysis it is estimated that about one -half or $1.2 billion represents effective competition to facilities at the site. Total effective competition is thus estimated at over $2.4 billion from CBD, MRC and other trade area competitive facilities. Unsatisfied Potential, Site Share and Square Footage Justified Using what might be termed a residual analysis, the total effective competition from CBD, major retail center and other facilities is subtracted from the total potential to obtain the unsatisfied potential. As is shown on the summary table, on the following 5 pages more than $2.4 billion of effective sales competition subtracted from the over $2.7 billion estimated trade area potential leaves $323 million in unsatisfied potential. No site can normally be expected to capture a large share of unsatisfied potential in a large trade area. Based on size and configuration of the Met Site trade area and the relative site location it might be expected that at least five to seven percent of the unsatisfied potential might be available, or between $16 and $32 million. . Conversion of the sites share of unsatisfied dollar potential to square footage of retail development unsatisfied has been done assuming a sales level of $100 per square foot. At the level, there would appear to be 162,000 square feet unsatisfied that might be captured at the site, with a possibility of up to 226,000 square feet. The residual analysis, leading to estimates of unsatisfied potential, is used to indicate ease of entry into a market. This analysis shows a trade area that is relatively well, .,,built. up -.with retail facilities. The analysis suggests that substantial new retail facilities. depending upon this trade area would not have an easy entry into the market, with a suggestion of perhaps an' average of 200,000 square ;feet. of . unsatisfied potential able,.to_ be captured 'at the Met Stadium site.,,.; (See table on following page) 6 Met Stadium Site Trade Area Unsatisfied Retail Sales. Potential And Site Development Justified Summary Table 1982 Population Pre Capita Total Retail Expenditure Total Potential ($0001s) Less: CBD's Share @ 15% ($0001s) Suburban Potential $(000;s) Less: Effective MRC Competition ($000's) Less: Effective von -MRC Competition ($0001s) Unsatisfied Potential ($0001s) Site Share @ 5% ($0001s) @ 7% ($0001s) Sq. Ft. Unsatisfied @. $100 /sq. ft.: 5% Share Basis 7% Share Basis 7 505,000 $5,400 $2,727,000 409,000 $2,318,000 835,000 1,160,000 $323,000 $16,150 22,600 161,500 sq. ft. 226,000 sq. ft. PART R This part of the analysis considers the impact of a four million square foot retail complex on the major retail centers whose customers appear to come, in part, from the trade area identified in Part I. rP­A. A - Assumption of the total development as planned would obviously bring visitors to the site from beyond the normal. retail trade area ( "Visitor' appears to be anyone coming to the complex for any reason, from anywhere). A convention or recreation area visitor Will probably buy something from the retail sector, but that does not justify extending the normal retail trade area to encompass the world. While the total complex would undoubtedly draw from a considerably larger area, and increase the total retail sales at the site due to more "visitors ", it seems probable to assume that it is within the trade area -as generally defined that the presence of the retail complex has the best possibility of altering the regular retail purchasing habits of "visitors" (residents). Trade Area Expenditure Altering of shopping habits can in part mean increasing the per capita expenditure for retail goods through the development of more facilities. The local area shopper has. more places to shop and buys more goods (spends more money). Also new shoppers may be attracted to both new and existing facilities. In many cases, both new and existing facilities can, over time, benefit if the existing shopping area has the strength, attractiveness, uniqueness and merchandising ability to attract a share of the new shopper trade and hold on to the old one (in other words, to compete). n Met Site Market Share of Trade Area In regards to the trade area, a strong, well anchored and well merchandised facility of four million square feet clearly would have the ability to carve a market share from the trade area's retail sales potential. The following table assumes that in 1982 a retail sales volume of $100 /square foot could have been derived by these new facilities from the trade area defined if both convention center and fantasyland were also developed. The resulting $400 million sales volume ($100 /sq. ft. times 4,000,000 square feet) compared against the total estimated sales potential of the trade area at $2.727 billion (see Part I of this analysis) shows that the new facilities might have attained a trade area market share of 15 percent in 1982 had they been in operation at that time. Market Share Impact on Trade Area Facilities The combination of analyses in Parts I and II suggest that assumed major new retail facilities at the Piet Stadium site would have an adverse sales impact on the various existing major retail centers whose trade areas appear to overlap, to varying degrees, that of the site. For an individual center, the impact might depend in part on its present strength, proximity to the new yet Stadium facilities, tenant mix and ability to meet the challenge. Thus it is difficult to quantify or forecast the actual impact on each major center, as it is also to determine what might happen to less- than -major retail centers. Nevertheless, it has been determined in Part I that a relatively small amount of trade area unsatisfied retail potential normally exists at the Met Stadium site; certainly not enough to support four million square feet. (It has therefore to be assumed that four million square feet are only justifiable through the additional sales generated by assumed numbers of convention and fantasyland visitors, rather than regular shoppers from the trade area). The retail over - building is forcing itself on the area, carving a 9 market share from the trade area in part through capture of some unsatisfied potential and in part through capture of sales volumes that would normally go to existing trade area facilities. A breakdown of the assumed $400 million additional sales volume taken from the trade area might have been as follows in 1982: Trade Area Derivation Met Site Retail Sales Volume (000's) Rounded 1/3 of unsatisfied potential $100,000 Capture of MRC* volume 175,000 Capture of - Non -MRC volume 125,000 Total Volume $400,000 * MRC =major retail center The following table is an illustrative breakdown of the $175 million assumed volume that might be captured from the major retail centers, based on observations of proximity to the planned new facilities, trade area barriers and apparent trade area overlapping of existing centers and that of the Met Stadium site. It does not take into account such factors as strength and size of each existing center, nor its potential to attract customers that might arrive in the area to visit the assumed convention or fantasyland portions of the new facilities. 10 Illustrative Distribution $175 Million Volume Transfer To Met Site From Selected MRCS ($000's) MRC 1982 Volume Transferred Share Of Volume to Met Site $175 Million Mpls. CBD $ 389,518 $ 17,500 10% . St. Paul CBD 97,423 8,750 5 Southdale /Yorktown _ 428,045 43,750 25 Southtown 184,967 43,750 25 . Burnsville 190,758 26,250 15 Highland area. 51,008 - 8,750 5 Hub S.C. 56,958 17,500 10 Hi- Lake / Minnehaha 83,031 1,750 1 Eden Prairie S.C. 116,040 1,750 1 Signal Hills S.C. 40,609 1,750 1 E. Lake Area 75,081 1,750 1 Southtown Square 148,973 1,750 1 Total $1,862,411 $175,000 100°6 Other Impacts Percent volume Loss to MRC 4.5 10.2 -. 23:3 13.8 1'x.2 30.7 2.1 1'.5 4.3 2.3 - 1.2 9.4 It should be noted that this is a retail trade area analysis, and as such does not deal with the remainder of the metropolitan area, the state, nation or the world. Therefore, it is not assumed that four million square feet of retail facilities will in total do only $100 per square foot sales volume. In fact, considering an assumed convention, office, fantasyland, and hotel use of the site also, the visitor draw would normally be expected to considerably expand the retail sales volume per square foot. The $100 per square foot draw is only assumed for the trade area (whose shopper range of retail purchases would incidentally normally be wider than say that of a convention - goer from Cincinnati who probably would not buy items of furniture, for example). Thus if one considers the total possible retail sales volume at the site at, say, $300 per square foot, a $1.2 billion total emerges, supported principally by non -trade area dollars. To help attain this volume, some 800 shops, two supermarkets and six department stores are planned. One wonders if some of these key facilities might not have to relocate from other centers in the metropolitan area, which would be another 11 impact. This type impact is one that is all too familiar to central business districts all over the country. From where will the anchor department stores emerge? The major anchors such as Daytons and Donaldsons would probably hurt their own stores at Southdale and Burnsville if they were also at the Met Stadium site. One wonders where a total of six department stores might be found from within this metropolitan area for this close- in site without impacting the current area -wide retail picture through closings of major facilities now in existence. Potential. retail impact on the Minneapolis central business district has already been suggested as coming in part through the historical process of major new suburban facilities simply intercepting potential and existing customers. This general process has already been continuing for some time and although the CBD has continued to lose retail market share, it has remained strong. If it were to lose any of its principal department store anchors, and /or substantial numbers of ancillary stores it would of course be impacted substantially in the present and in regard to the future. Retailers might not be as interested in locating within its limits. Additionally, if the convention center were located in the Met Stadium site, it should be noted that conventioneer purchases of goods and services (including retail', but much beyond retail) would be mostly lost to the CBD. The impact here is that an element of growth (and preservation of CBD strength) would be lost. Also it is conceivable that some conventions that normally would have been attracted to the CBD would be lost, along with their retail . and other expenditure potential. Conclusion Because there is relatively little unsatisfied retail potential in the trade area, the development of four million square feet of new facilities, (supported principally by non -trade area dollars) should impact those existing facilities that draw from its trade 12 area, as the Met site captures a market share. Many factors will determine the net dollar impact on each major retail center. Additionally unknown is the degree of store closings and relocation to a new major center at the Met Stadium site that would go on. This could have significant impacts on retail locations subject to these closings. The retail and non - retail expenditures lost to the CBD due to location of a major convention center at the Met Stadium site could be substantial. They might overshadow any retail losses caused' by intercepting potential CBDs retail customers. :GpAi260 q y CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 210 CITY HALL MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. 55415. a/E,S- 13 Hirsoin-C S Ltd CONVENTION CENTER LOCATION PREFERENCE STUDY Executive Summary This summary discusses the mayor findings of a survey undertaken among association directors and tradeshow managers on August 2 and August 5, 1985. Individuals responsible for convention and tradeshow planning were interviewed in 201 .randomly selected organizations as part of this study. The Two Proposals: This study shows that the downtown Minneapolis, free- s_ standing site is overwhelmingly preferred to the Bloomington complex on a characteristic -by- characteristic comparison. ''(1) By 70% to 13:. respondents favored a downtown site twenty minutes away from the airport to a five minute distance suburban site. (2) By 68% to 20%, they supported a 300,000 square feet hall located on the ground floor to two five hundred thousand square feet areas located on the fourth floor of a structure. (3) By 83 %: to 9%:, interviewees opted for a downtown site connected to shopping and entertainment areas by enclosed walkways. over a site located in the middle of a large amusement park. (4) By 77%: to 14%, an overwhelming me3ority preferred a free - standing site connected by enclosed walkways to 5,000 hotel rooms over an enclosed. complex containing 2,000 hotel rooms. When the two sites are completely described and a choice is requested, tho downtown site again dominates. Eighty -four percent. of those interviewed choose the downtown convention I. center; only eight percent favored the suburban complex. In addition, fifty -five percent indicated a strong preference for the downtown convention center. Survey respondents who selected the downtown site were asked to give reasons.for their choice. Interviewees answered: (1) A downtown site was preferrmble to any other location. (2) The convention facility should be on the ground floor in order to minimize difficulties for exhibitors. (3) An amusement park on the premises was a major distrac- 8IO - 1-1)O1111(Nl S11-ccl S()l ill S1 OW II()2 • Nlk iilcopo is, Miiuxcs01t-1 55414 • (612)'332-3185 tio•n from the convention or trnde ;how. n- •iil!ibility of 7),000 hotel rooms within walking distance was cr.it.ic:7l. As a final basis for the evaluation, respondents were asked if they were more or less likely to choose a convention site located in a mayor amusement park. A substantial majority of respondents weree loan likely to consider a center within an :amusement park. Seventy -five percent .indicated they were less likely, -- forty -seven percent much_ less likely -- while four percent ...,were more likely to choose a center located there. 0 p2j sources I-Id M E M O R A N D U M TO: FROM: RE: Fiscal Disparities and the Bloomington Mega -Mall The Mayor of Bloomington is proposing that a part of the financing plan for the proppsed mega - mall /convention center be the exemption of the project from fiscal disparities. A major part of the rationale is that since a number of projects in the metropolitan area, notably in Minneapolis and St. Paul, are exempt, so should be the mega -mall. ' This memo is to explain a number of facets connected with this and to put the proposal in perspective. I. Exempt projects in the Metro Area Yes, there are projects throughout the metropolitan area which are exempt from contributing to fiscal disparities.. All of these are located in HRA redevelopment tax exempt districts created under MS 462.585 prior to August 1, 1979. To create a district under MS 462.585, a finding of blight was required. Districts created after August 1., 1979 or created under different state law such as MS 472A are not exempt and must contribute ` to fiscal disparities (that is why City Center, created in 1977 under MS 472A, is a contributor). Also exempt is the City of South St. Paul because it was a federally designated redevelopment area under E.D.A. as of the passage of the original fiscal disparities law (1971). Fiscal disparities was created by the legislature in 1971. At that time the decision was made to exempt the HRA tax increment districts since they were' a redevelopment tool. As the 70's progressed, however, concern arose that this exemption was becoming a mechanism whereby communities could avoid participating in fiscal disparities. In 1979 the decision was made that any district created after August 1, 1979 would participate in fiscal disparities. Districts created prior to that date continued to be exempt. II: The extent of exemptions in the Metro Area and Minneapolis Throughout the metropolitan area eighteen communities have districts which are exempt from fiscal disparities. The total contribution value which , was exempted from contribution in 1984 was $58,915,000. The exempt value for South St. Paul was $2,534,000. These total $61,850,000. The total pool for fiscal disparities in 1984 was $1,055,942,000. Thus the amount exempted was only 5.5% of the possible total. For the City of Minneapolis in 1984 the amount of exempt contribution was $29,384,000. The actual contribution was $203,731,000. Thus the amount exempted for Minneapolis was 12.6% of the possible total. , The amount exempted in 1985 was $36,000,000 (this is the 40% contribution of $90,000,000 of assessed valuation. referred to by the Mayor of Bloomington) while the actual contribution rose to $238,000,000. The ,amount. exempt was 13.1% in 1985. From another angle, projects in Minneapolis located in districts created after 1979 or under state laws other than MS 462.585 contributed $41,259,000 in value to the pool. III. The impact of the mega -mall It is important to understand the size of the mega -mall and what its impact on the total assessed valuation of Bloomington would be and the impact of the proposed exemption would be. If the market value of the mega -mall was only one billion dollars, the assessed value would be $430,000,000 and the contribution to fiscal disparities would be $172,000,000. The fiscal disparities pool in 1985 amounted to $1,263,501,000. The mega -mall contribution would equal 13.6% of the current pool. Exempting it would basically mean every municipality in the metro area receives this much less. The current assessed valuation in Bloomington- is $807,460,000. If the project is exempted, this means that one' project alone, with minimal draw on City services will add 53% to the tax base of Bloomington. Even if the project were to contribute 40% to fiscal disparities as required by law the assessed valuation would increase by 32 %. As mentioned the total amount of exempt property in the seven county area in 1984. was $61 million. The Bloomington. proposal alone is almost triple this. The amount of exempt projects in Minneapolis in 1985 was $36,000,000. The Bloomington proposal alone is over 42 times this. The amount of exempt property area -wide would triple to over 18 %. Bloomington.�in 1985 contributed $73,160,000 to the metro pool. If the $172,000,000 from the mega -mall were exempted, the ratio of exempt property in Bloomington would exceed 70 %. This is compared to 5.5% area -wide, and 13.1% for Minneapolis. IV. Final thought Two final thoughts: First, what Bloomington is proposing runs directly counter to what the legislature. tried to accomplish in 1979. The move then was to be away from exempting projects. Second, the mega -mall is really a perfect example of what fiscal disparities is all about.. The benefit of commercial activity should be available to more than just the residents of the immediate community. Accidents of geography should be minimized. W1. 1985 Fiscal Disparities Worksheet- -Metro Area .q tttttttitittttttttttttt #tt # #tti # #t #it #ttttt #t #t #ttt #t� � „ �• Current." ..';..- `� Proposed a; ton trlbutlion Pct ;`;,; , O:qO XXXXXXXXXXXXXX Formula Multiplier:. " ..' },.;- 2 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX.:,' ;,i.. ' ,`Area Wide Mill Rate , 108.1430 ` !08.6933 Model Estimate 108.6768.' Bloomington. Project Market Value 1,000,000,000 Ass'd Value` 429,991,000 M1i New s'. ,171,996 ;400 .(f"�. ( ..•M,• l,:t "� q a t 'iN• ,Cont -I.. � , ', .1 .. • .1 ,i. , ,111 i :•f i, � �4 ;� .i .. iy':�y I r , P ' i. ; 1 - 1 .,.�. 1985:. 1985' :; 1985 FD Estimated Estimated Estimated .Dollar „, 1985 Dist Levy Code ----------------------------------------- Cont Val '. Dist. Val Net Cont Val Dist Val -rr---- - - -- ---r --r--±----------------r-------r---r---------r------------ Net Change Dist levy Change 6 ANOKA COUNTY 11- ,, .. 1 BURNS 32,081 `. 1,320,340_:.; ".1,288,232 32,081`';':'1,510,624.' 1,478,537 190,305 125,618 18,106 8 COLUMBUS 319,396 2,563,795 x..,.'2,244,348 319,396., 2,933,269 2,613,873 369,524 241,125 34,755 9 LINWOOD .. 161,982.. : '.2, 460,318: ?;:,;.2,292,373 .,..;;,.. • 167, 982.,.:. ,, 2,814,901 . 2,646,999 354,626. 231,293 33,338 10 OAK GROVE 179,507,',, .3,017,300 i,;;i`'2,037,746 ' 179,507 ::x,;•'3;452,145 3,272,638 434,892 299,265 43,135 11 ANDOVER . 1,696,653 8, 205, 364 ',4';'6, 588,723 .` �'., .1,696,653 ,,;.'` 9,479,598 7,782,945 1,194,222 822,897 118,610 12.ANOKA I .• 7, 064,106;'.:' 11,921;190 i x'4,851,811 '.;;`.;;: >7 064,106('.1;13,640 306.6 576,200 1,718,389 1,260,460 182,834 '13 BETHEL 68,512',':.:..' - '331,530,:.': <�.'' 262,954 `,'; ''.'•'60,572 ;;';r ''379,309 310,736 47,702 39,346 5,671 14 BLAINE (JT) 14,882,673: 29,067 ;422..';14,184,712 14,882,673'; ':33,257,108 18,374,435 4,189,663 3,179,987 '458,355 15 CENTERVILLE 195,564.:...::.,.,. ' 752,086 :';;;;;,,, 556,508 ;.;.;K 195,564', ';;.:::,, 860,457 664,893.. 108,385 .... .100,200 14,454 16 CIRCLE PINES 424,590 ;,.3,373,978 ' :':2,949,465, '. 424,590;;;: 3,860,378 3,435,788 486,322 425,890 61,387 17 COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 4,695,234 '13,663,552•''``8,968,307 :.; %,4,695;234;`,.;15 ;632,969 10,937,735 1,969,428 1,419,023 204,534 18 COON RAPIDS 12,434,511 ..;.32,574;646.,''20; 140,155 :',.:12,434;517. 6:`31,269,845 24,835,321 '.4,695,172. 3,549,149 511,565 19 EAST BETHEL 785,606 .^ 6 ,173,052:'''''!5,387,420 785,686,:`: 7,062,870 6,277,105' 889,765 595,820 85,880 20 FRIDLEY " 29,835,444 � 18;142,244 ':(11,693,118); Y.29,835,444 :... ;20,751,290 (9,018,154) 2,615,024 1,948,920 280,912 21 HAM LAKE 1,704,454 .''.. ,7 038,440 S, .i.5,334,007.<,:. ;";1,704,454:1;x';',.,8,052,962 6,348,507..1,014,501.: 690,207 i-99,405 :22 HILLTOP ;, 298,624 '' 1,275,027.','.` r ,' 977,116•: , L; 298,624, -:); 1,459,621 '.. 1,160,997 183,881. 139,935 '� 20,170 23 LEXINGTON :364,112 2;515,645 :2 ;211,551 w ,*';364,112F;:r.,,2;946,911 2,582,800 371,248 333,327 48,045 24 LINO LAKES = 885;243 ' ' ' 4,566,212 ,;rr ,3,680,916 .• „,.': 885,243, `irr5,224,311 ` 4,339,068 658,153 519,931 83,591 .25 RAMSEY . 3, 043, 045: -,? 9, 076, 180;•'•',x,, 6,033,134 ;' ^ 3,043,045 X10,384,383 7,341,330 1,308,204 940,030 135,493 26 SPRING LK PK (JT) 2,121,117';.,.' ;:5,342,636 •.; ".3,220,795 `:'2;121,777,:: :;r 6 ;112,632 3,990,855 770,060 599,277 86,318 27 ST FRANCIS' ..,. 569,924 ' 1,136,799 ';f ::: 566,850,: t,;;.569,924c'`.' ;1 ;300,620 130,696 163,846 119,941 11,288 819769,190 . 164; 659 ;216.;;:: 82,890,006 ;::'.:` 81,769,1Q0,!; 180,392,589 106,623,399 23,733,392 17,649,735 2,543,908 Y tit �aAj1 ` T r , r' j 7 L} };, � •��- �''Si �'a,.. i 3 t f� w�;,;,..J{ r1 � _ - .S ,,5tt 1�.. .. .•.. -r :vo � `�'S •� .4..Yni..a ,y� •i. S ,,, r .. ... 1985 ;1905 �' 1985 FD Estimated Estimated Estimated Dollar 1985 Dist Levy Code ,Nape , _ , Cont,Val Dist Val Net :' Cont. Val Dist Val Net Change Dist levy Change t - - - -- -- 1- r -r� - -- - -------'------------------------------------------------------------ ,�39 CARVER COUNTY 40 BENiON " 692,431 '.�, ; 271;479,;,:,952)f ti ;692,431: ;312,452..:. (379,979) ` 34,973 • 24,366 3,011 '41- CANDELA 82,461,; �' ;265,918`.,j,` 183,451 ', 82,467 299,434 216,966 33,SI6 25,554 3,221 ' , 10016,74 120,819 76 6,743 142 CHASKA 38,382 121,639 17,563 11,896 1,115 ,43 DAHLGREN 2801142 ; ;, 433,213;;, +' 153,131 ;2801142 x.495 649 215 507 62 376 41 304 5 965 r r r r r 44 HANCOCK ;•',,,24,865 " "x;:118,507, °>�;.93,642 ` 24,865'' 133,443 108,578 14,936 9,666 1,218 '.-45 HOLLYWOOD. :01,469 "''1413,040:.�`�T:331,571',: 81,469 :. 412,116 391,241 59,616 35,929 5,119 46'LAKETOWN ;'174,880'i 1;262,243:�,,ti,1;0871363 _` 174,880:. ;1,444,022':' .1,269,142 181,119 126,391 18,218 47 SAN FRANCISCO 53,626" 226,897,"�s2.,,'-1731271: ' 53,626 259,674 206,049 32,178 19,196 2,167 148 WACONIA 140,885 ;`' 516,631':`! *'`;;x',435, 752 ; - 140,885 659,118 518,893 83,141 53,433 7,702 F 1 ! 49 WATERTOWN 1.12141932. .. 636,158 ;A��';o018,114), 1214,932 128,659 (486,212) 91,902 56,415 8,132 50 YOUNG AMERICA 223,680 `;286 151'`t+N h;A 62,271: 223,880 323,812 99,992 31,721 25,700 3,390 r `� apt ''51 CARVER 116, 903: 571;504'���460,601, 116,903 660,629 543,721 83,126 10,021 10,094 ),. ;.52 CHANHASSEN .(JT),.4:::. ,,:'.: _ 1, 032,363 ``;' .!:;3,439,878 ;tr�?2,401;515 1,032,363 '::; ' 3,935,165 ,' 2,903,402 495,887 411,651 59,335 ..53 CHASKA 6,295,584 .'`-,..7,186,429'>;.`- ;;,890,845 6,295,584 8,222,242 1,926,650 1,035,813 789,635 113,816 54 COLOGNE 226,447 :;.408,479`x'; ;'262;032 '•' 226,447 559,004 332,557 70,525 48,618 7,008 55 HANBUR6,. ?50,066' 454,951;;r,;;;y;404,885 50,066 520,441 410,316 65,491 53,410 1,701 .56 MAYER 61,900 ;;{';,; 352,630;;x' ;;,< 290,730 61,900 403,400 341,507 50,711 44,610 6,430 57 NEW GERMANY 34,859 r'� 404, 369 `.';j:,,';' 369,510;.,';.;`;' 34,859 462,619 421,160 58,250 45,244 6,521 58 NORWOOD 410,710 ., ,.:,...1, 255,017. +:;.:;.,; 844,239'; { %:: 410,770:.':.`, 1,435,960 1,025,102 100,943 124,607 11,912 59 VICTORIA 525,805 525;804:` •,934,299 408,494 117,758 91,203 13,146 60 WACONIA' " 1,115,560 1,735;692;;ir ��'620,132 :;,. 1;115,560; ,`1,985,915 810,355 250,223 193,946 27,955 61 WATERTOWN [,.560,834;.;;'.,2,333,140 _„ ,1,172,306 q4 ,560,834: " 2,669,368 2,108,533 336,227 231,454 33,361 62 YOUNG AMERICA 248,655. x..1,210;914 ,1 ;:1',022,259.,;? 1;,.248,655 1,454,248 1,205,593 183,334 136,201 19,633 . ± 13;666;014 192 3,666;074 28,511,981 14,845,901 383,552 . " 4 q• �i . L la f�1 t .•i:. ' ', : J�4'1; r- 'lr+Y- - �sr ��i+ Mt "�.�r�i1�r ^`'4 N l�A�N,pr�,,Z'�•t�:� r ',' . , 1985 1985. -1985 FD Estimated Estimated Estimated Dollar 1985 Dist levy Code. ;Name .;. -r. Cont,Val Dist Val ,,., ,',_,.Net; , ;.' Cont Val Dist Val Net Change Dist Levy Change -69 DAKOTA COUNTY-------------------------------------------- y �;' -- - -- -- - - -- -- --------- - - - - -- -------------------------------------------- CASTLE:ROCK. x:330,223 „ �r1,z565 ;942 �- :.235,119- „.330,223 641,671 311,454 81,735. 48,803 1,034 11: DOUGLAS :,;;=.,':.''. , 15,564. :-:.:.. 119,205';;`:;,x;.;;103,641 15,564 "':201,792 126,228 22,581 14,713 1,862 =: 72 EMPIRE "" ' .:. " 238, 390 ;: ;r:.', 502 707 ` „' 344,311 ;:: ,.` ",.. 238,390 ' 666,813 420,422 84,105 52,392 1,552 13 EUREKA_ ;:.,221,346, 465,356r �e�;244,010 221,346 532,529 311,183 61,113 41,912 6,050 : .74"GREENVALE" ` 192,035 .191,923 , (112) "192,036 219,133 27,698 21,810 16,248 2,342 ; 75, HAMPTON : ';,': . ' ;`; 98,094 :;,:;::';;;.316 ;789'4' >'` '218 ;695 98,094 '. 362,615 264,521 45,826 26,930 3,882 76: MARSHAN ::. ,! 508,046:, 843,111,':,..;. '.:.335,665 "'.. 508,046 ; ,. 965,429 457,383 121,118 73,446 10,506 77 NININGER . 44,499 ' :;,, `;;389,916 ' ;:�;:. 345,411 44,499 445,911 401,412 56,055 34,920 5,033 "''78 RANDOLPII :' '`131,229 159,551, ";` 22,322 131,229. 182,411 45,182 22,860 14,085 2,030 '. 79.RAVENNA - :;115,936 _,1,296,349 4 „1,180,413 115,936, 1,483,314 1,367,378 186,965 115,718 16,679 80'SCIOTA '.` 8,585:, :,72,260 x;63,675 8;586 81,368 72,102 9,101 6,233 786 81 VERMILLION - .230,218: :450;904 220,686 230,218 515,181 285,569 64,883 39,688 5,121 82 WATERFORD' ;.'.:162,536" ;;° :':162,441`:,,,` i :; , (95) :: ;.: 162,536 185,871 23,335 23,430 14,004 2,018 83 APPLE VALLEY 5, 603,662: `,:16,701,663 '.11,098,001 :;'. 5,603,662 19,109,012 13,505,350 2,407,349 1,867,883 269,232 84 BURNSVILLE 33,615,900' `;,;-19,792, 958':..(13,822,942) . <'. "331615,900.: 22,645,969 (10,969,930) 2,853,011 2,270,261 327,230 85 COATES ... ; `136,421 115,159 155,938 40,779 19,511 12,581 1,814 86 ..: EAGAN ' 27,660,100 a 12,104,514 (14;955,586) `� 21,660,100 14,535,622 (13,124,419) 1,831,107 1,280,239 184,530 :',.87,FARMINGTON 1, 428,396. ' 3,178,814`x;:`.1,150, 418':._:;;',;. "1,428,396 ,., ; 3,631,162 2,208,166 458,288 351,963 51,596 88 HAMPTON 97,927 �'i:;214;179 ;,,..;;;116,252 97,927. :. 245,134 147,207 30,955 21,514 3,101 89 HASTINGS (JT) 3, 435,354 �0,954,494::�::'5, 519, 140.,: .3,435,354." 10,245,254 6,809,900 1,290,760 1,010,496 145,650 90 INVER GROVE HTS 13, 368,962 %`x`:12,470,968 `�``',-.' (897,994)';�' 1313681962,`; 14,268,453 899,491 1,797,485 1,338,091 192,869 .91 LAKEVILLE., ..,,, 1, 743 ,109..,..;_.10 ;726,605.,:x`', 2, 983, 496.:.;;:., 7,743,109.'. 12,212,649 4,529,540 1,546,044 1,087,515,., 156,152 92 LILYDALE 406,814. ;'121,397 °'^(285,411) x:'406;814 136,698 (210,116) 15,301 9,578 7�':" 1,207 93 MENDOTA 94,411' 149,145 , `:54,134 94,411 170,806 76,395 :. 21,661 19,244 2,714 94 MENDOTA HEIGHTS . ... 5, 493 ,821::.;,'' ";:2,928,B5C',1, (2,564,973)';� :`: '5,493,821'' <,: ."3,351,162 (2,142,666) 422,301 271,782 39,114 95 MIESVILLE 63,341 .'..,.. 104,344';;,.;.._,.:'41,003 ;;:;,.63,341 119,301 55,961 14,958 8,775 1,265 96 NEW TRIER `'.11,936 .; :.`.;:`.138,740 °; ;; 126,804 .;::;: "'11,936'`.; „'.,,. 158,606 146,670 19,866 12,322 1,776 37,060' 359 218 3 097,RANDOLPN 60 411,157 374,098 ,. ,. 51,880 34,487 41971 98 ,. . ROSEMOUNT , .. :4;337,647 3,374,266 ",(963,381) 4,331647 3,860,539 (417,108) 486,213':. 344,485 �- 49,653 99 SOUTH ST PAUL 0 15,462,255 15;462,255. :, 0 :17;691,047 17,691,047 2,228,792 1,805,116 260,185 100 SUNFISH LAKE 34,034 ;. 98,274 ` ";;64,240 ti ,:;.34,034. ., <110,660 16,626 12,386 .. 9,118 ' 1,157 101 VERMILLION 18',596 465, 356:;•'. «; :386, 760 ,';i: ' " :18,596 ` �..''' 532,566 453,970 61,210 42,368 6,107 102 WEST ST PAUL 8,143,431 s' `10,550,290;;;:x`2,406,859 ti ;9,143;431 :.;.;12,070,823 3,927,392 1,520,533. 1,027,247 140,065 1141132,367 ' "'124,309,935; ,10;171,571 114;132,367 142;219,868..,20,007,501 17,909,930 .13,330,344 :1,920,682 1985 1985 1985 FD Estimated Estimated Estimated _Dollar;,. 1985 : Dist Levy Code Name font Val Dist Val Net Cont Val Dist Val Net, • ! Change.,;`::' Dist levy •:' Change III HfNNFPIN 112 HASSAN 761,914 1,087,373 325,459 761,914 1,244,057'.• 4821143 156,684 ::: 119,859'• 17,276 114 BLOOMINGTON 73,160,645 37,479,304 (35,681,260) 245,157,045 32,813,419 (212,343,626)(176,662,366) - °. 3,988,099 (496,479) 115 BROOKLYN CENTER 22,406,979 20,272,766 (2,134,213) 22,406,979 23,194,936 . 787,957 2,922,170,„.o2,181,3(14 314,419 116 BROOKLYN PARK 16,666,800 36,666,090 20,000,091 16,666,800 41,951,955 25,285,155 5,285,064 4,081,001 588,225 117 CHAMPLIN 1,209,099 8,406,183 7,196,284 1,209,899 9, 617, 880.'., %.8, 407,981'.,1,211,697 ;;;;.927,804 ,:; 133,731 CHANHASSEN (JT) 1,358,790 4,914 (1,353,876) 1,358,790 5, 520 '.,' (1,3531270) ;�l':�, , ;1.606' 4 : J`, % ";x,.543;;;; <.'. , , 78 119 CORCORAN 024,779 2,822,198 1,997,419 024,779 3,229,011.`,'' 2,404,231 :406j812 ,1+ ; 287,109, :,':;,' 41,383 120 CRYSTAL 5,429,894 17,727,470 12,297,576 5,429,894 20,282,603 14,852,709 ,;`2,555,133 _:'..1,979,922'`, ' 285,381 121 DAYTON 00 623,015 3,388,429 2,165,414 623,015 3,876,931 3,253,916 :, ":;.:.488,502.'.;'.. ".379,759; >; 54,738 122 DEEPHAVEN 793,860 1,271,492 477,624 793,868 1,454,905 661,036:i' ,; 183,412 140,642 ::'.:'., 20,212 123 EDEN PRAIRIE 40,692,057 7,950,654 (32,741,403) 40,692,057 9,096,499 (31,595,558): i1, 145,945. "1"? X850,722 -.'' 1221621 124 EDINA 46,433,530 14,323,722 (32,109,803) 46,433,530 16,388,126 . (30,045, 404) ;;`2,064,404 ;.,,1,369,484'.;`;., 197,394 125 EXCELSIOR 1,258,224 1,267,445 9,221 1,258,224 1,450,177 :.,. 191,953 +:••r1021732`:;0,�;139,989': ,.';. 20,178 126 GOLDEN VALLEY 26,936,522 8,857,954 (18,070,560) 26,936,522 10,134,813 (16,801,709) >,1,276,859 v'•.: 928,499`: 1133,031 127 GREENFIELD 473,201 776,943 303,742 473,201 888,967 415,766 � ';;':'` ;79,719 ,i.- .•11,490 128 GREENWOOD 230,501 212,734 (17,767) 230,501 243,523 "1121024 13,023 `'i' '..30,790 ?''23,736;, ";'` 3,421 HANOVER (JT) 13,700 171,690 157,990 13,700 196,275 7+:. y.. J L., .. ' . 102, 575.'" ;.; Y 24, 585 °?;:: ;' 18,307; = .`;"y`,, 2,639 130 HOPKINS 10,892,988 8,287,098 (2,605,890) 10,892,908 9,481,735' ( 1,411,253)'''.1;194,637;:,.';; 832,161. "`..:.'119,948 131 INDEPENDENCE 282,431 1,235,013 952,642 282,431 1,413,182 1, 130,751 ?:, 118;109 ;•`:.'„ 134,175;'i''. 19,426 132 LONG LAKE 1,424,874 1,048,641 (376,233) 1,424,874 1,199,718 (225,155)':`:`;; 151,078 `Y- ;•'121,322';';';:1 17,481 133 LORETTO 212,344 252,911 40,567 212,344 209,422 77,018 .:�•• :.36,511 : `',' 27,097:. 3,906 134 MAPLE GROVE 9,764,704 14,894,578 5,129,074 9,764,704 17,041,308 7,276,684 " 2;146,810'xX'u 1,648,847•: ': 237,661 135 MAPLE PLAIN 933,024 946,321 13,297 933,024 1,082,860 149, 837•` ?;136;540± !''.100,886 ;,•,15,695 ; I36 MEDICINE LAKE 33,005 179,495 146,490 33,005 205,349 172344 25,054�� ?x;:;15,503 i'r� "s 2,235 131 MIDINA 1,502,354 1,074,944 (507,410) 1,502,354 1,229,052 (352:502i'-,-.,".:"154,908.i)-," 114,473 ;;16,500 IJO MINNEAPOIIS C 237,991,973 215,565,425 (22,426,545) 237,991,973 246,635,995 �,• 8,644,022 : 31,070,567•;:;,24,375,813 3,S13,467 139 MINNETONKA BEACH 203,474 164,753 (38,721) 203,474 185,519 (11,955);,..;. 20,766 ';j;.•••.18,587, ... 2,343 140 MINNETONKA 53,937,885 18,009,285. (35,928,600) 53,937,885 20,605,044 1 (331332,841) ' 2, 595,159 "1:,,844,181 ;', "; 2659903 141 MINNEIRISTA 225,952 1,251,548 1,025,596 . 225,952 1, 431, 845':'' 1, 205,893 ':' :';180,297;x' �; 126,389,:;' ; 18,217 142 MOUND 1,175,114 5,973,902 4,198,128 1,115,174 6,834,859 5,659,685.;y::860,957 a�638,284 143 NEW HOPE 18,075,421 15,499,252 (2,576,169) 18,075,420 17,733,389 ( 342 ,032)`%2,234,137 -'{•1,707,254 ,:' 246,079 144 ORONO 1,711,293 2,042,654 331,361 1,711,293 2,337,215 625,922 ;':,.:294,561'.;;` 207,538 29,914 " 145 OSSCO 1,430,409 2,197,291 166,882 1,430,409 2,513,894 1,083,485 " '' 316,603 `` 246,374. 35,512 146 PLYMOUTH 45,560,931 16,705,999 (28,854,932) 45,560,931 19,113,800 (26,447,131) 2,407,801 .`. 1,697,375 244,655 147 RICHFIELD 5,408,057 23,469,561 17,981,504 5,488,057 26,852,437 21,364,380 _;3,382,876 `' 2,631;608' 380,178 148 ROBBINSDALE 2,289,812 9,254,808 6,964,996 2,289,812 10,588,801 J., 8,298,989,,11,333,992;x,•'; 1,129,339 .° : 162,780 ROCKFORD (JT) 203,634 686,473 482,039 203,634 785,263 :.. 581,629 :,'?;,.'.99 790;;; =`;.. 78,801.. ;? ,_11,359 150 AUGERS 1,425,794 365,059 (1,060,135) 1,425,794 411,668 (1,008,126) :'?:.;• 52,609 ?: -' 43,110 6,214 151 SHOREWOOD 1,355,365 1,918,366 563,001 1,355,365 ; ; 2,194,921 -''8391555 = :;..276,554 :;;?:` 226,206 '32,605 ; 152 SPRING PARK 1,443,538 662,193 (781,345) 1,443,538 757 788;,x; , ( 685, 750) s��;, 95,595 _K?:,1;.71,659 .. ' ; 10,329 . . 153 ST ANTHONY (JT) 2,152,260 2,938,681 186,421 2,152,260 ' :3,362,375 . - ",' 610,115 ;•...423,694' a :- 294,398,,; •' 42,434 ' • 154 ST BONIFACE 429,921 676,645 246,724 429,921 ` : ..714,301-; ;:'';,; 344,380; . ?.;;x.97,656,,,;;:; '• 79,873; !:_`. 11,513 . . 155 ST LOUIS PARK 35,171,287 20,051,361 (15,119,926) 35,171,287.,.t? 22,941; 621 ";(12,229,666)` - ,2,8901260 ,2 ,123,688 306,103 156 TONKA BAY 300,527 469,692 169,165 300,527 .`. 537,324''•, 236,798:_;', .:67,633,i.;'. 50,826.:.,x;., 7,326 157 WAYZATA 3,514,170 1,098,356 (2,415,814) 3,514,170 ',1, 256, 577 ;x(2,257,593) ',`;`•,158,22! " +`"109,711 ::. 15,818 . 158 WOODLAND 7,122 150,301 143,179 7,122 x:169,245 ..., 162,123 .,: :.•;18,943.7. ; 15,202 1,916 679,094,041 529,758,907 (149,335,125),- 851,090,441 a- :596,0421987-(255, 041 ;454)(105,112,328);..58,222,519 .,,:,7,320,11 9 J 3� �,d+:. • ,., ., .'� ad. +�M�� f'j ` .f �,��� i'.� . ',��!iS,�ht f y 5p? , �.i +x i-Ci y ! k( J�Li�- '`^Fll!•,(1,1 C-t P• �t - ' j„• `-,k �{p]Ji 1 , .•.r.f�tyl�rS Va •,- , 1985 1985 :' 1985 FD Estimated Estimated Estimated Dollar 1985 Dist Levy Code , Name Cont Val: ;Dist Vale Net ;Coot Val Dist Val Net Change Dist Levy Change - - - - - -- -------------------------------------------------------- i173 RAMSEY .174 WHITE BEAR I ' 1,040,194 4,261;911 3,213,117 .'1,048,194 4,816,179 3,821,986 614,269 431,644 62,216 175 ARDEN HILLS 18,541,488 .; 4,210,462 -.. (14,331,026) 18,541,488 4,817,309 (13,724,179) 606,847 301,635 55,008 ELAINE (J1') 125,709 r.;:, O:f''(125,709) :, ` ; ;..125,109: 0 (125,109) 0 0 0 111 ,FALCON HEIGHTS 1,302,884.__ .;3, 158,980 f,,.':.2,456,096 ::`''`; 1,302,884 4,300,868 2,997,984 541,088 390,392 56,270 110 6EM LAKE ; ".933 614 t:. , ' ( ; ;?;132;959 ;c'f, 800,715) ' s 933,614 152,009:' (161,665) 19,050 13,414 1,942 179 LAUDERDALE 159,6246 1,538,566 'y ;942 159,624 1,160,345 1,000,121 221,119 153,220 22,085 180 LITTLE CANADA.. ,.........7,696,727 x:5,014;863,.. (2,681,864)• =.'7,696,727 .;,.5,737,750 (1,958,977) 722,887 .: 562,728 81,110 181 MAPLEWOOD 41,436,240:-,'-.: r.. . • 15,330,452 .;;,(26,105,788) 41,436,240 17,540,012 (23,896,227) 2,209,560 , 1,116,594 256,074 182 MOUNDS VIEW 4, 192, 525,' 11,007,330,;:'; :;'1,614,805. 4,192,525 13,509,175 9,316,650. 1,701,845 1,122,536 161,799 103 NEW BRIGHTON 10,738,447. •16,397,014,,;;;;, „5,658,567,„ 10,738,447 , 18,760,480 8,022,033 2,363,466 1,508,993 217,502 184 NORTH OAKS 476,813 ,,864,233 X87,420 416,813 913,159 496,346 108,926 16,605 9,655 185 NORTH ST PAUL 3,597,904 „1 9,953,131 '••� ':.6; 355,227 : "i:. 3,597,904,.;.11,381,516 1,189,611 1,434,444 1,123,005 161,982 186 ROSEYILLE 41,131,618: 18,2b5,087 � ',�:,(29,412,531) 47,737,618; '20,897,795 (26,839,823).. 2,632,708 1,816,454„ 261,819 ST. ANTHONY (JI) 2,689,874 _ - 1,274,093 ;(1',415,181) 2,689,874 :1,457,856 (1,232,017) 183,764 125,507 18,090 187 SHOREVIEW 11,476,328.; 11,585,346 :;.;':,;.109,018 11,476,328 13,255,166 1,778,037 1,669,819 1,068,359 153,991 SPRING LK PK 01') 21,337,._ 91,048 :. 69,711 21,337,, 104,085 82,748 13,037 8,813 1,270 190 ST PAUL C 146,400,459 188,313,761;;:';' :-41,913,302 .' :146,400,459,' 215,456,647 69,056,188 27,142,886 21,1BO,950 3,052,968 191 VADNAIS HEIGHTS "': 712031019 '` -4,504,995J�:,:(2,698,024). ; ''; 7,203,019 ;:"" 5,154,295 (2,048,724) 649,300 471,387 67,944 192 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WHITE BEAR LAKE ., .::6,348,131 16,461,829,1'':;;,10,119,698 '..6,348,131'' :18,841,285 12,493,155 2,373,456 1,774,474 255,768 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 312,726,995 313,172,060'`:`":.;1045,070 312,726,993 : 358,981,991 46,254,998 45,209,931 33,987,571 4,897,495 i ;f•- - ------ - - - - -- 203 SCOTT COUNTY 4 l -_204 BELLE PLAINE 205 BLAKELY 206 CEDAR LAKE 207 CREDIT RIVER 200 HELENA ••209 JACKSON 210, LOUISVILLE 211• NEW MARKET 212 SAND CREEK 213 SPRING LAKE 214 ST LAWRENCE 215 BELLE PLAINE .216 ELKO .217 JORDAN 218 NEW MARKET 220 PRIOR LAKE 221 SAVAGE 222 SHAKOPEE 1 1985. 1985 i'; 1985 FD Estimated : Estimated Estimated Dollar 1985 Dist Levy Cont Val Dist Val .' : Net Coot Val :' Dist Val Net Change Dist levy Change 56, 950,,:' .: ; ` 225, 452 ' ,',. • 168,502 ,; . : 56,950 253,069 196,910 28,415 18,507 2,333 44,549 ;, 174,292 `'; 129,743 44,549 199,513 154,963 25,220 14,145 2,039 68,741 .; '' 659,592. .. 590,851 68,741 754,608 685,867 95,016 62,052 8,944 136,384•, 1,512,263.' 1,375,879. 136,384 1,730,097 1,593,713 217,834 143,429 20,674 153,097.:"''•;"' -460,154 ':' .` 307,051''... 153,097 526,525 373,428 66,371 43,262 6,236 413,004,;; -,`., 1,708,233 ;'..;,1,295,229 413,004 1,954,553 1,541,550 246,321 168,708 24,317 694,966:. %{'. y'ti:.445,701 ;`:- :.;.`(249,265) ; : ; ; '694,966 509,875 (185,090) 64,175 41,888 6,038 246,380 '`_752,374 0. <'..'505,994 246,380 860,865 614,485 108,491 72,134 10,397 172,252;::: "'_.;;. 764, 225:;;;.':;`: 591,973 '. ; 172,252 874,358 702,106 110,133 73,662 10,618 140,622 .;'=r:- :'.1,424,395'':.: ::;;:1;283,773 140,622 1,629,711 1,489,155 205,382 135,431 19,521 134,543 ? 145,966 ;,'`;11,423 ,' 134,543 167,017 32,534 21,111 13,700 1,975 489,946:' ' 2,165,256;x' '2,215,310 409,946 3,163,731 2,673,185 398,475 292,780. 42,201 ..32,838E ,264,762:;':231,924' „: 32,838. :. 302,822 269,984 38,060 28,411 4,095 7091536 '..: 3,238,411,,;;,;x -4,528,801 709,536 3,705,140 2,995,612 466,731 385,119 55,510 33,600 '', 284,995.; '''' 251,395 33,600 326,044 292,444 41,049 29,125 4,198 1,613,988 `. 4,042,306 3,228,318 1,613,980 5,540,360 3,926,372 690,054 549,867 79,256 3,725,626.,;2,171,904,`;'` (953,722) 3,725,626 3,171,496 (554,130) 399,592 344,421 49,644 15,001,222 '. "5,273,044 ., „(9,007,378) 15,001,222 6,033,947 (9,047,275) 760,103 585,016 84,323 ----------------==---------=------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23, 940,244...;��.;.21,714,131;:- . 3,765,888 :23,948,244 31,704,664 7,756,420 3,990,533 3,001,664 432,317 .1`�.'��ttr �y'• •! `' >° f. �` �- � ',r- '�•r.niv`VJ•!.'r_rcr,,i:y;�+ . ,. '� ''''. r .. .. Kl:''�1''1985 `';:`��V. 1985 ;'r,.,,. �`]985 FD Estimated Estimated Estimated Dollar 1905 Dist Levy CodeName - 'Cont - • - - - -- -- - -. ... �.:.��.���� .....r---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 230 WASHINGTON COUNTY 231,BAYTOWN ,x;+302,692 „,.1 ti „438, 415~;,',,'4, 135,783 302,692 501,667 198,915 63,192 30,751 5,505 232 DENMARK :.:: 456,194;;'i,;' ;'- 371,129:•; ;;E (85 065) 456,194 '' 424,766 (31,428) 53,631 31,833 5,453 233 FOREST LAKE ":'...�•.;,'; 544 :064, ; ;;.z 3,273,680.1, ' 2,729,616 '. ' ..` 544,064 3,745,646 3,201,502 471,966 318,266 45,074 234 GRANT ;:..;',;121,415 ry^;1�481,336+,ww+;: 159,861 121,415 1,694,834 973,359 213,498 139,155 20,051 235 GREY CLOUD IS 112,110;,,..1 = - :!' 145,966:' "" (26 204) ` 172,170 166,930 (5,232) 20,912 15,109 2,110 236 MAY �?. ;',{ 70,059:. °:'F''.`,� 88b,718'` �;:;�'0 816,119 70,059 1,014,718 944,659 127,940 11,393 11,155 237 NEW SCANDIA :. 360, 740; `'';::;1,582,211;.;;;`1,221,471 360,740 1,810,306 1,449,646 220,175 154,394 22,254 238 STILLWATER 7,891 ...'... - .675,200 ., 667,309 7,091 772,401 764,509 97,230 59,704 0,606 239 W LAKELAND 272,656':;• : 666,818 ;;;. 394,162 272,656 763,019 490,363 96,201 56,464 8,139 240,AFTON 024,906 a '1,157,610 •.,;: 332,704 , 824,906 1,324,626 499,720 167,016 112,870 16,269 '•241 BAYPORi '' :: s,_.' '''2 203,361 -`.`� 1'',252,498" '` 1,950,863,+ : r•:;• i 1,950,062 2,520,901 510,038 317,540 213,106 30,003 242 BIRCIIWOOD . �x..., f. ,512':,,j ' `:;482,988;:;;t " 466,476:' 16,512 552,486 535,974 69,498 52,151 7,517 243 COTTAGE GROVE 14,465,063",.,. x,,9,267,432 - 5,197,631 16,550,150 11,352,527 2,005,095 1,600,201. 242,191 244 DELLWOOD 200,461 '..,' ;.:: 225,452;' ::''' 24,991 200,461 253,068 53,406 28,415 24,502 3,009 245 FOREST LAKE "; •. 3,546,213.'::::::; 3,538,731•;, , (7,542) 3,546,273 4,040,032 502,559 510,101 367,043 52,905 HASTINGS (JT), .• 50,020;• ' ' "' 15,030, •i ' `:';. (34,990)., 50,020 17,061 (32,950) 2,032 1,787 258 247 HUGO 1,511,346,;.:`ic 2,533,156;x' "'c;1,021,810;'., "1,511,346 2,090,200 1,306,062 365,052 241,872 35,120 248 LAKE ELMO 1,476,560 '`.;.3, 508 ,151 :,,. - 12,111,591 1,476,560 4,105,311 2,620,751 517,154 360,964 53,102 249 LAKELAND 209,8961%1-*-. ..:.1,242,877'..1;;1,032,901 209,096 1,422,005 1,212,109 179,120 107,892 15,551 250 LAKELAND SHORES 18, 904':: .,, `' 80,064.;'..:':. 61,160 18,904 91,632 72,728 11,560 6,976 1,006 251 LANDFALL 36,381 •,;'.. 2,798,785 '::, '2,762,404 36,301 3,202,143 3,165,762 403,350 321,041 46,309 252 MAHTOMEDI ;; r 432, 133 i 42 257 700 ?~ '111824,967 432,133 2,583,231 2,150,504 325,537 242,122 34,905 253 MARINE ST CROIX :59,931 .`,;;1 .214,469 ti�w��';154,532: '59,931 245,422 105,405 30,953 20,062 3,007 254 NEWPORT 1 ,505,404'•,'f;.`2,217,813`�'`j" 112,409 1,505,404 2,537,462 1,032,058 319,649 255,246 36,790 255 OAK PARK IIGTS • , 2,114,690 :;.'; "_'1,105,582 1,009,108) 2,114,690 1,264,974 (049,716) 159,392 106,700 15,301 256 OAKDALE 1,524,669.:: 10,404,324 '.'•'8,819,655 1,524,668 11,903,867 10,379,199 1,499,544 1,215,047 175,134 257 PINE SPRINGS " 261242 ;:'.,•'',.133,531,''; 101,295 26,242 152,769 126,526 19,231 12,906 1,060 258 ST CROIX BEACH ;; 41,844 -3:; ;'889,090 .�;',` 841,246 41,844 1,011,160 915,316 120,010 19,019 11,3911 259 ST MARYS POINT f �� 15, 910.;;;:" 212,734;_+1;,': 196,824:.~;.,. 15,910 243,254 227,344 30,520 10,014 2,605 260 ST PAUL PARK 1,5 10,172`: 41166,528;�',,.�. 2,596,356 ''.'' 1,510,112. 4,761,204 3,1'11,033 600,611 415,041 60,412 261 ST1llWAlER 4,414,943;,`;`;,. ?.8, 528, 158 r.`,',ii,4,113,215 ;:. 4,414,943 9,757,361 5,342,410 1,229,203 090,064 129,560 WIIIIE BEAR LK (JT) ' 22,117..x,,;.. ,,1`101,742 .:.': 79,625 22,117 116,356 94,230 14,613 10,890 1,571 263 WILLERNIE 741310 ,, 160,461.. 686,157 74,310 070,076 795,766 109,609 05,609 12,339 264 WOODBURY 8,414,074 . 5,509,124 ' .(2,904,950) 8,414,074 6,303,140 (2,110,934) 794,016 626,760 90,340 38,164,739 " 78,354,135 :;' 40,189,397 38,164,739 89,643,968 51,479,229 11,209,832 0,450,775 1,217,630 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Metro Total 1, 263, 501, 650' 1,263,5011650 ,' ,'. .(0) 1,435,490,048 1,435,498,040 0 4 137,313,298 18,715,702 f - - THE WORLD OF TOMORROW: MINNEAPOLIS IN THE POST - GHERMEZIAN ERA PROLOGUE One and a half billion dollars. Four million square feet. Eight hundred stores. A world -class convention hall. Submarines and anteaters. A Governor so excited he can't .Irep. What does this all mean for Minneapolis? In the past three weeks one would suppose more has been written about this potential project than any event in the state's history. Most of it has been good, useful, analytical material, and much of it deals directly with the planning issues involved. In addition, Ron Shirk's paper on the market effect of the development covers that aspect of the project admirably. In the light of this information plethora, what would be the most useful contribution? Thinking about the potential audience for a paper on the economic effect of the Ghermezian proposal, it seemed to me a novel approach, that told the story from a ,Afferent time perspective, might be useful. The information is essentially the same as would be presented in a narrative account with two exceptions; first, a small amount of literary license is permitted to name stores and situations that are actually prototypes, and second, the "present" is in the future. I trust this meets the reader'.s requirements and that he finds it thought provoking. As soon as possible I intend to extend the paper itself with what amounts to a second, annotated edition. This will document the reasoning behind the various points, using figures and diagrams where appropriate. -- 1 The Ghermezian epiphany struck Minneapolis with the same shock as Pearl Harbor. Wonder, apprehension, disbelief, awe, sleeplessness, declarations and edicts, travel, and predictions were within hours superimposed on the prevailing holiday most. It being summer, really good news was in short supply, and this pushed accounts of virtually everything else aside. More broadly, in a period of rising doubt and concern it suddenly it focused attention on something tangible, comprehensible, and 100% American. But what happened? So far accounts of this event are being penned after the lightning and before the thunder. None has chronicled how this phenomenon changed civilization in its part of the world. How does it look if one stands at a. point in time fifteen years from now and looks back over the Ghermazian era. . Hannibal had defeated . Rome; what if the Pope had cowed Luther; what if Democrats had made 11540 40' or Fight" a reality in 1844? So, taking a firm position in the future and looking back we see that ...... It happened exactly as they said it would. Within six months of the announcement the Legislature had met, Bloomington had been exempted from the fiscal disparities law, operating subsidies had been voted, environmental controls had been waived, Canadian banks had made loans, land had been transferred, design plans for the 'Edmonton mall had been. adopted, the Gharmazian team was transferred to Bloomington, and ground was broken. A year after that construction was complete and the key to the Golden City was presented to Governor, recently elected to a second term on the strength of his vision, economic leadership and a $5 million campaign. Behind the gates all of it was there - everything -just as they had promised. On opening day in February 1987 4,000 guests staying in the two hotels joined a crowd of local visitors and tourists to patronize the 800 shops, ride the amusement devices, view the exhibits, surf on the lake, skate on the rink, attend six simultaneous conventions, and generally to admire what imagination, charisma, and large amounts of money, disbursed without hinderance, can do. Among the crowd were former doubters: the mayors and business leaders from surrounding communities along with many of their town -folk. They too were looking pleased and speaking words of admiration. It was so grand - awesome even. They were seeing the future and it worked. Their own kind, consummate businessmen- politicians, had done 2 this. Clearly people loved it. To have expressed doubt or to have reserved praise at this point was unthinkable. Better yet, it didn't quit. The crouds of winter were replaced by the hordes of summer, and then winter convention visitors made up in dollar spending for the mass of school children and youth. Two additional hotels were built to balance demand created by a million square foot convention hall. The Minnesota Orchestra performed summer concerts in the central mall. Time Magazine featured the Ghermazians, each holding a miniature submarine, on its cover, and inside was an article about the Minnesota Miracle. Duluth sought and obtained Legislative support for an Embarcadero Hotel with an attached Fantasyland managed by Jeno Pulucci and the Brothers, or "Fab Five" as they were known locally. The Legislature, at the brothers' suggestion,. arranged to fund projects on the Iron Range with a special set -aside from the Mall's sales tax (which exceeded the former taconite tax) and the IRRRB was given full access to the Ghermezian brothers' research and analysis department. In the Center itself one thing people invariably noticed and remarked was how well - groomed eveything was. The maintenance staff was much younger and better scrubbed than elsewere. They kept the place spotless, the plantings were as lavish as in Como Park Conservatory, the pavement wasn't broken up the way it was on the Nicollet Mall, and you never had to put up with the bums, winos, punks, or deviates as you did downtown. For that matter, you didn't see many Black, Indian or obviously poor people either. Surprising to most people perhaps was the lack of a clear, definable downside to all this. Because the Center had, comparatively little office space, the existing downtowns and office parks didn't notice any diminution in non- retail activity. In fact, they gained a bit. As real estate interest concentrated on the environs of the Center, elsewhere economic rents, reflected in land prices, tended to level off, making otherwise prohibitively expensive sites affordable. Also, the national attention lavished on Minnesota may have had a small positive effect on the larger economy. Downtown actually benefited from reduced competition for support services like parking space and hotels. Because they had fewer convention guests, the latter were now far more attractive to business travellers. 3 Likewise there was little overall on housing. 1 few families living in the immediate vicinity and along the major approach routes were upset, but eventually they moved and their space was taken by road up- grading and roadside business. Virtually no funds were routed directly from additional tax revenues to housing. In the light of falling house values on the Range as people moved to accept the 40,000 new jobs in Bloomington, this was politically expedient. f Early reaction to the Ghermezian proposal had assumed that the greatest negative effect would be in retailing and entertainment, but it was substantially less than expected. The Center itself had six general merchandise stores as planned: Dayton's, Donaldsons, Penney's, Sears, K -Mart and the area's first Mervyn's - Lechmere, Herberger's reached out to non - metropolitan area residents with a small trial store. The Mall also had a Byerlys and a Rainbow Foods, a multiline automobile show room, fifteen theater screens, Menards, Plywood Minnesota, and two of every Pillsbury franchise. The remainder of the 800 stores offered virtually every known type of food service and merchandise with the possible exception of religious and pornographic. While the breadth was extreme, the depth was something less: clearly these shops catered almost exclusively to the national average in taste, price points cut and fit of clothing brands, fad appeal,and quality. Incidently, it was soon noted that while there were 800 shops as advertised this didn't mean 800 separate businesses. For example there were three McDonalds, six Grandma Gebhard's Cookie stands, one dress shop that operated under four names, fifteen instant cash machines, and seven shops under the .aegis of Byerly's. This gargantuan retail offering had mixed results in the surrounding area (a ring of about six miles) but little effect beyond. Dayton's vacated its Burnsville store but replaced it with a Mevwin's- Lechmere and cut merchandise space in its downtown Minneapolis unit by 15 percent (about one floor). Sears closed its Lake Street store, devoting part of the space to warhouse expansion and the remainder to a consolidated liquidation outlet. This had the secondary effect of wiping out the plans for upgrading the Chicago-Lake intersection. After a few years of loss operation Wards closed its Southtown store but this was only partially caused by competition from the Center. The overall effect on Southtown was remarkably similar to the effect of Rosedale on Apache Plaza. The center remained open but with more vacancies, higher turnover, and redirection to the less affluent shopper. 4 Retailing at Southdale and in owntown Minneapolis were clearly affected by the Center's opening but in ways that weren't anticipated at the time. As they yielded the vast middle market to the Center, high fashion customers tended to gravitate to what were now perceived (and advertised) as oases of taste in a retailing world run like a circus Southdale had more success in maintaining patronage because of its agile, unified management but downtown was able to capitalize on a growing employee base that ' concentrated its high discretionary expenditures on a relatively narrow range of goods and services. Both areas gained those hallmarks of haute- couture; Saks and Neiman Marcus, and part of . the Donaldson's Southdale store was redeveloped for Bonwit Teller. A few thought this differentiation by class (or more accurately, price level) was socially if not economically detrimental, but more and more, mediocrity appeared to be the Bloomington Center's greatest appeal. As downtown's middle income orientation shrank, its upper income units grew. The overall dollar result was essentially a wash, although the merchandised area declined by perhaps 10 percent. The starkest result was across the River, where the critical mass of steady shoppers had never been achieved. Viable stores, primarily in Riverplace but also in Saint Anthony Main now sought new locations in the heart of downtown and were not replaced. Riverplace was definitely sick; whether it would die or simply linger, as Butler Square did during the early 801s, was still unknown. Other retail centers were affected in varying -but predictable- degrees. Early on community -level centers like Oxboro Heath and Richfield Hub lost their larger stores claim to unigness, to the Center's voracious appetite for tenants. Pierce Skates and Nautilus were examples. On the other hand, more ubiquitous units like Snyder Drugs or United Stores, or shoestring operations continued as before. The greatest effect was on the larger regional centers:' first as sales of standard units like Braun's, B. Dalton, and Regal Shoes was divided among more outlets; and second, as their anchor department stores drew a reduced share of the regional trade. The effect was not devastating on places like Burnsville Mall, Eden Prairie Mall, and Highland Park but it was measureable. As for entertainment: whether it succeeded or not depended on one's orientation. Certainly in terms of its original billing as Fantasyland it faded and died. But with the more ordinary activities: indoor skating, some water sports, staged athletic contests, a comparatively modest children's petting zoo and Storybook Village it carried on even if it didn't succeed. The rides, thronged in the first year and a half, began to fade at 5 the end of the 1988 summer — partly brought about by the sharp recession that fall, but also by boredom and the growing irritation of store personnel and shoppers. Ultimately, however, it was competition that did them in. It was probably predictable,- but fantasy being hard to quantify, is more often sold by exitement potential than by cash flow analysis. As it was in Edmonton, so it was in Bloomington Government relieved the developer of any need to produce hard data that might have foretold failure. In any case, after the fact five things became clear. First, fantasies dependent on hurtling through space or synthetic placement in dangerous situations don't renew themselves every twenty -four hours. Most people's fasciniation with roller costers is effectively reduced to zero after one experience, and while it does regenerate the recovery period, which varying with age, is fairly lengthy. It is perhaps as great as a decade for those over 30. Valley Fair and the State Fair continue to exploit this fact by appearing seasonally. Second (and related to the first), novelty became a tyrant. At first the rides were fresh and people sought a new experience. Every addition of a new ride boosted patronage. But the limitations of the human psyche and physique put a ceiling on ways to catapult, shake, whirl, and drop individuals. Also the cost of such devices (which carnivals spread by moving them around) made rapid change prohibitive. Third, non -ride activities that combined education with sensation were either- directly competitive with places that did it better (The Zoo, the Omnitheater) or they had a sterile "you've seen it once, you've seen it all" quality like the New Orleans World's Fair. In either case their high labor input, high maintenance. cost, and inordinate space demand gradually forced their. removal'. Fourth, the volume of water involved in lakes, waterfalls, rain forests, chutes, and wave machines made the place uncomfortably humid in summer and clammy in winter. This could have been moderated to some degree by engineering technique but to reduce it to the level of Saint .Paul's Town Square would have meant major changes in design. Several rides were also inherent noise producers or required noise to enhance their effect. People endured it for a while, as with the planes flying over south Minneapolis, but eventually the din became intolerable for some employees and patrons. 6 Fifth and foremost, Fantasyland foundered on fares. The recession of 1987 reduced part -time job opportunities for teenagers, who were by far the largest user group. Faced with choices, Big Macs, pizzas and clothes won, and suddenly rides were "not -in." None of this should be interpreted as criticism or second - guessing of the Center's promoters. Their greatest need at the outset was to create interest, novelty, excitement, motion — and they succeeded admirably. Without it the project would have been just another mall, albeit a large one. The fact that it didn't continue to attract after the first couple of years and was therefore cut back is a tribute to their business sense, not an indictment. The parallel fact that twice they got governments to cover the shortfall is particularly comendable as a canny developer's technique. . . A less significnt reason for the amusement park's decline was the advent of even more spectacular parks in other cities. Just as Bloomington upstaged Edmonton, Shaumberg and East St. Louis (both in Illinois), Omaha, and Aurora (Colorado) all acquired park - centers that intercepted tourists from those areas. Two were Ghermezian- sponsored and all enjoyed heavy governmental support. A side note: in every case the Legislature, assumed that this was the state's one big opportunity to achieve prosperity and, that no one else would be similary motivated. Later the public and the press were inclined to blame this competition for Bloomington's decline, but in fact it only reinforced inherent weaknesses. The hotels were a mixed bag. Initially they were a huge success, primarily because of their novel. decor, family plans, heavy booking by tour groups, and loss- leader rates. The latter concerned the taxing authorities who had counted on higher revenues to offset heavy losses on the convention center, but. the Ghermezians quickly pointed out that more guests would increase sales tax revenues and ultimately property taxes. The fact that property taxes went to Bloomington exclusively and sales taxes were not available for convention. center oepration was largely ignored. Within a few years however, the novelty of the hotels (one floor Camelot, one floor Emerald City, one floor Alice's Rabbit Hole, etc.) began to fade. It had always appealed primarily to young people and to a few adults with a vivid imagination,. but the assessment of more sophisticated travellers ran from amused tolerance to ridicule. Business travellers on expense accounts didn't try it twice, which at least had the beneficial effect of preserving relatively high occupancy rates in Bloomington's other hotels. Convention - 7 attendees didn't have the same choice. They took what was offered, but within a few years those marketing the Cities to association executives began to hear isolated tales of distaste for too many children not one's own, contempt for "life in Fairyland ", and "If I'd wanted this I would have gone to Southern California." At that point however, the cost of redoing completely the decor. of four 1,000 -room hotels was more than the state was willing to bear. The solution lay elsewhere, as chronicled below. The convention center was something else. It. was owned by the state and leased to the Center management for a nominal rent. Under a 25 -year contract operating deficits were covered by a biennual legislative appropriation. Other provisions of the contract covered hiring and staffing (with state involvement), management compensation through an incentive system based on the number of conventions (which promoted raiding and was later changed), and food service operation. As promised, the hall was big - a million square feet - but it still competed directly with Minneapolis' 250,00 - square foot hall. The latter was city- financed, much to the state's dismay. Reprisals and disciplining were discussed, but were dropped in exchange for Minneapolis' acquiescence in Bloomington's exemption from fiscal disparities. The world -class hall did, in fact, add Bloomington to a short list of collosal Colesseums available to the largest conventions and trade shows. But placement on the list didn't provide immediate patronage. First, all the largest affairs had booked ten or more years ahead so that only two, who had to make last- minute changes because of overseas political difficulties, appeared in Bloomington before 1997. Second, these largest conventions were reluctant to break ties with familiar halls, old business associates, acknowledged fun cities, and proven membership acceptance. Third, exhibitors, who pay the bulk of convention costs through space rental fees and assessments, were wary of a fourth -level hall with limited floor loading capacity and a highly inefficient loading dock arrangement. They also looked askance at the competition for attention afforded by 800 shops and mall attractions. The upshot was that Bloomington was beginning to get a few mammoth conventions toward the end of the century but only a couple of trade shows had signed. Management's reaction was first to go after smaller conventions, mainly regional meetings with a family orientation; second, to begin promotion of its own meetings; and third, to seek alternative uses for what by now was obviously a surfeit of space. 8 1 Raiding, as already noted, didn't go down well. Center managment argued eloquently that dropping that policy violated principles of free enterprise and might raise issues of freedom of assembly, but the Legislature understood even better the arguments of Saint Cloud, Duluth, Rochester, and resort operators. The practice was toned down but not dropped. The second policy worked remarkably well. It was based on Americans' love of coming together, their obsession with hobbies, and their desire for professional advancement through networking, particularly when it is tax - deductible. Its only real drawback was its high degree of labor intensity: the salaries and fees of the large staff needed to create, arrange, and conduct endless meetings made it unprofitable as a cost center. Part of the shortfall was charged against the hall, contributing to the state - funded operating deficit; the balance was absorbed as hotel and mall promotion. The third policy really saved the situation though, and will be covered below.. As mentioned, Minneapolis meanwhile had expanded its hall to 250,000 square feet and had built a 600 -room convention hotel between the hall and Nicollet Mall. It was reasonably successful in keeping it full - not as successful as if no hall existed six miles south because they tended to split the business, but, all in all, a contributor to the Downtown economy. The fact that it worked as well as it did was a tribute to the City's sales staff with their well - developed contacts, to their long- standing reputation for superior hall management, to the concern for operating efficiency in its design which also gave it a clean, pleasant appearance, and most of all to the fact that people who go to conventions prefer the ambience of downtown. to that of a suburban shopping center. So, to summarize the economic consequences of the Ghermezian accession as of AD 2000: - 800 stores in a mall that epitomized the great American middle at the turn of the millenium adjustment in other, centers but neither as severe nor as detrimental as some had predicted gradual shaping of Downtown :Minneapolis and Southdale as slightly smaller retail complexes more tightly focussed on up -scale merchandising initial acceptance and gradual fading of the amusement center, with stabilization on an unusually large area devoted to skating, sports demonstrations, children's zoo amusements, and a few rides. 4,000 hotel rooms that operate somewhere between high convention utilization and toleration by tourists because of their modest rates a convention center whose ability to attract the very largest conventions on a regular basis is only now being tested How the Bloomington Center has affected the political life of the state and community is really another story. This record is primarily about its economic effect so we will only note, but not comment on, four political issues with economic consequences. Bloomington's exemption from the fiscal disparities act weakened that piece of landmark legislation. At this point it still exists but pressure is mounting to kill it altogether. .Minneapolis is the largest contributor and, ironically, Richfield on the center's doorstep, is close to being the largest recipient. The Convention Center subsidy has become a major concern. It is growing and with it pressure to transfer part (or all) of the cost from the state to Bloomington, who receives all the property taxes. Minneapolis' situation is cited as precedent (it pays all the costs of the Downtown hall); Bloomington responds that the Center's hall is a state benefit; that they wouldn't have built so large and expensive a facility; and that, anyway, the real cause is splitting the business with Minneapolis. However the point will soon be moot, as noted below. Allocating the cost of public improvements in the vicinity of the site has been and will continue to be a problem. The Ghermezians opened the Center eighteen months after acquiring the land, just as they said they would. They pointed out, correctly, that time is money — that the sooner the center opened the sooner benefits would flow, and in particular jobs. No one denied it, and in fact the Governor made a point of how he wouldn't be able to sleep until every Iron Ranger had had an opportunity to apply for a job. And so the planning- engineering team was imported intact from Edmonton and work began forthwith. 10 Almost immediately, however, problems with the surrounding highway network appeared. Construction vehicles caused delays on Interstate 494 at three intersections and on Cedar Avenue at two. Work began on design improvements, but these were hampered by the need for legislative action, reallocation of funds from other projects, assessment of the environmental impact, and staffing. By the time planning was well underway the Center opened, and the low level of public discontent with construction vehicles became a veritable roar of outrage as not only center -bound traffic but work_ and airport -bound trips were delayed. This resulted in calls for speeded up construction with attendant higher costs, and eventually questions of who would pay. The Ghermezians, Bloomington, the state, center patrons, tourists through an arrival tax, even a general gasoline tax, and a lottery were suggested. Over the past ten years construction has taken place and in fact is nearly complete, but the basic question of where the money ' to retire the construction bonds will come from remains unanswered, at least at the moment. .Added to this is continuing debate about rail connections between the Center, the airport, hotels, the Downtowns and perhaps low- income residential concentrations. However, inability to face funding questions for the road facilities already in place does not augur well for buying a street car system. Likewise the airport. Its road system which was barely adequate to its. needs in 1985, must now serve tourists and conventions generated by the new . center as well. The terminal, like O'Hare, stretches, three - quarters of a mile end- to-end. It is no longer convenient, and there is talk of some businesses getting fed up. It will have to be rebuilt; who pays is the question. Finally, politically the Center just didn't do the job - producing job it was supposed to do. Perhaps this is its greatest disappointment, given the Legislature's expectations at its inception. True, the-Center itself offered jobs, precisely the 40,000 projected. But many of them were part -time, minimum wage positions — not to be desegrated in the overall job picture but not a solution to general unemployment on the Iron Range either. Most of those positions were quickly filled by moonlighting local residents. The better paying managerial positions both in construction and operation were filled almost exclusively by persons transferred from Edmonton or stores elsewhere in the area. It quickly became obvious that materials could be supplied efficiently and on short notice -� 11 by established suppliers from underused plants in the metropolitan area so no new plants were generated elsewhere in the state. The most significant effect on employment was to create entirely new positions for some 5,000 persons, mostly in the $20- 30,000 range. Of these, forty percent were in the construction phase and the balance in operation. Perhaps ten percent were obtained by persons moving directly from northern Minnesota. In the mid 190s problems of and around the Center were beginning to compound. Perhaps the most general complaint was the road system in the area because its inadequacy affected more than just Center visitors. Moreover complaints more and more were being directed to the state rather than to center management or local governments who pointed out that the state oversaw the roads in question and was the only body in a position to raise the amount required. The Department of Transportation judged the total cost of widening 494, widening Cedar Avenue between 62nd Street and Franklin Avenue, completing Highway Parkway, building a directed interchange at 494 and Cedar, and upgrading makeshift entrances at 24th Avenue, 34th Avenue, Killebrew Drive, and Old Shakopee Road at $450 million (1995 dollars). As. noted, funding sources of that magnitude were not easy to come by. Other problems began to press also. As the novelty and uniqueness of the Center's rides and amusements were off it became less of a tourist destination, particularly in the six months of winter. Then, even though the end of the journey was attractive the thought of a drive of several hundred miles through snow and ice to get there cooled most families' interest and they opted for the Ghermezian's newer centers farther south. The time required to book a million square feet of convention space was seriously underestimated, a problem compounded by Minneapolis' redoubled efforts to market its hall. While it was only a quarter the size of Bloomington's and therefore far from world - class, it seemed to have greater appeal to professional associations and business groups, particularly those for whom the appeal to children and mass entertainment was not great. In short Minneapolis tended to get the conventions that were also interested in San Francisco and New York while Bloomington got those that preferred Orlando and Anaheim. This circumstance put considerable pressure on the state. who owned the space and who had counted on percentage rent from the hall to meet bond service requirements. Talk of combining the Minneapolis Convention Center, the Bloomington Center, the Metro Sports Center, and the Humphrey Stadium under a State (or Metropolitan Convention Authority began. Some pointed out that four negatives don't 12 .. . ,add up to a positive, but others saw the political attractiveness of at least balancing the utilization of the facilities through creative accounting. A shortfall in tourists and conventions - a shortfall only from the early glory days since there was a substantial increase in absolute numbers but pressure on the hotels, whose occupancy rates fell below the breakeven point. The situation was temporarily solved by quietly "mothballing" one of the towers. r And then, in 1999, just as the gloom was deepening over the Legislature about a complete breakdown of the Range economy, agriculture that had to compete with rising production in the USSR and China and signs of renewal in Africa, a deteriorating food system, and the covetous eyes of California focused on Lake Superior, the Ghermezians, came up with the perfect solution. As it has been in 1985, the Ghermezians came up with the perfect solution. As it has been in 1985 the timing was perfect, the idea was simplicity itself, it would be entirely bright, and its benefits would radiate from Bloomington througout the State. The Touchtone — gambling! Not just your little Monte Carlo or Atlantic City operation but gambling like the world had never seen before! It would do everything that craps had done for Las Vegas and more! Five billion dollars in new tourist money alone! This wasn't just talk. They now owned Monaco, and Bloomington would be a carbon copy only twice the size. The Governor, without being reminded, called the Legislature into session. They acted immediately to draft an amendment, and in anticipation of voter approval authorized funds to convert 750,000 square feet of the convention center into the world's largest gambling hall. And it worked, just as they had said. Crowds jammed the airport daily — no sticky - fingered kids who only spent $3 on a roller coaster but BIG SPENDERS with rolls of bills who headed straight for the tables and gambled all night. So it was as the millenial year came to a clost. The Ghermezians had come through a second time. They promised to change the face of Minnesota, and it all happened, just as they said. 13 RF.gf`.T.TTTT0M WHEREAS, the following described tracts of land constitute various separate parcels: Lot 2, Block 2, Indianhead Crest and Lot 1, Block 1, Arrowhead Ridge; and VTHEREAS, the owners of the above tracts of land desire to subdivide said tracts into the following described new and separate parcels (herein called "Parcels "): That part of Lot 2, Block 2, Indianhead Crest, according to the recorded plat thereof on file and of record, Hennepin County, Minnesota which lies Southwesterly of the following described line: Commencing at the most easterly corner of said Lot 2, Block 2; thence in a northwesterly direction, along the northeasterly lot line of said Lot 2, Block 2, a distance of 95.44 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence northwesterly, deflecting to the left 27 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for a distance of 80.00 feet: thence northwesterly, deflecting to the right 24 degrees 29 minutes 30 seconds for a distance of 180.00 feet, more or less, to the northwesterly lot line of said Lot 2, Block 2 and there terminating. and Lot 1, Block 1, Arrowhead Ridge, and that part of Lot 2, Block 2, Indianhead Crest, according to the recorded plat thereof on file and of record, Hennepin County, Minnesota which lies Northeasterly of the following described line: Commencing at the most easterly corner of said Lot 2, Block 2; thence in a northwesterly direction, along the northeasterly lot line of said Lot 2, Block 2, a distance of 95.44 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence northwesterly, deflecting to the left 27 degrees 00 minutes 00seconds for a distance of 80.00 feet; thence northwesterly, deflecting to the right 24 degrees 29 minutes 30 seconds for a distance of 180.00 feet, more or less, to the northwesterly lot line of said Lot 2, Block 2 and there terminating. L•THEREAS, it has been determined that complaance with the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and said Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purposes of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Ordinance Nos. 801 and 825; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina that the conveyance and ownership of said Parcels as separate tracts of land is hereby approved and the requirements and provisions of Ordinance No. 801 and Ordinance No. 825 are hereby waived to allow said division and conveyance thereof as separate tracts of land but are not waived for any other purpose or as to any other provision thereof, and subject, however, to the provision that no further subdivision be made of said Parcels unless made in compliance with the pertinent ordinances of the City of Edina or with the prior approval of this Council as may be provided for by those ordinances. M1`C r� Y '4 y b Y WILLIAM L. WILSON Councilman CIT"Y�uObt SAV T PAUL OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL Mayor Wayne Courtney Edina City Hall 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney and Members of the City Council: MARK VOERDING Legislative Aide As you are aware, Northern States Power Company has filed a request for an electric rate increase of 13.44 per cent which will cost elec- tric consumers an additional $129 million each year. My purpose in writing is to ask if you, as a public official, have considered the impacts of this rate increase in your community, and secondly, to find out if you are interested in joining a consortium with other munici- palities to challenge this request. We in St. Paul are very concerned about how the proposed increase affects residential users, particularly since it follows on the heels of a requested gas rate increase. These users will be especially hurt because they will carry a greater portion of the rate increases (15.05% compared to 13.44% overall for electricity, 8.89% compared to 7.05% overall for gas). Because of our concern, we have already intervened in the gas rate case, and support for this action has been overwhelming. Beyond this, the proposed electric rate increase will have an adverse impact on city budgets. We have projected, for example that it will cost St. Paul an additional $400,000 per year to operate street lights, traffic signals, water pumps and other electric services. Of particular concern is NSP's proposal to eliminate the pumping class for large municipalities. To assist you in evaluating the NSP rate increase on Edina, I have enclosed rates of comparison which apply to municipal services and comparisons of present and proposed residential, farm and commercial rates. Finally, I propose that, as concerned cities, we join together as a consortium to intervene in this electric rate case. NSP's proposal should have similar effects on all cities, so it is appropriate to join together, and, if a number of cities become involved, the cost CITY HALL SEVENTH FLOOR SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 612/298 -4646 46 would be low. There are a number of ways in which the consortium could be set up to allow for participation by individual municipali- ties as well as members of the Suburban Rate Authority. Please let me know as soon as possible about your concerns regarding this electric rate increase. At this time, I am not looking for a commitment or the organizational structure, but rather your interest and ideas. Respectfully, t William L. Wilson Councilman WLW:jca Enc. -A RESOLUTION RELATING TO PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON S.A.P. 120 - 138 -04 (BRAEMAR BLVD) FROM GLEASON ROAD TO VALLEY VIEW ROAD THIS RESOLUTION, passed this 9th day of September, 1985, by the City of Edina in Hennepin County, Minnesota. The Municipal corporation shall hereinafter be called the "City ". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the "City" has planned the improvement of MSAS 138 (Braemar Boulevard) from Gleason Road to 2,000 feet west of Gleason Road; WHEREAS, the "City ", will be expending Municipal State Aid Funds on the improvement of this Street, and WHEREAS, this improvement does not provide adequate width for parking on both sides of the street approval of the proposed construction as a Municipal State Aid Street project must therefore be conditioned upon certain parking restrictions, and WHEREAS, the extent of these restrictions that could be necessary prerequisite to the approval of this construction as a Municipal State Aid project in the "City ", has been determined; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED; that the "City ", shall ban the parking of motor vehicles on both sides of MSAS 138 (Braemar Blvd) from Gleason Road to Valley View Road at all times. Dated this 10th day of September, 1985. City of Edina, Minnesota. ATTEST: By Mayor City Clerk RPROTETTON WHEREAS, the recent U. S. Supreme Court decision in Garcia versus San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority extends coverage of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to the-State and local government; and WHEREAS, this ruling represents an unwarranted intrusion in the management of State and local government. At a time when tax payers are demanding that government curb spending, compliance with FLSA regulations will increase the cost of government without any corresponding increase in the level of services provided; and WHEREAS, in some jurisdictions the higher costs of government may be accompanied by service reductions; and WHEREAS, for the City of Edina, one of the most pronounced effects of this ruling has been a dramatic increase in the cost of overtime; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the FLSA regulations, the City must now pay overtime at the rate of 1% times the regular hourly rate for work exceeding 40 hours in a seven -day work period; and WHEREAS, in the past, the City has limited its overtime cost by giving employees the option to use compensatory time in lieu of overtime. Compensatory time provided a tool that facilitated the management of the City's work load requirements. Because municipal work loads such as those involved in snow emergencies and watermain breaks rarely conform to the standard work week, use of compensatory time has given the City the flexibility to handle its workloads while managing the cost of human resources; and WHEREAS, from a management's prospective, the City must now address an unanticipated increase in overtime costs. Without any prior experience in budgeting overtime expenses in accordance with the FLSA regulations, City officials recognize that their cost estimates projected to this point could be extremely conservative and thus creating further budgeting problems for 1986; and WHEREAS, any increased cost of compensation as a result of the FLSA regulations will be borne by City taxpayers who will realize higher costs of government services without any accompanying service improvements; and WHEREAS, from the prospective of City employees, elimination of the option to use compensatory time is seen as a major loss, particularly since paid time -off is perceived as a desirable benefit. Previously, employees were able to work with their employer to identify alternative arrangements to compensate hours worked overtime above the normal work schedule. To many, it is ironical that the FLSA regulations,which are intended to benefit and protect employees, now restrict their ability to take compensatory time in lieu of overtime payments; and -2- WHEREAS, union employees recognize that the FLSA regulations negate the compensatory time provisions contained in collective bargaining agreements. No recognition is given to the fact that the employer and unions representing the employees through a process of negotiation and compromise mutually agreed upon the use of compensatory time as an alternative to cash overtime payments. Instead, the U. S. Department of Labor now dictates important terms and conditions of employment for employees without having any investment in how those decisions affect City employees; and WHEREAS, the extension of FLSA regulations to State and local government has necessitated the re- design of work schedules for fire fighters because the traditional 56 -hour a week fire fighter schedule typically used in mid - western communities is now inconsistent with FLSA regulations. The City could opt to continue the 56 -hour schedule and pay the overtime now required by law. This merely increases the cost of providing fire services, resulting in higher costs to taxpayers without any increase in the level of the services. In addition, paying the overtime associated with the 56 -hour schedule ignores wage rates established through collective bargaining, essentially creating an un- negotiated salary increase and disregarded the collective bargaining process. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Edina supports modifications to the FLSA regulations as outlined in Senate Bill 1570 which permit an exemption from the FLSA overtime pay requirements for State and local employees, permitting the use of compensatory time off in lieu of overtime compensation; grant exempt status for individuals who volunteer services for State and local government; and eliminate retroactive application of Federal Fair Labor Standards to the State and local government. S J RF.gnT.TTTTnV WHEREAS, the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Garcia versus San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority extends coverage of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to the state and local government; and WHEREAS, this ruling represents an unwarranted intrusion in the management of state and local government at a time when taxpayers are demanding that government curb spending, compliance with FLSA regulations will increase the cost of government without any corresponding increase in the level of services provided; and WHEREAS, in some jurisdictions the higher costs of government may be accompanied by service reductions; and WHEREAS, for the City of Edina one of the most pronounced effects of this ruling has been a dramatic increase in the cost of overtime; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the FLSA regulations, the City must now pay overtime at the rate of one and one -half times-the regular hourly rate for work exceeding 40 hours in a seven -day work period; and WHEREAS, in the past the City has limited its overtime cost by giving employees the option to use compensatory time in lieu of overtime, compensatory time provided a tool that facilitated the management of the City's work load require- ments. Because municipal work loads such as those involved in snow emergencies and watermain breaks rarely conform to the standard work week, use of compensatory time has given the City the flexibility to handle its workloads while managing the cost of human resources; and WHEREAS, from a management perspective the City must now address an unanticipated increase in overtime costs, without any prior experience in budgeting overtime expenses in accordance with the FLSA regulations, City officials recognize that their costs estimates projected to this point could be extremely conservative thus creating further budgeting problems for 1986; and WHEREAS, any increased cost of compensation as a result of the FLSA regulations will be borne by City taxpayers who will realize higher costs of government services without any accompanying service improvements; and WHEREAS, from the prospective of City employees, elimination of the option to use compensatory time is seen as a major loss, particularly since paid time off is perceived as a desirable benefit. Previously, employees were able to work with their employer to identify alternative arrangements to compensate hours worked overtime above the normal work schedule. To many it is ironical that the FLSA regulations, which are intended to benefit and protect employees, now restrict their ability to take compensatory time in lieu of overtime payments; and Resolution - FLSA Page Two WHEREAS, union employees recognize that the FLSA regulations negate the compensatory time provisions contained in collective bargaining agreements, no recognition is given to the fact that the employer and unions representing the employees through a process of negotiation and compromise mutually agreed upon the use of compensatory time as an alternative to cash overtime payments. Instead, the U.S. Department of Labor now dictates important terms and conditions of employment for employees without having any investment in how those decisions affect City employees; and WHEREAS, the extension of FLSA-regulations to state and local government has necessitated the redesign of work schedules for firefighters because the traditional 56 -hour week firefighter schedule typically used in mid - western communities is now inconsistent with FLSA regulations. The City could opt to continue the 56 -hour schedule and pay the overtime now required by law. This merely increases the cost of providing fire services, resulting in higher costs to taxpayers without any increase in the level of service.. In addition, paying the overtime associated with the 56 -hour schedule ignores wage rates established through collective bargaining, essentially creating an un- negotiated salary increase and disregard for the collective bargaining process; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Edina supports modifications to the FLSA regulations as outlined in Senate 1570 which permit an exemption from the FLSA overtime pay requirements for state and local employees and permits the use of compensatory time.off in lieu of overtime compensation; grants exempt status for individuals.who volunteer services for state and local government, and eliminates retroactive application of Federal Fair Labor Standards to the state and local government; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that of Senate 1570 to encompass the FLSA. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS CITY OF EDINA ) the City of Edina supports expansion of the provisions the private sector with regard to administration of CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina, do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of September 9, 1985 and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 17th day of September, 1985. City Clerk 1985 Cl­ OF EDINA CHECK NO. DATE 231711 08/23/85 CHECK REGISTER 09 -09 -85 PAGE 1 AMOUNT_ ____.__— __.__ V_NOOt ITEM DESCRIPTION- __ . ACCOUNT N0, INV. I P.O. # MESSAGE 175,00. MARIO BOGNANNO SERVICES 10- 4220 - 140 -14 175.00 -' 232136 :8/23/85 198.75 EARL F ANDERSEN GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 301 -30 232136 58/23/85 350.70 EARL F AN)ERSEN GEN SUPPLIES 40- 4504 - 801 -80 548.75 # 232526 )8/23/85 1,810,00 TRACY OIL CO GASOLINE 10- 4612- 560 -56 19810.00 # t . f ► f # 239368 . 09/C4/_85 ____ —__ _ 2 1519.83_._ .___._ __MUTUAL- BENEFIT - ..... .___— _PREMIUM______.__. __ .. 10 -4158- 510 -51 29518.83 24535: 79/04/85 .26 MINN_G4 :SSCO HE4T 10- 1130 - 000 -01) 245354 .09/04/85 - 123.54_ __._... MINNEGASSCO HEAT .__. 10- 4254- 446 -44 245354 0.9/04/85 3.00 MINN_GASSCO HEAT 10- 4254- 500 -50 246554 09/04/85 53.58 MTNN_GR :SSCO HEAT 10 -4254- 520 -52 245354 09/04/85 _ _. 174.17 MINN_GASSCO HEAT ____. ___._ _ 10- 4254 - 540 -54 245554 29/04/85 104.21 MINN_GASSCO HEAT 1C- 4254- 646 -64 246354 09/C4/85 1003 MINNEGASSCO HEAT 23- 4254 - 611 -61 245354 _ 09104/85 4389 .93_._MINN_G0.SSC0_._HEAT.._.____._ —. —_ 26 -4254- 689 -68 246354 09/04/85 3.95 MINN= GA.SSC0 HEAT 27- 4254- 662 -66 245354 09/04/85 19562.92 MINNEGASSCO HEAT 28- 4254 - 708 -70 246354 09/04/85... __....__46.39 .._ _- ... MINNEGASSCO _ _._._.__ HEAT.____—__.._._ ....__._ _ 40- 4254- BUI -80 246354 09/04/85 122.58 MTNN_Gfl"SSC0 HEAT 40- 4254 - 803 -80 245354 09/04/85 3.11,0 MINN= GASSCO HEAT 50- 4254 - 821 -82 246354 _ __09/04/85 .._. _. _._._.,_17.64 MINNEGASSCO - -- -- 50- 4254 - 841 -84 246354 09/04/85 21.40 MINNEGASSCO NEAT 50- 4254 - 861 -86 69636.60 • 25ZU03 - _08/ 23/.85__._._._____ -__- ___121,50 ._.. _— ___ALBINSON_ _ _ BLUE.. PRINTING_,_____— __,..10 -4570- 260 -26 121.50 • 252004 09/04/85 __ _..__ _ 15*16 _ AMERICAN LINEN _.. LAUNDRY ___ —. _. _.___ _.__.10- 4262- 482 -48 252jJ.4 Ob/23/85 11.50 AMERICAN LINEN LAUNDRY 10- 4262- 628 -62 252004 08/27485 142.80 AMERICAN LINEN LAUNDRY 27- 4262 - 661 -66 ....- 252005 09/04/85 37,25 AUDIO GROUW ADVERTISINS 50 -4214- 822 -82 252U75 0.9/04185 _... _ _ 37,25 _..- .AUOIO..G'ROJP ADVERTISING.__.... -..____ _- ._.50- 4214 - 862 -86 74.50 # 25203,7 08/27/85 4500. APEX.PEST CONTROL CONT SERV 10 -4200- 646 -64 * ** -CKS *** -CKS ** *—CKS MANUAL *** -CKS MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL * **—CKS ••* -CKS _._ 1985 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 09 -09 -85 PAGE 2 CHECK N0. DATE - AMOUNT V7-NDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION _ACCOUNT N0. INV. # P.O. A MESSAGE 45.00 + 252UL:B 06/23/85 44.40 KAMAN BEARING 8 SPLY PARTS 10- 4620- 560 -56 252uj8 08/23/85 13.50 KAMAN BEARING B SPLY PARTS 10 -4620- 560 -56 57.90. +r.rrf * *. -CKS 25271'3 06/23/85 79.30 ALT'R ►JA TOR REBUILD GENERAL SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 646 -64 252U13 08/23185 3.63 ALTERNATOR REBUILD PARTS 10- 4620 - 560 -56 252013 0,8/23/85 - 81.18 ALTERNATOR REBUILD TOOLS -_ _ . 60 -4580- 803 -80 164.38 ... * ++ ... - CKS 252ii26 78/23/85 134.32 BADGER METER INC GEN SUPPLIES 47- 4504 - 807 -80 252J26 _3/23/85 639.56 BADGER-METER INC REPAIR .PARTS 40- 4540- 807 -80 773.58 + - ** *-CKS 252u33 09/04/85 1094A0 BERGrORD TRUCKING INVENTORY 50- 4626- 822 -82 252033 08/23/85 - - - __198.90 _ -- BERG = ORO TRUCKING INVENTORY 50 -4626- 822 -82 252J33 09/04/85 99.45 BERG °ORD TRUCKING - _._ INVENTORY _ 50 -4626- 822 -82 252033 09/04/85 132.30 BER6=0R0 TRUCKING INVENTORY 50 -4626- 842 -84 252033 08/23/85 - 369990 Br'RGFOR0 TRUCKING INVENTORY 50 -4626- 842 -84 252C33 C9104/85 207.45 BERG=ORD TRUCKING INVENTORY 50- 4626- 842 -84 252Q33 U9/C4/85 86.49 BERG-FORD TRUCKING INVENTORY 50- 4626- 862 -86 252033 U9/n4/95 _ _ 177.30 _ ._- - BER6=0RD TRUCKING _ INVENTORY 50 -4626- 862 -86 252u33 08/23/85 332955 BSRGF010 TRUCKING _ _ INVENTORY 50- 4626 - 862 -86 1.714.05 • * ** -CKS 252J37 08/27/85 450.30 BRAUV ENG TESTING IN CONST 1458 - 000 -00 252037 08/23/85 860.65 BRAUN ENG TESTING IN _ ___-__10- CONSTRUCTION 60- 1300 - 268 -04 1.310.65 *+f -CKS 252741 78/27/85 _- 1 9822.80. _ BURY 8 CARLSON INC BLACKTOP 10 -4524- 301 -30 252041 08127/85 92.10. BURY B CARLSON INC BLACKTOP _ 10 -4524- 645 -64 252041 08/27/95 108.50 BURY 8 CARLSON INC BLACKTOP 10- 4524 - 646-64 252J41 08/27/85 412.70 BURY 6 CARLSON INC BLACKTOP 60- 4524 - 803 -80 2,436.10 252047 09/04/85 277.32 BROYY DiHOTO PHOTO SUPPLIES 10- 4508 - 420 -42 277.32.* +. *..* *+* -CKS 252049 09/03/85 116.00 BURESH ROBERT MEETINGS 10- 4206- 440 -44 J 1985 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 09 -09 -85 -E 3 CHECK NO. DATE _ _ .- AMOUNT_.____— ___._. VENDOR _ ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. i MESSAGE + *+ -CKS 252U5(* 08/27/85 401.12 BATTEIT WAREHOUSE RE ?AIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 252354 08/271/85 _ 71.15 BATT_Rr W4REHOUS °_ RE"PAIR PARTS ._ ._._____.____ 10- 4540 - 560 -56 252U54 08/23/85 100.�?Q GATT_RY WAREHOUSE SHORT ON CK 10- 4620 - 560 -56 252054 08/23/85 193.44 BATT'RY WAREHOUSE PARTS 10- 4620 - 560 -56 - 252L54 Ob/23/85 32.97 BATTERY WAREHOUSE PARTS 10- 4620- 560 -56 798.69 * ► + ** -CKS 252056 98/23/85 5,902.00 B H K B R INC INSURANCE 10- 4260 - 510 -51 - 59 902.10.. * _ +rftr t * +* -CKS 252360 U8/27/85 175.70 AMBASSADO2 SAUSAGE CONCESSIONS 27- 4624- 664 -66 252060 09/03/85 183.80 AMBASSADOR SAUSAGE CONCESSIONS 27- 4624 - 664 -66 -- 359.50.. * +*-CKS - 252U62 08/23/85 267.40 BROCK WHITE GEN SUPP 10 -4504- 390 -30 252J62 08/23/85 42925 BROCK WHITE REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 322 -30 302.65 • ..._ _ .. -._._ _ ___ _. _ ..._ ... _ -. _ -_. * ** -CKS 4 252U72 _ 09103185 35.36 DAILY CONST REPORTS - ADVERTISING ^� 10- 4210 - 140 -14 e 35.36 • ** *- C K S 252UIK ..::•8/27/85._ -._ _ __. __ - _618.40_ _ _ _. COCA C)LA. BOTTLING CONCESSIONS _ ..._ _ _____._ 27- 4624- 664 -66 618.40 • fi + +** _ _ _ .. __.._- -... - -- _. ...._�_._----- --•-- -..._. _ _ * *f -CKS 252J82 0.9/04/85 34.35 CONWAY FI2E & SAFETY EQUIP MAINT 10- 4274 - 420 -42 252.82 9.50. CONWAY FILE & SAFETY EQUIP MAINT _ .10-4274-420-42 252082 __.U9/04185__._ U.9/ ^3/85 8100 CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY CLOTHING REPLACEMENT 10- 4574 - 440 -44 r 51.85 • +f ii►f * ** —CKS % 252091 — 175. R2 ___ —_ _ CITY 0r: E)INA- WATER ________________.__ .__1.1- 4258- 446 -44 252091 .09/03/85 09/03/85 32.25 CITY OF EDINA WATER 10- 4258 - 646 -64 252091 09/03/85 44.85 CITY OF EDINA WATER 10- 4258 - 646 -64 .252.92 rif f i f * ** —CKS Zo 252U97 08/23/85 263 *0D COURTNEY :.WAYNE REGISTRATION 10- 4202 - 100 -10 `� 252091 09/04/85 39.93 COURTNEtY C WAYNE MILEAGE 10 -4208- 100 -10 1995 CITY OF EDINA CHECK NO. DATE -_ AMOUNT 299.93 + CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 09 -09 -85 PAGE 4 ol ACCOUNT N0. INV. # P.O. # MESSAG- rfrf ** * ** -CKS 252125 98/23/85 458.70 MERIT SUPPLY CONSTRUCTION- 10- 1422- 000 -00 252125 08/23/85 453.25 MERIT SUPPLY GEN SUPP 10 -4504- 301 -30 252125 06/23/85 138.10 MERIT SUPPLY GEN.SUPPLIES 10- 4504- 440 -44 252125 0.3/23/85 1990)0 MERIT 6UP3LY CLEAN SUPP 10- 4512 - 540 -54 252125 08/23/A5 989.23 MERIT SUPPLY TRASH CANS 10- 4602 - 644 -64 152125 03/23f85 437.25 MERIT SUPPLY PAR TS 10- 4620- 560 -56 152125 08/27/85 480.33 MERIT SUPPLY CAPITAL OUTLAY, - 10- 4900 - 300 -30 152125 Ob/23185 132970 MERIT SUPPLY GEN SUPPLIES 23 -4504- 611 -61 252125 08/23/85 148.50 MERIT SUPPLY CHEMICALS 26- 4564- 689 -68 252125 09/04/85 59.0 MERIT SUPPLY CLEANING SUPPLIES 28- 4512 - 708 -70 252125 x0/23/85 278.25 MERIT SUPPLY CLEAN SUPPLIES 28- 4512 - 708 -70 252125 015/23/85 99.75 MERIT SUPPLY GENERAL 4C -4504- 801 -80 252125 '78/23/85 _2.284.10 MERIT SUPPLY GEN SUPP 40- 4504- 802 -80 69157.73 252126 39/04/85 611.90- DAVIS EUGENE CORRECTION _ 60 -4100- 985 -90 252126 ''9/04/85 611.()9 DAVIS EUGENE NEED CONTROL 67 -4100- 985 -90 252126 .19/ ^4/85 611.62 DAVIS EUGENE WEED CONTR.CL 60- 4100 - 985 -90 252126 _49/04/85_.. _ _ _. 46.46 DAVIS _ EUGENE MILEAGE_ -. 60 -4208- 985 -90 656.08 ffffff .._ .fr -CKS - 2,31143 C8 /27/85 159.74 EMRICH RACING CO CONCESSIONS 27- 4624- 664 -66 252143 09/3/85_ 161.20 EMRICH BARING, CO CONCESSINS 27- 4624- 664 -66 319.94 * ffffff _ Rif -CKS 152146 7d/23/85 89265.70 GREEN A:CR =S SPKL CONSTRUCTION 60- 1300 - 014 -07 89265.70 * ffffff + *+ -CKS 252154 (18/23/Q5 4x7.20 JOE ELIAS WAGES 27- 4100 - 663 -66 252154 09/04/85 464970 JOE =LDAS WAGES 27- 4100 - 663 -66 951.20 f I f f f f f f + + * -CK5 252156 09/04/85 32.25 FAIRVIEW iOSPITAL SERVICES 10- 4224 - 421 -42 r 252156 �9/03/85 393.15 FAIRVIDW HOSPITAL 1ST AID SUPPLY 10- 4510- 440 -44 425.40 • 252157 08/23/85 16000 50TH FRANCE BUS ASSN MEETING 50- 4206 - 820 -82 16.00. • _ i ffffff ** +-CKS 252161 09/04/85 33.80 FLYING CL)JO SANTAR RUBBISH REMOVAL 10 -4250- 353 -30 33.80 + qw 1925 CT. . JF EDINA CH':CK NO. O -TE 252162 09/03/35 f t f f f f 252183 1)8/27135 252133 18/27/85 252183 ;8/27/85 2521 °3 ^8/23/55 252183 ff Rfff ?9/ ^4/95 252188 „e/27/85 252188 08/27185 2521 88 03 /23/85 152183 J 6127 185 2521 98 t)s127/85 ffrat• 252194 LLs/23/95 252194 C9/ 14/85 2521 94 U9/74 /95 252194 D9/ 113/85 .•tR :f 2522..2 08/27/8` 2522.j2 78/23/85 252Zu3 06/23/85 2522 3 Q8/23!85 2522, 3 '0.8 /23/85 152203 L'8/23135 Z522.j 3 C6 /23/85 2522u3 08/23/85 2522--.3 08 /23/85 25Z2J3 08/23/85 251213 08/23/P5 2522u3 0 8/23/85 252213 ",8/23/35 25llu3 ub/23/85 Z522v3 08 /23/85 251Zu3 0^',/23/85 2522-13 08/23/85 132Z13 J8/23/85 • i R f + * AMOUNT. 3.90 3.90 + 8.75 30.10 36 .'C, 1D.98 80.4 5 166.18 • 46. °3 56.51 2,367.19 CHECK RE .( =R VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION FOWLER ELECTRIC REPAIR PARTS GIVENS INC GIVENS INC GIVEVS INC GIVENS INC GIVEVS INC GnAY9AR. EL- ECTRIC CO CRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO GRAYBARi ELECTRIC CJ C ^NT REPAIRS CONT REPAIRS REPAIR PAR TS ALARM SERV CONT REPAIRS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS CONSTRUCTION 09 -39 -85 ,GE 5 ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. N MESSAGE 27- 4540 - 663 -66 10- 4248 - 520 -52 10- 4248- 520 -52 1J -4540- 520 -52 23 -4304- 610 -61 28- 4248 - 708 -70 1')-4540- 646 -64 27• -4 5 40- 661 - 66 28- 1300 - 000 -00 * ** -CKS * ** -CKS ,d �d 132.35 GRAYSAR EL =CTRIC CO REPAIR PARTS 28- 4540- 708 -70 1, 51.94 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CU REPAIR PAR TS 28- 4540 - 708 -73 2.655.32 • * *+ -CKS 271.15 GENERAL C34MUNICATNS RADIO SERVICE 10- 4294 - 420 -42 10'.',.30 GENERAL COMMUNICATVS RADIO SERVICE 10 -4294. 420 -42 52.36 GENERAL COMMJ "diCATNS RADIO SERV 10- 4294 - 420 -42 51.56 GENERAL COMMUNICATNS RADIO SERV 17 -4294- 440 -44 475.'7 • * ** -CKS 132 *32 GOPH'RS SHOOTERS TARGETS 29- 4648 - 720 -72 16+13 GOPHERS SHOOTERS TARGETS 29- 4648- 720 -72 148.45 • I 21.50 PETTY CASH POSTAGE 10 -1145- 000 -00 12.35 PETTY CASs R=CORO SEARCH 10 -3038- 000 - '" 0 9.79 PETTY CASi ME =TING EXP 1J- 4206- 140 -14 2.50 PETTY CAS4 PARKING 10 -4208- 120 -12 _ 6.14 PETTY CASs PARKING 10 -4208- 140 -14 33 *37 PETTY CASH MILEAGE 10 -4208- 160 -16 12.50 PETTY CASs MEETING EXP 17 -4208- 200 -20 7.?1 PETTY CASH- UPS 10- 4290 - 621 -62 32.25 PETTY CASH LIC PLATES 10- 4310- 240 -24 7.7G PETTY CAS4 LIC PLATES 10- 4310 - 260 -26 101992 PETTY CASs GEN SUPP 10- 4504 - 624 -62 13.10 PETTY CASH PARK RE DED 10 -4504- 627 -62 6.76 PETTY CASH MUSIC SUPP 10- 4596- 627 -62 6.38 Pr-TTY CASH CONTRACTED REPAIRS 28- 4248 - 708 -70 5 *JD PETTY CASH NRA MEMBER 29 -4204- 720 -72 34 *77 PETTY CASs GEN SUPP 40- 4504 - 801 -80 313.14 1R• CKS Zd 1985 CITY OF EDINA 86.55 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT _ 252213 0.9123/85 240.30 151213 L'8/23/85 24,1.)7 252213 09/73/85 24J.90 t f * * SUPPLIES 723.110 + * f 252228 09/04/85 222.97 GEN SUPPLIES_ 222.97 • offffa 08/27/85 _ 252236 ':8/23/85 100.07 HOWE 252279 100.17 f 252238 08/23/85 24.70 OWN HOWE 24.90 + 08/27/85 127.76 JERRYS CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION LEROY H LI3SY CONT SERV LEROY i LIBBY CONT SERV LEROY M LIBBY SERVICES 09 -09 -85 PAGE 6 ACCOUNT NO* INV* N P.O. N MESSAGE w 40- 4200 - 800 -80 49- 4200 - 800 -80 40 -4200- 800 -80 • HILLSTROM AUTO SUP Y REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540- 662 -66 HIRSiFI -=L)S GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 646 -64 WM H MCCOY GEV SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 301 -30 252248 08/23/85 -- - - 8n *10 MAP,MDV GLOSS Z52248 US/27485 1D ^ *75 HARMDV GLASS 180.85 f f / f * • 252256 99/03/85 f f f f f f 252267 08/23/85 f f f f f 19266.00 19266 *30 1 •'306 *27 19006.27 • ICSI IBM CORPORATION 252277 28/23/85 86.55 CARLSOM PRINTING SUPPLIES - -- 86. 5 5 • SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 301 -30 GEN SUPPLIES 252278 98/23/85 47.54 JERRYS FO)DS SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 420 -42 GEV 40.54 * 10 -4504- 440 -44 GEN SUPPLIES_ _- 10- 4504 - 470 -47 252279 08/27/85 29.98 JERRYS OUR OWN HOWE 252279 18/27/85 _ 6.26 -, JERRYS OUR OWN HOWE 252279 08/27/85 127.76 JERRYS OUR OWN HOWE 252279 08/27/85 12961 JERRYS OUR OWN HOWE 252279 08/27/95 6.73 JERRYS OUR OWN HOWE 252279 Od/27 -/85 21.36 JERRYS OUR OWN HOWE 252279 Uh/27/85 43.85 JERRYS OUR OWN HOWE 252279 06/27/85 _ _- _ 11.37 - . JERRYS OUR OWN HDWE 252279 08/27/85 9.29 JERRYS OUR OWN HOWE 252279 08/27/85 16.60 JERRYS OUR OWN HOWE PARTS 10- 4620- 560 -56 PARTS 10- 4620 - 560 -56 OFFICE EQUIP 10 -4906- 500 -50 EQUIP RENTAL 10- 4226 - 510 -51 PP.I NTING 10- 4600 - 620 -62 GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 627 -62 CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248- 446 -44 GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 260 -26 GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 301 -30 GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 328 -30 GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 390 -30 GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 420 -42 GEV SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 440 -44 GEN SUPPLIES_ _- 10- 4504 - 470 -47 GEN SUPPLIES 10.4504- 540 -54 GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 560 -56 •••-CKS • w * *+-CKS w * ** -CKS low *•* -CKS *► • * *• -CKS .. * ++ -CKS w r *•+ -CKS ftp • • r w . 1965 Ci OF EDINA 6+0900- JON--.3 CHEMICALS CHECK RL_.STER CREDIT 09 -09 -85 PAGE 7 CHECK NO* DATE_.._ _ ___..__ ..AMOUNT_ _.- _._____..___ VENDOR CHEMICALS INC ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. INV. A P.O. 4 MESSAGE 252279 D8/27/85 4.18 JERRYS OUR OWN HOWE GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 627 -62 252279 :18/27/85 357.63 JERRYS OUR OWN HOWE GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504- 646 -64 252279 x8/27/85 75.01 JERRYS OUR OWN HOWE PAINT 10- 4544 - 646 -64 252279 :18/27/85 76.C5 JERRYS OUR OWN HONE GEN SUPPLIES 26- 4504- 689 -68 252279 X8/27 -/85. - -_ _ _ _- 63.91 JERRYS OUR OWN HOWE GEN SUPPLIES . _.__ _ 27 -4504- 661 -66 252279 38/27/85 3506 JERRYS OUR OWN HOWE GEN SUPPLIES 28- 4504 - 708 -70 252279 U8/27/85 8.58 JERRYS OUR OWN HOWE GEN SUPPLIES 29 -4504- 721 -72 252279 08/27/85 16 *98 JERRYS OUR OWN HOWE REPAIR PARTS 40- 4540- 802 -80 252279 08/27/85 20.43 JERRYS OUR OWN HOW= REPAIR PARTS 40- 4540 - 803 -80 252279 ,:6/27/85 7.19 JERRYS OUR OWN HOWE REPAIR PARTS 40 -4540- 807 -80 CO REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 390 -30 252334 08/23/85 125.67 KNOX LUMB =R 252233 0.9/03/85 6+0900- JON--.3 CHEMICALS INC CREDIT 26- 4564 - 686 -68 252283 u,9/03/85 784.00 J0N_3 CHEMICALS INC CHEMICALS 26- 4564- 686 -68 252283 .. _ 08/23/85 -._ 316.70 _ J ^yE5 CHEMICALS INC CHEMICALS _.. 26- 4564 - 689 -68 252283 co/27/85 366970 JONES CHEMICALS INC CHEMICALS 26- 4564- 689 -68 252283 0.9/03/85 512*10 JINES CHEMICALS INC CHEMICALS 26- 4564- 689 -68 1,0918.10 + far # ## 252286 38/27/85 405.75 JUSTUS LUMBER LUMBER 10 -4604- 646 -64 405.75 • 2523114 0,3/23/85 124.01' _ KNOX LUMBER CO GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 301 -30 2523]4 +06/27/85 81.12 KNOX LUMB :R CO GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 400 -40 2523 J.4 09/23/85 35997 KNOX LUMBER CO REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 390 -30 252334 08/23/85 125.67 KNOX LUMB =R CO REPAIR FARTS 10- 4540 - 520 -52 25231.4 09/74/85 167.54 KNOX LUMP-:'R CO LUMBER 10 -4604- 646 -64 252324 Co/27135 22.44 KNOX LUMB --- R CO LUMBER 10- 4604- 646 -64 252374F 09/x4/85 - _ 132.57 KNOX LUMB -R CO LUMBER _ .. 10 -4604- 646 -64 25233,4 08/23/85 21.96 KNOX LUMBER CO LUMBER 10- 4604 - 646 -64 252334 08127/85 38.99 KNOX LUMBER CO LUMBER 10- 4604 - 646 -64 252354 08/27/95 31.55 KNOX LUMBER C0 LUMBER _.._ 10 -4604- 646 -64 2523:;4 08/27/85 145.78 KNOX LUMBER CO LUMBER 10 -4604- 646 -64 2523]4 08/23/85 10.96 KNOX LUMBER CO LUMBER 10 -4604- 646 -64 252334 08/23/85 __ __ 35102 _. _ _ KNOX LUMBER CO LUMBER._... _. _._ 10- 4604 - 646 -64 25230,4 08/27/85 467.92 KNOX LUMBER CO LUMBER 10 -4604- 646 -64 25233 -4 0.8/27/85 141997 KNOX LUMBER CO LUMBER 10- 4604- 646 -64 15230.4 08/23/85 7923 KNOX LUMBER C0 LUMBER 10 -4604- 646 -64 2523:14 ^6/23/85 368 *25 KNOX LUMBER CO LUMBER 10- 4604- 646 -64 252314 08/27/95 15.27 KNOX LUMBER CO GEN SUPP 27- 4504 - 661 -66 252374 0.8/27/85 _ 29.94._ -_ -.__ _ KNOX_LUMB --- R CO GEN SUPPLIES _____... 28- 4504- 708 -70 25233.4 08/27/85 48.71 KNOX LUMBER CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 28- 4504- 708 -70 252374 C8/27/85 79956 KNOX LUM87-R CO GEN SUPPLIES 40- 4504 - 801 -80 2523-1.4 118/23185 119936 KNOX1 LUMBER CO REPAIR -PARTS 50- 4540 - 840 -84 2,572.75 • 252337 08/23/85 5 1?30,.63 KOCH ASPHALT ROAD OIL 10- 4526- 314 -30 * ** -CKS * ** -CKS * ** -CKS *f* -CKS J J =J J .J J `J 1985 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 09 -09 -85 PAGE 8 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. INV. # P.O. 4 MESSAGE 59830.63 + CKS 252317 03/27/85 _ 463.39 _... LAWS)N PRODUCTS GENERAL SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 646 -64 252317 09/04/85 623.33 LANSON PR03UCTS PARTS 10- 4620 - 560 -56 1 9086.42 + ** -CKS 252323 09/ ^3/85 38.46 LINHOFF PHOTO SUPPLIES 1D- 4508- 440 -44 38.46 + # «r•tr � * ** -CKS 152325 06/27/85 2206 LONG LAKE =ORD TRACT GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 646 -64 252325 08/23/85 37.98 LONG LAKE FORD TRACT REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 252325 06/27/85 19.14 LONG LAKE FORD TRACT PARTS _ 10- 4620 - 560 -56 78.98 * ** -CKS 252331 09/C4/85 7 373.70 LAHASS CORPORATION ROAD EQUIP 10- 4912 - 370 -30 252331 09/04/85 49228."0 LAHASS CORPORATION ROAD EQUIP 10- 4912 - 300 -30 119601.7.0 * *r. -CKS 252342 08/23/85 _ 230.76 MAC QUEEN EQUIP INC REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 230.16 * • f . t t # * ** -CKS 252344 C9/C3/85 45.41 MED OXYGE4 8 EQUIP 1ST AID SUPPLY 10- 4510 - 440 -44 45.41 * ** *-CKS 252353 00/27/85 109.c8 MINNESOTA GLOVE G =N SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 560 -56 252353 06/23/85 93.70 MINNESOTA GLOVE GENERAL SUPPLIES 40- 4504- 801 -80 - - - - - - 202.08 ** *-CKS 252356 J8/23/95 5%.O MINNESOTA BLUEPRINT GENERAL SUPP 10 -4504- 260 -26 252356 ';9/ ^3/95 433.72 MINNESOTA BLUEPRINT BLUE PRINTING 10 -4570- 260 -26 252356 29/03/85 _ 141.95 _...._ MINNESOTA BLUEPRINT LUMBER 10- 4604 - 260 -26 252356 ^•9/03/85 33.20 MINNESI.TA BLUEPRINT LUMBER 10- 4604- 260 -26 658.17 ** *-CKS 252359 _. Qb/23/85 36.3a MTNN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 560 -56 252359 2.6123/85 170.47 MINK TORO ZNC REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 252359 08/23/85 5.38 MINN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 • 1985 CI.. OF EDINA CHECK RL ,TER 09 -09 -85 GE 9 CHECK NO. DATE. ...__ . _ AMOUNT.___._ VE4D03 ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. 9 MESSAGE 251359 09/C3/A5 247.33 MINN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS 27 -4540- 670 -66 152359 L'.8/27/85 138.24 MINN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540 - 670 -66 528.22 + 152360 08/2?/85 31.11? ___.._. MINNESOTA WANNER CONT REPAIRS_._ 10- 4248 - 322 -30 25236U 76/27/85 31.71! MINNESOTA WANNER CONT REPAIRS 10 -4248- 322 -30 252360 06/27/85 7.50. MINNESOTA WANNER CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 330 -30 252360 09/04/85 865.15 MINNESOTA WANNER CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 560 -56 252360 08/23185 11. ^0 MINNESOTA WANNER GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 646 -64 25236U 08/23/85 12.2n MINNESOTA WANNER PARTS 10 -4620- 560-56 252360 Ob /27/85 6.:10__ MINNESOTA WANNER CON T. REP AIRS _ ____ 40- 4248 - 801 -80 963.65 f f f k f i + ++-CK S 152370 ^8/27/85 31.71 MIDLAND PRODUCTS CO REPAIR PARTAS 10- 4540 - 646 -64 252370 8/23185 -. 5.95- MIDL4N9 PRODUCTS CO CONCESSIONS._ 26 -4624- 684 -68 36.95 + frr.rr fff -CKS 252379 9/03/85 35.40 METRO FON= COMM EQUIP RENTAL 10- 4226- 301 -30 - - -- _ - - 35.40 + - fr..rr CKS Z52381 X9/^3/85 160.70 STAR & TRIBUNE ADVERTISING 10 -4212- 440 -44 Z52381 09/03/85 10500 STAR & TRIBUNE ADVERTISING 10- 4214- 490 -49 _ . 265.7.0_ rfrr.r ff► -CKS 252383 08/23/T'5 119966.20 MPLS COMP TREAS WATER 40- 4640- 803 -80 11.966.20 •fr -CKS 252385 0- 9/04/85 - 360.10 MCGUIRD ROBZRT TREE INSPECTION 10 -4200- 353 -30 2:)2 3 3 5 09/04/85 1.OF.0.00 MCGUIRE ROBERT TREE INSPECTION 60- 1300 - 012 -18 1 9440.�O r f f.- CKS 252388 09/03/85 62.40 NTL ATOMIK MOTOR REPAIR PARTYS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 252388 09/0,3/85 41.60 NTL 4TOMTK MOTOR REPAIR PARTYS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 252388 08/23/85 62.40 R'TL 4TOMIK MOTOR REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540- 560 -56 252388 09/03/85._ -._ .__ 38.70_.__ _.___NTL AT0MIK MOTOR PARTS _ .___ 10- 4620 - 560 -56 252388 08/23/85 38.70 NTL A•TOMIK MOTOR PARTS 10 -4620- 560 -56 243.80 f.r -CKS ZyZ4Zi ___- 05/27/_85____._. _�____ 80.56 __ __._ OLSON CHAIN & CABLE __ - PARTS. ___ _. _.__ _ _._ ___10- 4620 - 560 -56 8n.56 = rf.rr. r.f -CKS V 1925 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 09 -09 -85 PAGE 10 . r CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT -_ -__ __ VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N09 INV. A P.O. N MESSAGE 2)2434 (19/04/85 93.92 PRINTERIS SERVICE INC EQUIP MAINT 28- 4274 - 707 -70 93.92 • rrr -CKS 252441 08/23/85 115.90 THE PRINT SHOP PRINTING 10- 4600 - 628 -62 O 115.90 * ** -CKS d Z)Z45U Cd/23/85 43.84 PRA PARTS 10- 4620 - 560 -56 43.84 t O iif +rr +•+ -CKS 25,2457 09/13/85 348.50 R.L.GOULD & CO.INC. REPAIR PARTS 27 -4540- 662 -66 348.50 + 0 •rrrrr + ++ -CKS 252461 09/03/35 42.50 REED SALES & SERVICE REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540- 662 -66 O 252461 Od/2?/85 55.00 R---ED SALES & SERVICE PARTS 27- 4620- 662 -66 97.50 • _._ _- _- r f R R i r + *+ -CKS 252465 08/23/95 5.70 RICHFIELD PLUMB & CO REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540- 646 -64 O 5.00 • • rrrrr • +* -CKS O 252482 08/27/85 60.00 SATELLITE INDUSTRIES CONT SERV 27- 4200 - 662 -66 + 67.00 + r++ -CKS 252484 0.9/013/85 119.14 AMERICAN SHARECOM TELEPHONE 10- 4256- 510 -51 119.04 • + 252490 09/23/85 208.20 SHERWIN WILLIAMS GrN SUPP 10- 4504 - 301 -30 252490 0.9/27/85 286.30 SHERWIN WILLIAMS PAINT 28- 4544 - 708 -70 494.20 t O rrrrr+ _ rir -CKS 2) 2492 08/23/85 51.7D SOUTHD4;LE FORD REPAIR PARTS 10- 4248- 560 -55 >t 252492 Ob/23/85 26.25 - SOUTIDALE FORD REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 252492 ^8/23/85 9.95 SOUTHDALE FORD REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560.56 252492 06/23/85 73.61 SOUTHDALE FORD PARTS 10- 4620- 560 -56 rfrtrt tr• -CKS Ji J 1983 C OF EOINA f CHECK N0. DATE Z525j2 08/23/85 2>25i3 _ _ 08/27/85 2525J3 06127185 Z525U3 0.8/23/85 152503 76/211/85 2525 13 )8/27185 2525?3 Cd127185 252531 0.8/23/85 2525D5 _9 /74 /85 2525;.15 09/03/85 iffff f ST 252518 2525;,8 Z525L'9 252 5U 8 2525J8 25[5us 25e5u8 252508 2525JK x-8/23/85 09/C4/85 Q9/04/85 09/44/85 09/04/85 06/23/85 48/23/85 40/27/85 48/23/85 ..GE 11 � J SSAG- • • s * ** -CKS • * ** -CKS • • *** -CKS J 252516 59/04/85 252516 - ,8/23/85 252516• :8/23/85 tRik*R 10- 4210 - 140 -14 252527 06/23/85 - - 252527 08/23/85 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 25253L 08/23/85 252531 0.8/23/85 11 .52 + GEN 252549 08/23/85 ..GE 11 � J SSAG- • • s * ** -CKS • * ** -CKS • • *** -CKS J CHECK .TER 10- 4210 - 140 -14 243.38 09 -09 -85 _ AMOUNT_. ___... _ _ VENOOl 10- 4210 - 140 -14 ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. INV. # P.O. N ME 11.52 70.93 172.45 SU:`J CHECK .TER 10- 4210 - 140 -14 243.38 09 -09 -85 _ AMOUNT_. ___... _ _ VENOOl 10- 4210 - 140 -14 ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. INV. # P.O. N ME 11.52 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 520 -52 °AUL 11 .52 + GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 420 -42 12.94.. .. ST PAUL BOOK -- 1.72 _ 1.93 SUBU29AN 3LUMB SUP REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 540 -54 GEN 28• "-0 SUBURBAN PLUMB SUP REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 540 -54 SUPP 10 -4504- 470 -47 SUBURBAN 3LUMB SUP REPAIR PARTS 40 -4540- 801 -80 10- 4504 - 510 -51 13.69 SUBURBAN PLUMB SUP R =PAIR PARTS 40 -4540- 811 -81 38.33 28.66 SUBU29AN 3LUMB SUP REPAIR PARATS 40- 4540 - 811 -81 ST 14.78 SUBURBArN PLUMB SUP REPAIR PARTS 40- 4540 - 811 -81 _.88.78 * 70.93 172.45 SU:`J ROEBUCK ADVERTISING 10- 4210 - 140 -14 243.38 SUM SEARS ADVERTISING 10- 4210 - 140 -14 27.45 ST PAUL 903K G -4 SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 200 -20 8.96 ST °AUL BOOK GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 420 -42 12.94.. .. ST PAUL BOOK GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 420 -42 43.12 ST PAUL ROOK GEN SUPP 10 -4504- 470 -47 52.75 ST PAUL BOOK SEN SUPP 10 -4504- 470 -47 336.24 ST PAUL BOOK GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 510 -51 279.90 ST PAUL BOOK GEN SUPP 10- 4504 - 510 -51 38.33 ST PAUL BOOK GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 510 -51 122.40 ST PAUL BOOK GEN SUPP 10- 45C4- 510 -51 852.09 26.17 SEARS ROEBUCK 19.18 SEARS ROEBUCK 118.19 SEARS ROEBUCK 163.44 131.75 _ .. _ TAYLOR SALES 238.67 TAYLOR SALES 340.42 GEN SUPPLIES 28 -4504- 708 -70 TOOLS 40- 4580 - 801 -80 TOOLS 40 -4580- 801 -80 CONCESSIONS 26- 4624- 684 -68 CONCESSIONS 26- 4624 - 684 -68 _318.]0. TEXGAS CO.iP GEN SUPPLIES_. 10 -4504- 301 -30 318.10 * 73.36 AMMONIA: HOUSE CONT REPAIRS 28- 4248 - 707 -70 73.36 * 26.34 TWIN CITY ENGINE REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 « * ** -CKS *** -CKS • •** -CKS J 19 95 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 09 -09 -85 PAGE 12 v CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT. -_ VEND04' ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE v 26.34 + 25155) :8/23/85 127.28 TISD_L STANDARD REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540- 560 -56 - 120.28 + V +.r-CKS 252553 08/27/85 44.02 UNIT:? ELECTRIC CORP REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 322 -30 25255'3 Oo/27/85 7.64 UNITED =L =CTRIC COOP REPAIR PAPTS 10- 4540 - 520 -52 252553 ^,8127/85 124.78 UNITED ELECTRIC CORP REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 560 -56 2.)1553 Cd/27/85 203.x,8 UNITED ELECTRIC COPP R =PAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 646 -64 252553 nd127/85 176.!7 UN ?TED ELECTRIC CORP REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540 - 661 -66 252553 08/27/85 121.32 UNIT71 =L =CTRIC CORP REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540- 661 -66 r 252553 06/27/85 18.53 UNITED ELECTRIC CURP REPAIR PARTS 27 -4540- 661 -66 252553 06127'/95 132.85 UNITED EL =CTRIC CORP REPAIR PARTS 28- 4540 - 798 -70 252553 Ca 127185 7.96 UNITED ELECTRIC CORP REPAIR PARTS 28- 4540- 708 -70 836.35 + r :ffff * ++ -CKS � 252564 08/27•/85 541.03 VALLEY IND PROPANE GASOLINE 28- 4612 - 707 -70 - 541.73 r v frr..CKS 2525 ?3 08/27/85 29.28 VOSS GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 540 -54 252573 06/27/95 48.70 VOSS GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504- 646 -64 251573 X8/27/85 124.14 VOSS REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 322 -30 v 252573 Ob/27/85 29.28 VOSS GEN SUPPLIES _ 23 -45C4- 611 -61 25'1573 08/27/85 366.64 VOSS GEN SUPPLIES 28 -4504- 708 -70 - 597.34 rrf►fr + ++^ CKS r 252575 Ob/27/85 ._. 128.26 DATER MIP,03UCTS p,EPAIR PARTS 40- 4540 - 803 -80 252575 08/27/85 109060 VATER PRODUCTS REPAIR PARTS 40 -4540- 803 -80 - 236.96 w frf rrr + ++-CKS 252579 09/23/85 45956 - WILLIA.4S STEEL -HOWc GEN SUPP 10- 4504 - 331 -30 252579 08/23/85 31.63 WILLIAMS STEEL -HDW: GEN SUPPLIES 10 -45 ^4- 322 -30 252579 08/23/85 31.63 WTLLI4MS STEEL -HOWE GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4544- 646 -64 s� 252519 X8/23/85 372.52 WILLEAMS STEEL -HDWE T03LS 10- 4580 - 371 -30 252579 US/27/85 138.72 WILLIAMS STEEL -HOWE TOOLS 4C -4580- 801 -80 619.36 + a 252508 u9/03/E5 142.3D ST PAUL-BOOK. - _ _ GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 446 -44 252508 09/03/85 1.12 ;ST PAUL BOOK• - ,'_ GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 510 -51 f 143.12 + . : +..+ + +►-CKS � 252582 08/23/85 467.60 GORDON SMITH CO GASOLINE 27- 4612- 662 -66 252582 09/03/85 312.93 GORDON SMIT11 CO GASOLINE 27- 4612- 662 -66 it ' -= - 40 19,F5 C. OF EDINA CHECK F TER 09 -09 -85 GE 13 CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT _ _. VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION _ ACCOUNT N0. INV. N P.O. # MESSAGE 252582 0.9/03/85 394.06 GORDON SMITH CO GASOLINE 27- 4612- 662-66 ' 1,174.59 • .ff ff f * ** -CKS 252584 0x/23/85 182.77 WARNER INDUSTRIAL TOOLS 10- 4580 - 301 -30 162.70 + �. fffff• -- * ** -CKS 252586 jB/27/85 19949 W W GRkINGE2 REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 540 -54 252586 )8/27/85 393.48 W W GRWINGER REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 540 -54 412.97 r .> • f f f f f * ** -CKS 252594 09/73/85 3,604.16 STOAT FRONT SERVICES_ 10- 4224- 504 -50 3,604.16 + frfrrr •+ *-CKS 252597 08/23/85 50.70 ZEE a_DICAL SERVICE 1ST AID SUPPLIES 28 -4510- 708 -70 - - 50.70 * r • f f • � * ** -CKS 252612 .8/27/85 41.70 MIDWEST AS ?HALT CORP BLACKTOP 10- 4524- 301 -30 252612 8/23/85 43.70 MIDW =ST. ASPHALT CORP BL4CKTOP 10- 4524 - 668 -66 _84.]0_* * ** -CKS 2527v2 08/23/85 18410 IMDELCO CORP GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 646 -64 18.10 • 2527;33' 78/23/85 112.]0 NELSON RADIO COMM CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 560 -56 112.30 • 2527x.4 9!s /23/85 47.40 THE SATiTEALEE CO TOOL 10- 4580 - 353 -30 2527,3,4 08/23/85 90.37 THE SATTEILEE CO TOOLS 10- 4580- 560 -56 _.. 138.27 .+ 252705 08/23/85 53 *97 NEVCO SCOREBOARD CONT REPAIRS 10 -4248- 646 -64 58.37 + 252736 x6/23/85 254.00 LYND4LE GARDENS CAPITAL OUTLAY 10- 4900 - 000 -00 254.00. * _ 252737 9E/23/85 244 .0.0 MARGAReT 3 CAROLE WAGES 10 -4120- 200 -20 244. ?O.+ 2527x,8 08/23/85 67.50 THE BUR;EAJ OF BOOKS 10 -4502- 140 -14 67.50_ *. ... - -- - -- i. 252739 08/23/85 29958.00 MIDWEST AOJA CARE CONT SERY 10- 4200 - 358 -30 w �. ., 19E5 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 09 -09 -85 PAGE 14 CHECK NO.. DATE. _AMOUNT. - __.. •. ITEM. - DESCRIPTION _._._.._._ ----- _ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. N MESSAG= 252709 06/27 -/85 49560.1.0. MIDWEST AQJA CARE CONT SERV. 10 -4200- 358 -30 � - _......79 518.13. !..... __. ._. 252717 76/23/85 5.000.10 P!RKL ASSN CONSTRUCTION 27- 1300 - 000 -00 252,71 J_ ...._.. 78/23/85._.. - -- .__..._._ -._ 1,332.5n-- _,--- " -• - PIRKL.4 -'SSW_._._._ _ CONSTRUCTION ___....__.._- .._...__._.. -60- 1.300 - 268- .04,_ -. 6,332.50 • 252/11 08123/85. - 845.13 STRASeR- ROSCOE _ C ^NSTRUCTION __,....60- 1270 - 000 -00 - 252711 ]0/23/85 5,531.98 STRASAR- ROSCOE CONSTRUCTION 6C- 1270 - 000 -00 6,377.11 • 252712 08/23/85 876983 BARR = NSIN =ERING CO SERVICES 10-4220- 260 -26 876.53 + 252713 09/G,3/85 66.37 CITY OF RICHFIELD POWER 11- 4252- 345 -30 252713 x:9/03/85 66.37 - CITY OF RICI4FI -LD CORRECTION 10- 4252 - 345 -30 252713 ._ 09/;13185_ ,._.,_- "•.- "_.___— _,._ "_ 96.37 CITY OF RICHFIELD _ POWER.___.-.._.,_...,_._.___...._.,......-,_,I0- 4252 - 345 -30 252713 78/23/85 43.28 CITY OF RICHFIELD POWER 10- 4252 - 345 -30 139.65 252714 +70/23/85 723.75 MINN =yOTA = QUIPMENT ROAD EQUIP 10- 4912 - 370 -30 252714 08/23/85 723.75 MINNESOTA --- OUIPMENT ROAD _QUIP 10- 4912 - 646 -64 252714 t1H/23/85--- _____ -_ ,.___•,.._.723.75 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT _ GARAGE EQUIP....____ 11- 4926- 502 -50 252714 09/23/85 723.75 MINNESOTA EGUIPMENT ROAD EQUIP 40 -4912- 802 -80 2.895.00 • r 252711 U8/23/85 338.69 ACTION MAILING ADVERTISING 23- 4214 - 610 -61 338.69 • r 252716 ',8 2 3 8 5 75.00 HUMPHREY .;INSTITUTE CLASS 10- 4202 - 480 -48 75.00 • 252717 US/23185 24.10 POOL3IOE CHEMICALS 26- 4564- 689 -68 24.90 • 252 71 f 08/23/85 333.50 MADISON FILM INC TRAINING AIDS 29- 4608- 720 -72 333.50 • 252719 0x/23/85 1,970..13 ZAHL EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540 - 662 -66 1,9 -7.00 • 252720 09/C4185 35,161.10- KEHO CONSTRUCTION CCNSTRUCTION 27- 1300 - 100 -00 252120. 08/23/85 659852.00 KEWO CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION 27- 1300 - 110 -00 ./ 101 ,01 3.00. •.. ..... 252721 08/23/85 128.38 E Z SHARP GEN SUPPLIES 28- 4504 - 708 -70 . . -- 252722 09/U4/85 95.90, M SAl D=RS SKATE SUPP INVEN SUPPLIES 28 -1209- 000 -00 r 252722... _...... Q,8/ 23/85_.- _...._.._�._ _.,_....95.90..._.w__.__. M SAND= RS,SKATE. SUFP. -.- INVENTORY. SUPPLY _...___.__28- 1209 - 000 -00 252722 06/27/85 1.45 M SANDERS SKATE SUPP INVENT.OAY SUPP -.. 28- 1209- 000 -00 200.25 • 252123 U3S/23/85 117.87 ED LANCELLD SHRUBS 10- 4504 - 390 -30 110.87 • „ " r * V;35' C. OF EDINA CHECK RL_ __T_R C9 -09 -85 rAGE 15 CHECK NO. DATE __ _ AMOUNT...__ Y_NDOI ITEM DESCRIPTION _ ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE 252724 08/13/85 50.00 EDINA COMMUNITY CTR CLEANUP AUDITORIUM 10 -4225- 627 -62 50.00 • 25272i 06/23/85 _ 13.95 _. - FABRIC SOUTHTOWN GENERAL SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 627 -62 13.95 252716 )8/23/85 35.70 MARHHSHALL & SWIFT SUBSCRIPTION 10 -4204- 200 -20 3503 + 252127 08/23/85 225.90 CONST FASTENING PARTS 10- 4620- 560 -56 225. ^G 252728 08/23/85 36.24 ADVAVCE! BARING PARTS 10 -4620- 560 -56 36.24 * 252729 ua/23/85 - - _63 *12 GARLkNOS GENERAL SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 646 -64 63.12 * 252730 J.N/23/85 29489.75 FINLEY BROS ENTERP C04STRUCTICN 10- 1424 - 000 -00 252730. 136 /23/8 5 29489 *75 FINL_Y 3RJS ENTERP CONSTRUCTION 10 -1432- 070 -00 252730 3b/23/85 2,489.75 FINLEY BR3S ENTERP CONSTRUCTION 13- 1437 - 000 -00 252730. 06/23/85 __ 29489.75. FINLEY BROS ENTERP CONSTRUCTION. 20- 1420 - 000 -00 9,959.00 * 252731 03/23/85 79.70 PREF ERRED PRINTING PRINTING 10- 4600- 627 -62 79.70 * 252731 08/27/85 657.544.50 HARRIS BANK DUE FROM HRA. 10- 1145 - 000 -00 657,544.50 * 252733 08/23/85 7.50 AT & T SP_CIAL NEEDS TELEPHONE 28- 4256- 708 -70 7.50 * 252734 08/23/85 4109 LOUIS XBRAHAM MILEAGES 40 -4208- 806 -80 41.19 * 252735 0,3/23/85 39078.60 FEED RITE CONTROL WATER SUPP 40- 4622- 805 -80 252735 09/R3/85 1,496.69 FEED RITE CONTROL WA TER SUPPLY 40- 4622- 805 -80 4,575.29 * 252736 :8/23/85 450.30 ROBERT S03COVIAK REFINISHING 23- 4200 - 610 -61 450. ?0 * Z52737 U8/27/85 64.48 WESCO REPAIR PARTS 28- 4540- 708 -70 64.48 * 252738 08/27/85 445030 MN AiRE IVC REPAIR PARTS 29- 4540- 721 -72 252738 08/27/85 18.43 MN AIREI INC REPAIR PARTS 29- 4540 - 721 -72 252738 38/27/85 312.82- MN AIRa INC CREDIT 29- 4540- 721 -72 150.91 * 252739 18/271/85______._.8.__ 900 .?.D__._____._LAKE-RESTORATION _ _CHEMICAL.S __ 10- 4564 - 358 -30 900.00 * 25274L 08/27/85 69898.00- ITEN CHEV AUTOMOBILES 10- 4908 - 502 -50 1985 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT . - VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION REPAIR, PARTS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS R_PAIR PARTS REPAIR PARATS TOOLS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS REMOVAL TREES REMOVAL TREES REMOVAL TREES CONSTRUCTION CLASS V MATERIALS GEN SUPPLIES GEN SUPPLIES PERMITS 8 LIC REFUND MILEAGE CONSTRUCTION - 09 -39 -85 PAGE 16 ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P -O- # MESSAGE 40 -4540- 803 -80 40-4540- 811 -81 10- 4540 - 540 -54 40 -4540- 801 -80 10- 4540 - 560 -56 10- 4580- 353 -30 27- 4540 - 671 -66 27- 4540 - 671 -66 27- 4540 - 671 -66 60-1300- 002-18 60- 1300 - 002 -18 60- 1300 - 002 -18 27 -1300- 000 -00 10 -4532- 301 -30 10 -4504- 540 -54 10 -4504- 301 -30 28 -4 310- 70 8- 70 10- 3350 - 000 -00 10- 4208 - 480 -48 10- 1422 - 000 -00 6,888.30 * 252141 08/27/85 278. ^0 ITT 3RINNELL CORP 252741 76/27/95 4F.48 ITT GRINNELL CORP 326.48 * 252742 78/27/85 3606 VIKING EL'CTRIAL 36.16 * 252743 06/27/95 50.40 NEWARK ELECTRONICS 50.40 • 252744 08/27/85 35.30 AUTO WHOLE SALERS INC 35.30 * 252745 1R/27/85 226.85 ZIP PENN INC 226.85 • 252146 Od127/85 85.50 E Z GO TEXTRON 86.50 • 252747 Cd/27165 24.77 VERSATI'LE VEHICLES 252747 39/04/85_, 58.00 VERSATILE VEHICLES 82.3.7 252148 Ud/27/85 290.70 K C GR3VES TREE 297.10 • 252749 08/27/85 2359]0 WOODLAND TREE SERV 235.,0 252750 08/27/85 325.30 RAYMOND J 01HILLIPS 325.70 * 252751 )6/27/85 21,400.37 CARLSON MJORUD ARCH 21,p400.37 * 252752 78/27•/85 542.51 ED KRAEMAR B SONS 542.51 * 252753 08/27 -/85 109 *98 COPY DUPLICATING 10 %98 * 252774 08/2A/85 123.85 INDUSTRIAL SALES 123 F5 252755 78/27/85 ___ 226.67 ASC42 226.67 * 252756 09/04/85 10.50. HENRY MORAVEC 10.50 * 252757 09/03/85 9 .16 ALAN S4-MU_7LSON 90.16 * 252758 09/03/85 _ 247.08___._ PERCV TURNSTILES REPAIR, PARTS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS R_PAIR PARTS REPAIR PARATS TOOLS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS REMOVAL TREES REMOVAL TREES REMOVAL TREES CONSTRUCTION CLASS V MATERIALS GEN SUPPLIES GEN SUPPLIES PERMITS 8 LIC REFUND MILEAGE CONSTRUCTION - 09 -39 -85 PAGE 16 ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P -O- # MESSAGE 40 -4540- 803 -80 40-4540- 811 -81 10- 4540 - 540 -54 40 -4540- 801 -80 10- 4540 - 560 -56 10- 4580- 353 -30 27- 4540 - 671 -66 27- 4540 - 671 -66 27- 4540 - 671 -66 60-1300- 002-18 60- 1300 - 002 -18 60- 1300 - 002 -18 27 -1300- 000 -00 10 -4532- 301 -30 10 -4504- 540 -54 10 -4504- 301 -30 28 -4 310- 70 8- 70 10- 3350 - 000 -00 10- 4208 - 480 -48 10- 1422 - 000 -00 1965 C O OF EDINA C CHECK K TER 0 09 -09 -85 aG_ 17 CHECK N NO. DATE -._. _. A AMOUNT _ - - -- - V VENDOT I ITEM DESCRIPTION A ACCOUNT N0. INV. # P.O. A MESSAGE 247.1. 8 + + - -; 252759 G G9/03/85 4 405.70 R RETAIL DATA SYSTEMS C C04T REPAIRS 5 50- 4248 - 841 -84 405.30 2527t)0 0 09/03/85 1 175.00 P PHYSIO CONTROL 1 1ST AID SUPPLY 1 10- 4510- 440 -44 175.00 252 76 1 ] ]9/03/85 7 74.64 R R V 4;SSOC C CLEANING SUPPLY 1 10- 4512 - 440 -44 74.64 * * - -, 252762 0 09/03/85 1 150930 C CHEMSEARCi C CLEAN SUPP 1 10- 4512 - 440 -44 15n.0.0 + + 4 4 252763 0 09/C3/85 5 50.)0 R ROAD RESCJ-- 1 1ST AID SUPPLY 1 10 -4510- 440 -44 50.00 1985 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER C9 -D9 -85 PAGE 18 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT _ V --NDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. INV. # P.O. 0 MESSAGE Z52177 09/04/85 175. ?0 EMPLOYDES CLUB SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 500 -50 175.70 * 252775 J9/C4/85 203.21 JOE GRUEPIER SUPPLIES 27- 4504 - 661 -66 203.20 * 252779 J.9/04/85 39220.70 DEDE H_NS_L PROF SERV 10- 2235 - 000 -00 252779 = 9/•?4/85 911.29 DEDE HENSEL TROPHY 28 -4504- 708 -7C 39310.29 * 252780 •?,9/04/85 453.50 LAKE RESTORATION INC CONT SERV 10- 4200 - 358 -30 453.50 * 252781 09/04/85 749.51 IBM EQUIP RENTAL 10- 4226 - 510 -51 749.51 * 252782 09/04/85 190.16 XEROX EQUIP RENAL 10- 4226 - 510 -51 190.16 * 252183 0,9/3.4/85 363.15 INFORMATION DIRECTORIES 27- 4214 - 660 -66 152783 J9/04/85 363.15 INFORMATION DIRECTORIES 57- 4214 - 822 -82 252783 39/04/85 __. - 363.15 INFORMATION DIRECTORIES 50- 4214 - 842 -84 252783 U9/C4185 363.15 TNFORM4:TION DIRECTORIES 50- 4214.862 -86 19452.60 * 252784 09/04/85 972.10 AAIER LIT40 SERV PRINTING 23- 4600- 610 -61 972.10 * 25 27 95 79/04/85 36.51 MaRK3MAN FLOOR GEN SUPPLIES 23- 4504 - 611 -61 36.51 * 252786 J9/04185 26.00 FRANK B HALL B CO INSURANCE 10- 4260 - 510 -51 26.10 * • 252787 09/74/85 402.00 STUDIO DIE INC ADVERTISING 23 -4214- 610 -61 402.13 * 252188 J9/04/85 366.41 KELLY SEP.VICSES CONT SERV 10 -42,'0- 490 -49 366.41 * 252789 19/04/85 174.90 CONCEPT MICROFILM CONT SERV 10 -4200- 500 -50 252/89 J9/04/85 29.50 CONCEPT MICROFILM CONT SERV 10 -4200- 500 -50 204.40 * ' 25279U '19/04/85 156.00 MN IC= ARENA FALL CONFERENCE 28 -4202- 708 -70 _ -_ 150.0.0 * 252791 09/04'/85 645.00 MPLS SUB SEWER WATER CONT REPAIRS 40- 4248 - 803 -80 645.00 * 252792 09/04/85 P57.50 NEWM4N SIGNS SIGNS 10- 4542 - 328 -30 857.50_ * 252793 09/04/85 732.00 T MOTZKO 'LG 9 HTG REPAIR PARTS 40 -4540- 803 -80 . � r 1'48.5 C OF EDINA '� CHECK r, STER 09 -09 -85 SAGE 19 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT _. VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. INV. 0 P.O. 0 MESSAGE 732.7^ + 252794 09/ ^4/85 163.51 STAT= AGEN _-Y COPT SERV 10- 4200 - 510 -51 163.51 + 252795 09/04785 25.00 WILLIAM WALSH DUES 10 -4204- 421 -42 252195 U9/04/85 119010 WILLIAM WALSH CONFERENCE 10- 4208 - 421 -42 144.00 + 252796 :9/04/85 25.00 HENN CNTY ATTORNEYS TRAINING 10 -4202- 422 -42 _. 25.00 + 252797 09/04/85 2 °5.00 P T A; C TRAINING 10- 4202 - 421 -42 285.7.0 + 252798 U9/C4/85 225.00 P T A C TRAINING 10 -4202- 421 -42 225.00 + 252799 09/04/85 123.66 SHERIFFS 9---PT ROOM & BOARD 10 -4286- 220 -22 252799 a9/L4/85 114.13 SHERIFFS 3---PT SERV CONT 10- 4288 - 420 -42 25[799 09/04/85 535.13 SHERIFFS DEPT RADIO EQUIP 10- 4914- 420 -42 772.92 + 252 80 0 09/04/85 17.00 VECTOR ON_ EQUIP RENTAL 10- 4226- 420 -42 17.00 + 252931 0.9/04/85 16.65 SUPRA COLOR PHOTO SUPPLIES 10- 4508- 420 -42 16.65 + 2528L:Z 09/04185 39792.56 HENNEP�TN -OUNTY ROOM & BOARD 10-4286-220-22 39792.56 + 252803 0.9 /04/85 55.44 HARM94 GLASS GLAZING EQUIP MAIhT 10- 4274 - 420 -42 55.44 + 25281.4 09/04/85 295.00 INTERSTATE CONT SERV 10 -4200- 420 -42 295.00 + 252805 0.9/04/85 3500 MN SOCIETY OF CONF & SCHOOLS 17 -4202- 600 -60 35.00 + 252876 .19/04/85 3000 JUDY L OTKINS SERVICES 10- 4224 - 421 -42 30.70 7619709.86 FUND 10 TOTAL GENERAL FUND •• + -CKS 29489.75__ FUND 20 TOTAL 29382.29 FUVD 23 TOTAL ARVSC ENT ER 89229.20 FUND 26 TOTAL SWIMMING POOL FUND 1359557.13 FUVD 27 TOTAL GOLF COURSE FUND 7998.79 FUND 28 TOTAL RECREATION CENTER FUND 646.44 FUID 29 TOTAL GUN RANGE FUND _.24.805.80 FUND .40 TOTAL _ ___. -UTILITY FUND 39460.40 FUND 50 TOTAL LIQUOR DISPENSARY FUND l 190423934 FUND 60 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION FUND 19e5 CITY OF EDINA CHECK NO. DATE � t CHECK REGISTER 09 -39.85 PAGE 20 AMOUNT _ Y =NDOi IT_M DESCFIPTION _ ACCOUNT N0. INY. 8 P.O. 0 MESSAGE 965,803.]] TOTAL Manual checks #'s 65689 & 65896 Computer checks #'s 65689 thru 65896 ,,, -P.' COVED FOR FAYMENT. F;•.,ISra r.•nr�� og� f - ::UCH - t'v "r✓r.il�. , DATE :INA C IRZCTOR DATE 1 19P5 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 07 -3 185 PAGE 1 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT — ______— _VEND02 _ ITEM DESCRIPTION_ ACCOUNT N0._INY.__A P.O. A MESSAGE 163190 u7/19/85 148.96 GRIGGS COOPER INVENTORY 50- 4626 - 842 -84 MANUAL 163190 U7/19185 106018 GRIGGS COOPER INVENTORY_4 _ 50- 4632 - 842 -84., MANUAL 16319C 07/19/85 102.64 GRIGGS COOPER INVENTORY 50- 4632- 862 -86 MANUAL , 357.78 + °I I * **-CKS 183271 07/19/85 127070 INTE2 PIKG INVENTORY —_ 50- 4630- 842 -84 MANUAL 183271 07/19/85 332.31 INTER PKG INVENTORY 50- 4632- 822 -82 MANUAL it 459.71 r * **-CKS 183451 07/19/85 - 25.85 QUALITY WINE INVENTORY ..__._ _ �__ 50- 4630- 862 -86 MANUAL 163451 07/19/85 152922 QUALITY WINE INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 862 -86 MANUAL 178.07 • •f* -CKS 183723 07/19/85 500.U0 STEARNS CTY EXCHANGE CASH BAIL._.. -,. 10- 3800 - 000 -00 MANUAL 500.00 • +ri►rf * **-CKS 190055 U7/191E5 11.75 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 3470 - 000 -00 MANUAL 190D55 _07/19/85.. __..__ 427.38_ _. .._BRAEMAR ..GOLF .___ -_ PETTY CASH _. __ -27- 4120 - 663 -66 MANUAL 193^.55 7/19/85 189.76 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 4120- 664 -66 MANUAL 190055 07/19185 70.00 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 4120 - 666 -66 MANUAL 190055 07/19/85 _ ____ 64 +99 ___ _ BRAEMAR GOLF _ PETTY CASH 27- 4516- 660 -66 MANUAL 190055 07/19/85 20.14 BRAEMAR GOLF — PETTY CASff ' - -' 27- 4620- 663 -66 MANUAL + 190R55 07/19/85 8090 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 4624 - 664 -66 MANUAL 791.92 ffiii• *** -CKS 190 ^67 08/12/85 - - -- - — 9.b0__ __CAPITAL CITY DISTRI - m_.__— _--- ----'_ -50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 193067 08112/85 202.48 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 190067 00 /12/85 _ 4.50 _CAPITAL CITY DISTRI _ _.. __..�.__. - - - -.- -_ 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 190067 (38/12/85 581.25 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 797.23 itr f i i -_ __ .__ _. -. * **-CKS _'_-- •°- ___._ -__. -� _e�._��- ._- �.--- .�. -�.� - -_ �__� �- ._.___ -... 190.129 98/12/85 3,90104 _ BELLBOY •_ _..50 -4626- 822 -82. MANUAL 190129 38/12/85 39399.69 BELLBOY 50- 4626 - 842 -84 MANUAL 190129 08/12/85 119967 BELLBOY 50 -4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 1190129 _ — - L8/12/85. -- _ — 2433.60 BELL901 50 -4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 9,854.00 — ***-CKS •I 190138 US/12/85 5.46- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 190138— _ —_ —U8 /12/85 30_.70 -�ED,_ PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL _ J •I — 190138 08/12/85 11017- EO PHILLIPS 503710- 862 -86�— MANUAL "4 190138 U8/12/85 19535.211 ED PHILLIPS 504628- 842 -84 MANUAL �.i 1985 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 07 -31 -85 PAGE 2 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. INV. 0 P.O. 0 MESSAGE 194138 06/12/85 273.00 ED PHTLLI°S `` 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL ''I. 1190138 08/12/85. 558925 ED PHILLIPS _ _+ 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 29319.12 + _ .. * **-CKS . 190271 09/12/85 33.09- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3700- 822 -82 MANUAL 190.271 ;.!8/12/85 9.07- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 190271 U8/12/E5 9.07- INTERCONTINENTAL _ PK 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL - 190271 08/12/85 9.77 INTERCONTTNENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 19U.271 08/12/85 165.61- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 19U,271 08/12/85 .22 INTERCONTINENTAL _ _ PK '- - ^_50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL .> 190271 J8/12185 89280.89 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626 - 842 -84 MANUAL 190271 78/12/85 38.10 INTERCONTTNENTAL PK 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 19J.271 08/12/85 4.50 INTERCONTINENTAL _ _ PK 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 190.271 Ud/12/85 470.61 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 190271 08/12/85 no INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 190271 .18/12/85 4950 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 190.271 08/12/85 470.61 - INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 190.271 ,8/12/85 470.61 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 190271 Ob/12/85 4.50 - INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL ., X190.271 Ud/12/85 11.13- INTERCONTTNENTAL PK 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL ` - -- — - 89575.42...*-- ,, ••r•ra •** -CKS 190285 G8/12/85 34.91- JOHNSON WINE - 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL w 190.285 08/12185 1.74- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 190.285 08/12/85 - 10079- _ - _ JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 190285 Ob/12/85 1.50 JOHNSON WINE - ._- - �_ -- - -50- 4628 - 842-84 MANUAL e 190285 08/12/85 19740+78 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 190.285 08112/85 33.60 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 190.285 08/12/85 87 *35 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL .. 190285 08/12/85 10.20 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL ,194285 Cd/12/85 -- - 539.80 - JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 29365 *89 .. - -- - - -- - - -- ■*►rr• •** -CKS �. 19U318 07/19/85 50.25 MARK V11 INVENTORY 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 50.25 'r •rarer **f-CKS 190451 Cb/12/85 2.31- QUALITY WINE - 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL a+ 190,451 08/12/85 *12 QUALITY LANE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 190451 Cd/12/85 - - - 18.51- - -- -1.13' - QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 19(1451 08/12/85 QUALITY WTNE- -- -'- -"� -- _50- 3710 - 862 -86 - MANUAL r 190.4)11 06/12/85 3.28 - QUALITY WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 19Q451 08/12/85 _ _ 5.60 -•.... - _ -- QUALITY WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 190451 U8/12/85 6.20- QUALITY WINE _ _ 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL w 190451 Od/12/85 115.95 QUALITY WTNE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 190451 -- 08/12/85 925955 _ _ -_ -� -- ! QUALITY WINE - 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 19(1451 U8/12/85^ 280.21 QUALITY WINE - _ 50- 4628- 862 -86 - -- - MANUAL - !r 190451 08/12/85 56.95- QUALITY WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL + S 1985 CITY OF :DINA CHECK REGISTE CHECK NO.- DATE , _______ __ -AMOUNT - -__ ___ _. VENOOT 190451 08/12/85 164.45 OUALITY WINE 11,394.56 R 07 -31 -85 rM6E 3 3 ITEM DESCRIPTION —M ACCOUNT N0._INV *I P.O. I MESSAGE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL- * h * * * * X7/19/85 732.39 NSP ELECTRIC 10- 4252 - 301 -30 MANUAL 190.54C 08/12/85 22.59 - T TWIN CITY WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 190540 Ca/12/85 4.68- TWIN CrrY WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 19054U 08/12/85 11,129.95 TWIN CITY WINE _ .._- ___..__ <.__ 50- 4628- 842 -84 190540 Cis /12/85 18.00 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 191540 08/12/85 234.36 TWIN CITY WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 190540 08/1.2/85 _ 4.20 _ TWIN CTTY_WINE 10- 4252 - 375 -30 _ _- __50-46_28-862-86­­_ 193391 ____.__ .._ 11,359.24 r NSo _ _ ELECTRIC -_ -___ _ ___ __10-4252-440-44 MANUAL .arras 193174 u7/19/85 951,000.00 1ST BANK 3D ..- .._._- .- .__...._ ..._ .. BANK TRANSFER 50- 1010 - 000 -00 193174 u7/19/85_ _ 951,000.3.0. - 1ST.BANK_SO ELECTRIC - - _ BANK TRANSFER___________50 -1010- 000 -00__- _- 1Y33Q1 37/19/85 .00 • NSP ELECTRIC 10 -4252- 520 -52 MANUAL aaa -CKS MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL aa* -CKS MANUAL MANUAL *a* -CKS 193391 X7/19/85 732.39 NSP ELECTRIC 10- 4252 - 301 -30 MANUAL 193391 u7/19/85 111,869.44 NSP ELECTRIC �,A- -� 10 -4252- 321 -30 MANUAL IV3391 ✓7/19/85 -�- - -- 81,957.85 _ - _ _- NSP - ELECTRIC 10- 4252- 322 -30 MANUAL 193391 :17/19/85 21,072.95 NSP ELECTRIC 10 -4252- 330 -30 MANUAL 193391 07/19185 165.65 NSP ELECTRIC. MANUAL 193391 U7/19/85 100.75 NSP ELECTRIC 10- 4252 - 358 -30 MANUAL 1S 3391 L7/19/85 11,808.99 NSP ELECTRIC 10- 4252 - 375 -30 MANUAL 193391 07/19/95 372.81 NSo _ _ ELECTRIC -_ -___ _ ___ __10-4252-440-44 MANUAL 193391 _ U7/19/85T 39963 NSP ELECTRIC 10- 4252- 460 -46 MANUAL 193391 07/19185 349991 NSP ELECTRIC 10- 4252- 500 -50 MANUAL 1Y33Q1 37/19/85 11,383.52 NSP ELECTRIC 10 -4252- 520 -52 MANUAL 193391 ^7/19/85 862.08 NSP ELECTRIC 10- 4252 - 540 -54 MANUAL 193391. 07/19/85 11,264. 2 NSP ELECTRIC 10- 4252 - 629 -62 MANUAL 1Y3391 21,8774.24 _^ - NSP _ _ _ ELECTRIC_ _.._ 10- 4252 - 646 -64 �20- MANUAL 193391 .u7/19/85 _. U1/19/85 . 13.67 - NSP - ELECTRIC 1130- 000 -00 MANUAL a 193391 07/19/85 430.61 NSP ELECTRIC 23- 4252 - 611 -61 MANUAL 193391 07/19/85 61!7.95 .. .. -. NSP _. ...._ ......._ _ _ --ELECTRIC . _ -. 26- 4252 - 689 -68 MANUAL 193391 u7/19/85 11,790.02- NSP CORRECTION 27- 4252 - 661 -66 MANUAL 193391 67/19185 11,790.32 NSP ELECTRIC 27- 4252 - 661 -66 MANUAL 1Y 3391 u7/19/85 _ T _ ELECTRIC A - 27- 4252 - 662 -66 MANUAL 193391 07/19/85 _.___11,791.08NSP 117.31 n NSP ELECTRIC 27- 4252 - 662 -66 MANUAL _ IY3391 07/19/85 31,005.92 NSP ELECTRIC 28- 4252 - 708 -70 MANUAL 193391 07119/85 150.70 NSP .- _ _ ELECTRIC 29- 4252 - 721 -72 MANUAL 1Y3391 u7/19/b5 21,201.81 NSP ELECTRIC 40- 4252 - 801 -80 MANUAL 193391 U7/19/85 211,028.21 NSP ELECTRIC 40- 4252- 803 -80 MANUAL 193391 07/19/85 309.11 kSP _____._..- _ELECTRIC_ - -- __ 40 -4252- 804 -80 _ MANUAL 193391 �- u7/19/85 _- 643.1i NSP ELECTRIC 50- 4252 - 821 -82 MANUAL IV3391 u7/19185 11,294.96 NSP ELECTRIC 50- 4252 - 841 -84 MANUAL 193391 07/19/85 .. .__..__ _ 471.82 - _ . NSP__,._____. -... __._. _. ELECTRIC . _ ._�._ 50 -4252- 861 -86 MANUAL 193391 07/19/85 471.82 NSP ELECTRIC 50 -4252- 861 -86 MANUAL 193391 ,.7/19/85 471.82- NSP CORRECTION 50 -4252- 861 -86 MANUAL I. - - - - -- 64v998.79 a •1,r 1,a a • **-CKS 1985 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 07 -31 -85 PAGE 4 CHECK N0. DATE _ _ AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO* INV* A P.O. 9 MESSAGE 19343J 07/19/85 199414.59 PERA E 14 CONT 10 -4145- 510 -51 MANUAL 199414.59 • '" " ' Lr f i f i i l f 193523 07/19/85 89754 *14 SOCIAL SE :URITY EMP CONT 10- 4149 - 510 -51 MANUAL 89754.14 • ,,, l.f /k• * **-CKS 19618 07/19185 451.35 COLCA COLA INVENTORY - — 50- 4632- 822 -82 MANUAL ., 196078 07/19195 49518 *51 - COLCA GOLA CORRECTICN 50 -4632- 822 -82 MANUAL " 196^.18 J7/19/85 49518.51 COCA COLA INVENTORY 50- 4632- 822 -82 MANUAL 1y60/8 ,17/19/85 19202.95 COCA COLA INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 842 -84 MANUAL f196U18 ul/19/85 19350.40 COCA COLA INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 862 -86 MANUAL 39005.2-0--*-- if ►iii * **-CKS lV6318 U7/19/85 59946.15 MARK V11 INVENTORY 50- 4630- 822 -82 MANUAL a. 59946.95 1!1!11 *** -CKS r 196460 :11/19185 56.45 ROYAL CROWN INVENTORY 50 -4632- 822 -82 MANUAL t 56.45 + - 'Y i l f i i f f y, 196463 01/19/85 29141.15 REX DIST INVENTORY 50- 4630- 822 -82 MANUAL w 196463 ;;7/19/85 49825.90 REX DIST INVENTORY 50 -4630- 842 -84 MANUAL 196463 07/19/85 39271.00 REX DIST INVENTORY _ 50- 4630- 862 -86 MANUAL s 10923805 • 1 •fill! -_ .___- �___...__. _.__. _.__ **#-CKS y 197067 08/12/85 7.E1/�- -_ CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 3700- 842 -84 MANUAL 191067 08/12185 001 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI w.- 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL av 191067 08/12/85 576.25 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL < 191Q67 08/12/85 - - — — 7050 _ _— CAPITAL CITY DISTRI - 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 576.74 * _ T y i i f i i• �. _._ .. **. -CKS 197135 07/19/85 1.46- EAGLE WTN= DISCOUNT 50- 3710- 003 -00 MANUAL 4 197135 08/12/ ?5 - - - -� 5.75- -- EAGLE YIN= - -- 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 197135 08/12/85 11.32- EAGLE WINE —' - --- T__- __.- - - -50- 3710- 842 -84 - MANUAL 191135 08/12/85 21.25- EAGLE WINE 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 4 197135 08/12/85 287.50 EAGLE WINE 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 191135 68/12/85 565.95 EAGLE WINE _ 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL y 197135 08/12/85 19062.67 EAGLE WINT 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL li 197135 - 07/19/85 - 07 - 5 72.80 EA _ GL PINE E _. E W INVENTORY 50- 4632- 862 -86 MANUAL 1 9949.14 i. T r i i f f f i * **-CKS u 19E5 CI,. JF EDINA CHECK RE,oTER 07 -31.85 .,,6E 5 CHECK_ NO. VENDO2 ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. # P.O., 0. MESSAGE.. ._DATE _ _krOUNT _ _ -_ -INV. J lY71 38 08/12/85. _._._ _ __. _ _ _ __. 1.34 - ED PHILLIPS _ _.. __. __ .___._.� _ 50 -3710- 822 -82 . .- MANUAL._ • . - ! 197138 U8/12/85 10.06- ED PHILLIPS 50.3710- 822 -82 MANUAL ' 197138 06/12/85 108.44- ED PMIILLI°jS 50.3710- 822 -82 MANUAL , 1Y7138 08/12/85 10.98- ED -.ED PHILLIPS 50-3710-822-82 - 1911 _ 6.32- PFtILLI0S -T 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 197138 08/12/85 1.34 ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 197138 _ U8/12/85 _ „• 14.51- _ ._ ED PHILLIPS _ .._.. __- _ 50 -3710- 842 -84 , MANUAL 197138 08/12/85 12.64- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL i'-; 191138 u8/12/85 1608- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL ` 197138 08/12/85 7.51- ED PHILLIPS 50-3710-842-84­ MANUAL 197138 U8/12/85 56.29 - ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 842 -84� _ MANUAL 197138 08/12/85 .72- ED PHILLIDIS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 1YT138 Ub /12185 -- __.. .76-­­ .._ ED PHILLIPS _ ._---- _�.._._._ - -.50- 3710 - 862 -86 -.._. .. _ -. MANUAL 197138 U8/12/85 14.38 - ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL i`I• 1Y7138 UB /12/85 11.44- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 197138 08/12/85 3.22- ED PHILLIPS._,._ 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL_. - _ 1Y7138 _ U8/12/85- _ 135.18- ED PHILLIPS _ 50- 3710- 862 -86�- MANUAL 1` 197138 Od/12/85 4.67 - ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 1Y7138 08/12/85 _..__ .72- _ . ED PHILLIPS ..,- - 50- 3710.862 -86 ._ _.. MANUAL ._ 191138 U8/12/85 59421676 ED P4 IL LTP -S 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 197138 O,b/12/85 2,814.62 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL ` 197138 'J8/12/85_- 69758.95. E7 PHILLIPS .50 -4626- 862 -86 -�_ .. MANUAL. 197138 08/12/89 316.30 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL t't 1Y7138 08/12/85 6700 ED PIHILLIP'S 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 197138 08/12/85 503.15 ED PHILLIPS - - - -� 50- 4628 - 822 -82 .__ _ MANUAL 197138 08/12/85 549.70 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 197139 08/12/85 67.0- ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL - 197138 _ 08/12/85 - 375.55 EO_PHILLIPS_ _ - ��- - 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL. 1Y7138 u.8/12/85 502.50 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4628- 842 -84 -_.- MANUAL 197138 Q8/12/85 502.50- ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL ;- 197138 U8/12/85 R09.15 .._,_ __.._. ED PHILLIPS ._ _ _..___. _ _._ 50- 4628- 842 -84 - MANUAL 19T138 06/12/85 532.00 ED PMTLLIPS 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 197138 08112/85 725.70 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL lYT138_ 08/12/85_ _ 167.50 ED 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 197138 08/12/85 36.00 _PHILLIPS ED , PHILLIPS _ ^ _- 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL - 197138 08/12/85 161.00 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 1Y7138 UB/12/85..__•_ ED PHILLIPS __.. y 50 -4628- 862 -86. _- - MANUAL 197138 08/12/85 36.30 ED PH,TLLIPS 50.4628- 862 -86 MANUAL _ 197138 08/12/85 572.70 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4628- 862.86 MANUAL __ 197138 G,6/12/85. _ 233.55 ED- �ED PHILLIPS 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL__ i�• 197138 08/12/85 167.50. PHILLIPS " a' 50- 4628- 862 -86 _ MANUAL __ irj. 1Y7138 UB/12/85 38.00 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 197138 - J7/19/E5 _ 202.25 EO_PHILLI°S__._. - INVENTOR _lr _ _._ 50.4630s842�84 _. MANUAL 209489.46 • "`I 19719Q 08/12/85 80.90• GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL ' 197190•_ _ 08/12/85. ____. 77.55 -. -. GRIGGS COOPER AND C -_ �_.��_ -. __- __� _ 50-3710-842-84, _ MANUAL 1Y719U t 08/12/85 215.22- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 197190 08/12/85 4.92- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL ; 197190, 08/12/85.4,045.22 GRIGGS COOPER AND C -C 50.4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 197190 08/12/85 39877.68 GRIGGS COOPER AND - 50.4626- 842 -84 _ - MANUAL 19719Q 08/12/85 109760.95 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL'.. �� 1985 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 07 -31 -85 PAGE 6 v I CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. 0 P.O. R MESSAGE - 197190. 0.8/12/85 246.00 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL �1Y7190 07/19/85 - 97.97 GRIGGS- COOPER - - INVENTORY �50-i632- 842 -8i MANUAL 189669.23 +._ - - _ - -- __— _ .rrrrr - +•+ -CKS 197271 08/12/85 76.74- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 197271 U8/12/85 1071- INTERCONTINENTAL PK _ 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 197271 03/13/85 76.50- INTERCONTINENTAL PK - 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL „ 1Y7271 u3/12/85 9.52- TNTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 197271 J6/12/85 _ _ 1.98 -_____ - INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 197271 08/12/85 39837.11 INTERCONTINENTAL _ _ _ PK �50- 4626 - 822 -82 _ MANUAL 197271 08/12/85 18.75 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 191271 Ub/12/85 3,825.26 TNTF-ICONTTNENTAL PK _ _ _- 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 197271 :d/12/85 17.70 INTERCONTINENTAL _ _ _ PK -�� 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL i w 197271 38/12/35 .60 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL . 197271 08/12185 85090 -____ INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL : 197271 08/12/85 3.00 — __ INTERCONTTNENTAL _ PK -'� '- _ - ^' _ 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL _- i 191271 J8/12/85 476.14 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 842 -86 MANUAL 197271 U8/12/85 99.25 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628 - 862 -86_ MANUAL -j 197271 08/12/85 .60 INTERCONTINENTAL PK -__ 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL r, 8,197.66 + •rrfra *s+ -CKS y � 197285 08/12/85 .69- JOHNSON WINE — - 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 197285 0d/12/15 9.49- JOHNSON WINE - - -� 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL w 197285 08/12/85 .86- JOHNSON WINE 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 197285 08/12/85 - -- 13.57- - '15.81- - JOHNSON WINE_ 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 191285 08/12/85 JOHNSON WINE - -- - '- -' - - -- 50- 3710 - 862 -84 - MANUAL _I. v 197285 08/12/85 .05 JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 19T285 U8/12/85 _ _ _ 4.19- _ _ JOHNS ON WI NE _ - _ _ . _._._ - _ 50 -3710- 862 - 86 MANUAL 191285 08/12/85 21.18- JOHNSON WINE . _ 50- 3710 - 862 -86 .v MANUAL a 197285 08/12/85 .60 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 197285 06/12/85 _ _ 060 WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 197285 08/12/85 34.80, _JOHNSON JOHNSON WINE - -- �—�_- --' 50- 4628- 822 -82 �- MANUAL _ y 197285 08/12/85 474.30 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL c 197285 08/12185 _ _ _ 9.00 JOHNSOY WINE _ _ _ 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 197285 08/12/85 43910 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL ' 197285 08/12/85 678.90 JOHNS04 WINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL _191285U8/12/85 - __8.40 JOHNSON WINE_ 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 197285 08/12/85 2.55 JOHNSON 11I NE ^ X50- 4628- 842 -84- MANUAL yr 197285 08/12/85 790950 JOHNSOW WINE 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL r 197285 08/12/85 15.00 JOHNSON WINE. __ - -- -- 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 197285 C-H/12/85 209.52 JOHNSON WINE Y _ . -_ __.__� _ 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL o, 197285 08/12/85 3.00 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628.862 -86 MANUAL „ v 197285 l U8/12/85 19.8.0 JOHNSON_WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL -' 197285 ob/12/85 1.059.12 JOHNSON WINE _ _ 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL „ 3 :278.36 + •rrr. r .. L 197378_- — 0_8/12/85 1.34- MARK_VII_SALES_INC 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL i 197378 0 8/12/85 502.5D MARK VII SALES 'INC 50 -4628- 822 -82 — - MANUAL 11 197378 US/12/85 67.00 MARK VII SALES INC 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL v I 1985 Ci., OF EDINA CHECK RL -LSTER 07 -31 -85 PAGE 7 CHECK. NO* _DATE AMOUNT 191378 U8/12/35 502.50 197378. 08/12/ -85_ ..__. _ 167.50_ 19238.16 • • f f f f f _. - _. _ 197435 08/12/85 3.63- 197435 08/12/85 01/19/85 52.74 197435 018/12/85 128.70 197435._ - __08/12/_85___ 325.51 •fff.• - .. .- ---- ___._..._._._. _.. - 197451 Ub/12/85 .60- 197451_ 08/12/85_ 38.37- 197451 08/12/85 9.60 197451 08/12/85 32.87 191451 0.8/12/85 _.._._. _.__ -_... 7.10 - 197451 Ud/12/85 .16 197451 08/12/85 5.32 197451 08/12/85 072- 197451 - 08/12/85 _ �^ 4.21 197451 06/12/85 6.64- 197 451 08 /1218 5 _ _._• _ . _ *72- 197451 08/12/85 4.46 - 19/451 0,8/12/85 119.44- 197451 08/12/85 _ 3005 197451 - - 08/12/85 19918.90 191451 09/12/85 36.16 197451 U8/12/85 _ 1643.87 197451 08/12/85 5,972.28 197451 08/12/85 36.06 197451 08/12/85 _ 480.40 197451 - 08/1Z/85 355.20 _ 197451 08/12/85 266.25- 197451 08/12/85 _._, 8.10 197451 08/12/85 210.85 _ 197451 Cb /1Z /85 223.45 197451 08/12/85 33205 . 197451 07/19/95 _! 24.50- - �.'I 109770.17 + 197540 08/12/85 9.47 - 197540 T U8/12/85 6.16 - 197540 08/12/85 .A8 191540 08/12/85 _ _ 4.75-_-.- 197540. 08/12/85 8140 197540 08/12/85 473.64 _ _197540 08112/85 3.90 �L f197540. Ue/12/85 4.01 197540 08/12/85 309.39 _. ..... V�NDO- �ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT._N0.__,INV._p. P.O. 8 MESSAGE MARK VII SALES INC 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL �3 MARK - VI :I_.SALES INC . __. - 50�4628- 862 86._ _ MANUAL_ PRIOR WINE CO 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL PRIOR WIN-- CO _ 50- 3710 - 862 -86 - -.. _- MANUAL ' PRIOR WINE INVENTORY J50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL PRIOR WINE CO 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL PRIOR WINE_ CO 50�4628�862�86 _ MANUAL-_-.. yl I, tl QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL z1. OUALITT_ WINE 50-3710-822-82.. T -- MANUAL QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL zA QUALITY WINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL QUALITY WINE - _ -_ 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL _ QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL I_'i QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL QUALITY WINE _ _- 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL QUALITY WINE 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL QUALITY WINE _ _ 50- 3710 - 862- 86 MANUAL QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL QUALITY WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL - QUALITY._WINE,_.__ _ 50- 4626- 822 -82 _ _ MANUAL QUALITY WINE 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL QUALITY WINE 50 -4626- 842 -84 MANUAL QUALITY WINE. _ 50- 4626- 842 -84 _ MANUAL QUALITY WINE 50 -4626- 862 -86 MANUAL I' QUALITY WINE 50 -4626- 862 -86 MANUAL OUALITY_WINE ._ _ _ 50- 4628 - 822 -82 -_ _ MANUAL QUALTTY WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL °I QUALITY 41I NE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL QUALITY WINE_ __. ___ 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL QUALITY WINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL QUALITY WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL QUALITY WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL_ QUALITY _ __ WINE INVENTORY --50- 4630- 862 -86 __. MANUAL • +*-CKS I° TWIN _CITY_ WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 _ _ MANUAL TWIN CITY WINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL TWIN CITY WINE 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL TWIN CITY_.WINE.��_ _ _ „50- 3710 - 862 -86 - MANUAL ..., TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL II TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL TWIN CPTY__WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL �- TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL " TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL��I' 1985 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER r CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENOO2 ITEM DESCRIPTION 197540 08/12/85 237.65 TWIN CITY WINE 197540 08/12/85 3.90 TWIN CFTY WINE - _._ _. _. _._.. 197700 U7119/85 159190.18 15 9190. 18 • r f1f *ii GUNDERSON PAYMENT 199552 -- u7/19/8S___ - - -_ -_ 10x467.79 -- -AMOCO OIL - - -- �, -� 109467.79 GASOLINE 07 -31 -85 PAGE 8 ACCOUNT N0. INV. 4 P.O. A MESSAGE 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL I,ia W 5D�4628- 862 -86 MANUAL ]IV _ * **-CKS I� 60 -2040- 000 -00 -- MANUAL * **-CKS 10- 4612 - 560 -56 MANUAL * **-CKS 1Y9137 07/19/85 29000.00 U S POSTMASTER POSTAGE DUE 10- 4290 - 510 -51 MANUAL 2900000 _. 199138 07/19/85 150.00 JAMES BEHR UNIFORM.ALLOWENCE 10- 4266 - 440-44 _ MANUAL .+ _ - 150.70 _ i 1Y9739 U7/19/85 150.30 WILLIAM BOWLER UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 10- 4266 - 440 -44 MANUAL _... - - -- - --- ---- --- ---- -- -_ 199740. 07/19/85 — 150.00 DENNIS. CAI_,N. _ _ •__ -_ _ UNIFORM ALLOWANCE _,_,,,_y10- 4266 - 440 -44 MANUAL 150.00 + - 199741 07/19/85 150.00 RICHARD HELMER UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 10 -4266- 440 -44 MANUAL 150.00. • - - - - -- - - - - -- - - 199742 07/19/85_ _ — _ _ _ 150.00 - _ JAMES—— - _ . _ . _ - -- _. _ - UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 10- 4266 - 440-44 MANUAL ; 150.OD + _ 'i r 199743 07/19/85 150.00 STEPHEN LANDRY UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 10- 4266 - 440 -44 MANUAL I\ 150.00 + __ _._ 199744 07119/85 - _ 150.00 _ �- ROBERT LAWSON_ -_ ,UNIFORM . ALLOWANCE_ 10- 4266 - 440 -44 MANUAL 150.00 _ 199745 07/19/85 150.nO LEROY LISK UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 10- 4266 - 440 -44 MANUAL - - ���. --- --- 150.00 - - - -- - - - - - ---- --- -- -- ,_ . -. 199746 _ 07/19/85_ - _ �- 150000 _ - _WILLIAM LUTTS _ UNIFORM ALLOWANCE. 10 -4266- 440 -44 MANUAL 150.00 1Y9747 07/19185 150.00 JOHN MALONEY UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 10 -4266- 440 -44 MANUAL -- - --- - - - - - -- - - -- 150.00 * -- - -- -- - -- --- - - - - -. _.. -- - - 1YV /48 U7/19/85 _ 150.00. -. -_ __- RICH4RD_MYRE ____ _ UN IFORM ALLOWANCE. 10- 4266 - 440 -44 MANUAL 150.00 s - _ _ _. ._. , _—. _ _ 199749 07/19/85 150900 JAMES ROBINSON UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 10- 4266- 440 -44 MANUAL.----I", i 150000. - -., 19975 0, -_.- _07119/85_ r � 150.00 ^ JOEL- RADJENOVICH -: -,+,_ . UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 10 - -- 4266 - 440 -44 - MANUAL � 1 1485 CI.. OF EDINA CHECK RL._iTER 07 -31 -85 ..GE 9 L� _- CHECK _N3.__DATE_ AMOUNT_ VENOOQ_,T.__ _ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT.NO. INV. 0_P.O. 0 MESSAGE.-.____ - t I 150.00 199151 U7/19/P-5 150.00 ALLEN ROT14E UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 10- 4266 - 440 -44 MANUAL el. 150.00 Y! 199752 u7 /19 /85 T 150.00 RONALD SAMUELSON - - - UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 10- 4266 - 440 -44 _ MANUAL 150.00 + „I 199755 07/19/85 150.00 JAMES SINGLETON UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 10 -4266- 440 -44 MANUAL 150.00 + I. 199754 07/19/85 T -T 150.00 STEPMEN SIPPER UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 10- 4266- 440 -44 MANUAL 150.00 * �. 199755 J7/19185 150.00 GREGORY SMEGAL UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 10 -4266- 440 -44 MANUAL 150000.+ 199756 07/19/85 150.00 T - RICHARD 'VERNON UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 10 -4266- 440 -44 -__ MANUAL - 15D.00 + 199757 67/19/85 15000 KEN NELSOV UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 10- 4266- 440 -44 MANUAL y 15C.00 • _ „� 199758 07/19185 150000 ANDY MEDZIS UNIFORM ALLOWENCE 10 -4266- 440 -44 MANUAL :. "� 150.00 + r►rr.r + ++ -CKS 199188 15000 ANDY UNIFORM ALLOW_ENC_E 10- 4266 - 440 -44 MANUAL 199788 ___U7/19/85 _ :17/19/85 150.00- _MEOZIS _ _ ANDY MEDZIS -- CORRECTION 10- 4266- 440 -44 MANUAL .00 + rrrrrr rff -CKS t' 204067 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI_ 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 2U4U67 08/12/85 T ^'3.01- CAPITAL CITY DISTRI - 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL _ 204067 08/12/85 11.50 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 23,4067 08/12185 _ __ - - -_ _ _ _- 820.00 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI ___.. _ _.___.. 50- 4628- 822 -82 .._.___ MANUAL 2(14067 08/12/85 149990 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL ; 244067 08112/85 6.00 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 204067_ 08112/85 127.75 CAPIT4L__CITY.DISTRT_._, 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL_ - -'• 20.4067 08/12/85 4.20 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI ___ 'x'50- 4628- 862 -86 - MANUAL _ -t i / 19115.34 + frrf *+ ffr -CKS 20409507/26/85 36.82- COMM OF REVENUE ,- 10- 3357 - 000 -00 MANUAL.._ ^_. !� 204095 07/26c/85 81.31 COMM OF REVENUE SALES TAX 23- 3357- 000 -00 MANUAL 204095 07/26/85 19923.95 COMM OF REVENUE SALES TAX 26- 3357 - 000 -00 MANUAL 204095 _ n7/26/85-- _- __- .--- 4,-?32.35 -COMM OF. REV ENUE SALES TAX _. 27- 3357 - 000 -00 -28- � MANUAL 20.4095 07/26/85 8.59- COMM OF REVENUE SALES TAX 3357 - 000 -00 MANUAL 204095 07/26:/85 36.23 COMM OF REVENUE SALES TAX 29- 3357 - 000 -00 MANUAL 'I- _204095 07/26/85 _890._59 COMM-OF-REVENUE SALES-TAX 40 -3357- 000 -00 - MANUAL_ 204095 07/26/85 39804.90 COMM O REVENUE SALES TAX 50- 3357 - 001 -00 MANUAL "I i 204095 Y 07/26/85 79841.84 COMM OF,REVENUE SALES TAX' "" 50.3357- 002 -00 MANUAL 1985 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 07 -31 -85 PAGE 10 CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT _- VENDOR _ _ - _ ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. INY. I P.O. • MESSAGE 20.4C95 07/26/85 79634.57 COMM OF REVENUE SALES TAX 50- 3357- 003-00 MANUAL 279100.33 • �.I * **-CKS ---- - -- '1719.50 - -- - - - - - - - -- -50 i "1 204129 QB/12/85— BELLBOY -4626- 822 -82 - MANUAL'- �f ZU4129 0.8/12/85 1:250.45 BELLBOY 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL ;! 2U4129 08/12/85 29110.25 BELLBOY 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL J, ZU4129 08/12/85 723.40 BELLBOY - 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 2U 4129 08/12/85 1,859.15 BELLBOY 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL �! 204129 G8/12/85 - - 3,292.20 - -109954.95 BELL30r_ _ -4626- 862 -86 MANUAL i �. _ -_ _ ._. _ _50 - - _ -. f f f* f f 204135 08/12/85 30.00- EAGLE WIN- 50- 3700 - 822 -82 MANUAL d Z04135 08/12/85 - - 12.37- -- EAGLE WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 2U4135 - 08/12/85 " - - 27.11 -- - - EAGLE WIN= -� -- - - -- ' -50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 204135 08/12/85 21.35- EAGLE YIN- 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 3 204135 08/12/85 10078- EAGLE WINE -_ - 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 204135 08/12/85 1.92- EAGLE WING - - -50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 204135 08/12/85 618.61 EAGLE WIN_ 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 204135 - 08/12/?5 - *00 - -- EAGLE WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 204135 08.112/85 1,355.43 EAGLE WINE - - --50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL ' 204135 Oa/12185 539 *10 EAGLE YIN- 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL d 204135 06/12/85 , 1x067.74 EAGLE PINE - - -, _.- _ -- 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 204155 ^8/12/85 96.12 EAGLE WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL r 39573.37 �� - - -- - - - -- - * **-CKS 204138 08/12/85 _ -_ _ _ _ 34.51- _ ED PHILLIPS _ ..., _ ..__ _. . � 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 204138 08/12185 8.76- ED PHILLIPS _ 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 204138 03/12/85 2.46- ED PHILLIPS 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL C 104138 08/12/85 ___ -- 8.22- - ED PHILLI °S 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 104138 08/12/85 33.42 _ - ED PHILLI ?S -'- -- • -- '- - '-•- -�' - -� - -' - _50-3710-842-84 '-- MANUAL • 104138 06/12/85 4937- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL i 204138 08/12/85 10,18- PHILLIPS _ - 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL ZU4139 OS/12/85 47.71- ED PHILLIPS _._._ 50- 3710- 862 -86 _ MANUAL 204138 68/12/85 7.93- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL ZU4138 _ 08/12/85 ! 37*23 -_ - ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL i 204138 08/12/85 8.00- ED PHItLIP6 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 104138 08/12/85 19725070 ED PHILLI °S 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 4 104138 08/12/85 _ 19670.89 - _ED PHILLIPS _. ._- .._.._._.- .._.___� 50 -4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 204138 08/12/85 293L+5.65 ED PHILLIPS _ 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 204138 08/12/85 43805 ED PWILLIP6 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 204138 -- --- 08/12/85 -- 122.75 _ -� - ED PHILLIPS 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 104138 08 /12/85 410.75 ED PHILLIPS ----- `_�__ -_ 50- 4628 - 822 -82 -- -- - - MANUAL oy234138 W204138 08/12/85 08/12/85 _.._._ 218 *50 _ _. 509.05 _ __- ED PHILLIPS ED PH ILLIPIS -- __. _ _. ,- _..__.._� 50 -4628- 842 -84 . 50-4628- 842 -84 MANUAL MANUAL 204138 L8/12/85 396.50 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628 - 862 -86 _ MANUAL v 104138 08/12/85 19861.45 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL _ 2J4139 08/12/85 _ 400.00 �100030'�ED ED PHILLIPS 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL_ 204138 07/26%85 10,036.60 PFIILLIPt4� _ _INVENTORY; —'50- 4632- 842 -84— -- MANUAL v � 1985 OF EDINA CHECK NO* DATE AMOUNT i 204190 07/26/85 .33- ^ i 2U.4190._ 08/12/85 11 *99- j ZJ.4190 08%12/85 32 *73 - 204190 08/12/85 32*73- 20419U _ - 08112/85 32.73 -_ 204190 08/12/85 599.67 20.41 90 06/12/85 1,636.11 204190 08/12/85 1,636 *71_ 204190 68%12/85 1,636.11 ,204190 07/26/85 16 *49 __29207 *82_* i 264271 ___0f/1 2f 8_5 *93� 204271 U8/12/85 5.05 - 204271 08/12/85 .__.x10.02 204271 08/12/85 5.04 - 204271 Cd/12/85 .49- 20.4271 08/12/85 1 *50 20,4271 0012/85 1.20- 204271 08/12/85 501 *34 204271 08 /12/85 _ __._-252 *55. _ 204271 08/12/85 496.87 2U4211 08/12/85 5 *40 ?' 204271 08/12/85 1680_ 2U 4271 08/12/85 252.30 20.4271 08/12/85 24 *50 2U.4271 __.08/_1.2/85 .__ _ . _ _o30 �. 'I 19506.93 • 204285 08/12/85 8.47- 204285 _ US/12/85 -_ 3.28 -_. 204285 UB/12/85 31.61- 204285 08/12/85 4.61 - "2_ I 20.4285 08/12_/85 *fi0- f`'�264285 68/12%85 17.29- 204285 08/12/85 8.10 2U4285 08/12/85.__ 164.28 -_ 204285 08/12/85 423.53 20.4285 08/12/85 2.40 204285_ 08/12/85 1.80 2U4295 08/12/85 230 *62 - 204285 08/12/85 19580.87 ° 204285 - •_08/12/85 28.50 2J4285 08/12/85 40 *00 204285 08/12/85 15 *90- "'i 204285 081121.85 864_. -70 2U4285 0.8112/85 *30 CHECK ;TER 07 -31 -8. ,GE 11 i VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0._INV. t P.O. -_0 MESSAGE GRIGGS COOPER DISCOUNT 50 -3710- 003 -00 MANUAL 6RIG3S COOPER AND C 50 -3710- 822 -82 _ _ MANUAL GRIGGS�CO3PER AND CT�T 50 -3710- 862 -86 � MANUAL GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL GRIGGS_COOPER AND C - - -- 50- 3710- 862 -86 _ _ - MANUAL GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL I.I. GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL - GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 862- 86 MANUAL GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50 -4626- 862 -86 MANUAL GRIGGS COOKER INVENTORY 50- 4632- 862 -86 MANUAL I „I 21 * **-CKS i�a. INTERCONTINENTAL PK' S0- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL I, TNTEACONTTNENTAL PK 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL i27 INTERCONTINENTAL PK -_• - 50- 3710- 862 -86 _�•-. _ _ MANUAL INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL TNTEIC04TINENTAL PK 50- 4626 - 862 -86 _ MANUAL_____ �! INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 862 -86 ' MANUAL INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL " - INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626 - 862 -86 .�.. _ MANUAL INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL _INTERCONTINENTAL_PK_ 50 -4628- 862 -86 ___ ___ MANUAL_ INTERCONTINENTAL PK T 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL INTERCONTTNENTAL PK 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL _I.NTEkC-QN_TINENTAL..PK __. 50- 4628 - 862 -86 __- MANUAL * **-CKS I "rl JOHNSON MINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL - JOHNSON WINE.• _ - -_ 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL JOHNSON _WINE 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL JOHNSON WINE, 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL JOHNSON WINE _ 50- 4628- 822 -82 •_ MANUAL JOHNSON WT NE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL i JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL rl ro- -JOHNS ON. WINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 _ _ MANUAL_. - !a- JOHNSON WINE T 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 1- JOHNSON NINE 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL ,;, dOHNSON_i1I4E �._ _- _ _ 50 -4628- 842 -84 -__ MANUAL.. --_ JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL n JOHNSON_MINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 7-7 JOHNSO* WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 - �T MANUAL'' 7. 1985 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENOOt _^ ITEM DESCRIPTION 204378 LB/12/85 167950 MARK VII SALES INC ^I [3.4378 08/12/85 502.50 MARK VI►I SALES INC � I 204435 204 43 5 204435 2U4435 204 43 5 204435 CS/12/85 08/12/85 08/12/85 -- 08/12/85 08/12/85 Ob /12/85 4.50- PRIOR WIN= CO 7.77- PRIOR WINE CO 5.15- PRIOR WINE CO _ ^— 225.00 PRIOR WIN_ CO 388.34 PRIOR WIN; CO 257,4D 10.44- WINE CO 853.32 rrr-CKS 4 1,� 07 -31 -85 PAGE 12 ACCOUNT N09 INV. A P.O. K MESSAGE V I 2U4451 _ - - - QUALITY WINE -_ - - r## -CKS MANUAL 1 ?1204451 06/12/85 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 3710- 822 -82 ; is 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL �, �el 08/12/85 10.44- QUALITY WINE w 1,01' MANUAL rrr-CKS 4 1,� 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL _ 30.19- !:•I. 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL I,f' _ —50- 3710 - 862 -86 — MANUAL 204451 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL - QUALITY WINE 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL - -- jyi _ 50-4628-862- 86 MANUAL 204451 O8 /12/85 .08 QUALITY WINE - - - -- ##+ -CKS ' I :f V I 2U4451 _ - - - QUALITY WINE -_ - - _ _50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 1 ?1204451 06/12/85 4.80- QUALITY WINE 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL �, 204451 08/12/85 10.44- QUALITY WINE 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL j 4 204451 - - -- 08/12/85 _ 30.19- OU4LITY WINE - 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 204451 08/12/85 12.12- - QUALITY WINE 50 -3710- 842- 84- -'- - -- l MANUAL - -- jyi 204451 O8 /12/85 .08 QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 204451 (18/12185 _ _ - 8099- QUALITY WINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL �Q 204451 138/12/85 10.94- QUALITY WINE _ 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 204451 08/12/85 5.58- QUALITY WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL : 204451 204451 Od/12/85 - 06/12/85 3.45- - - 522927 QUALITY VINE QUALITY VINE - - -- - -1 ' 50- 3710- 862 -86 - - - 50- 4626 - 822 - MANUAL 204451 08/12/85 19509.65 QUALITY WINE -82 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL MANUAL I` 204451 08/12/85 172.50 ��- -` QUALITY WINE - 50 -4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 204451 06/12/85 240.25 QUALITY VINE " _._ 50- 4628- 822 -82 �- - - MANUAL 204451 08/12/85 381.75 QUALITY WINE 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL !"': __204451 :i 204451 C`8 /12/85 08/12/85 _ 3.75- 606.35 - -QUALITY - MINE T�- '- 50- 4628.842 -84 _ _ MANUAL _ QUALITY WINE 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL °; 204451 08/12185 449.85 QUALITY VINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL " 204451_ _ __,__08/12/85 279.35 r -_ -� _ ____ QUALITV..WINE.._ _._ _ ��� -� ��^ - 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 204451 08/12/85 542.15 QUALITY WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 _ MANUAL 49606.38 204540 08/12/85 _ _`. ___ 2.08 -_ TWIN CITY WINE _ 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 204540 204540 Ob/12/85 08/12/85 5.56- 9.60- TWIN CDTY WINE TWIN CITY 50- 3710- 842 -84 - " .. MANUAL ,. i;, r WINE 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL :c 204540 104915 TWIN CITY WINE 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 204540 Q8/12/85 1.50 TWIN CITY WINE ' _ 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL v 204540 08/12/85 278.04 TWIN CI1TV WINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 204546 08/12/85 _ 3.60. ` TWIN CPTY WINE �+ 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 204540 204540 08/12/85 08/12/85 9100 480.30 TWIN CITY WINE TWIN C11TY WINE 50- 4628 - 862 -86 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL MANUAL _ 859.35 + �- #sr -CKS v 1985 C1. OF EDINA CHECK RL -.3TER 07 -31 -85 . .4GE 13 20.743Q 07/31/85 199559.87 199559.87 • STATE TREASURER EMP PERA 10- 4145- 510 -51 MANUAL n ` *dk+ -CKS 74 e CHEEK N0. DATE AMOUNT VENDOi I,TE.M DE_SCRIPTUN ACC- 09AT_•_NOo- •INY• -/ P.O._ NMESSAGE i - - --, 204791_________07/26i/85 - 135.30 MNN GFO. A--_-- __-- _...- ____._CONF_8.- SHOOL_ _._ _ _ 10- 4202 - 160 -16 . -...._ _ ._.. MANUAL______ ,204791 17/26/85 135.00 MN GFOA• CONF 8 SCHOOL 10- 4202 - 160 -16 MANUAL le 270.00 • -�- --- _.- _.____ _- .____._._.__ _­ ' �• rI •�� *rte ttt -CKS ° 207085_,,,_ -_ 07/26/85• -•__ _ -_ 1. 37. 03 BRAEMARr_GOLF PETTY•CASH_ACCT 27- 4120 - 663- 66_- MANUAL. cl X7055 07/26/85 257.56 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH ACCT 27- 4120 - 664 -66 _••�_._ MANUAL " 207455 07126/8' 36.00 BRAEMAR GULF PETTY CASH ACCT 27- 4202 - 660 -66 MANUAL 201055 07/26/85 60..87 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH ACCT . _ 27- 4624- 664 -66 MANUAL_ , 4 91 .4 6 -- - - - -- -� •.rr•r Ic-- 207174 07/31/85 1209000.00- 1ST BANK BANK TRANSFER 50- 1010 - 000 -00 MANUAL 20.7174 - 07/31,/85 120-Vk00.00___ 1ST_BAYK - BANK TRANSFER 50 -1010- 000 -00 MANUAL- r .DO -- - - •__ •,_'aq '� rt••rr 201198 07/26185 69289.89 GROUP HEALTH EMP PREMIUM 10- 4156 - 510 -51 MANUAL ✓ - -- - -- 69289.89 r �. _ ____J __ _�,_ I trttr• •••-CKS 207251 07/26/85 1359000.00 EDINA.MRA DUE HRA 10 -1145- 000 -00 MANUAL m, 1359000.30. • ••• -CKS 'i 207396. _ 07/26/85 60.25_, NWBELL---_ _- _._ _ ._..TELEPHONE _- 10 -4226- 160 -16 MANUAL 207396 7.7/26/85 54.95 NWBELL TELEPHONE _10-4226-160-16 10- 4256 - 460 -46 _• _ MANUAL _ 207396 !17126/85 42.45 NWBELL TELEPHONE 10- 4256 - 500 -50 MANUAL 207396 a.7126185 _ 29980.25 NWBELL - TELEPHONE 10- 4256- 510 -51 MANUAL 4II- 207396 ?7/26/85 203.70 NWBELL TELEPHONE 10- 4256 - 622 -62 ��• -_._, MANUAL - �t,, 207396 07/26/85 217078 NWBELL TELEPHONE 10- 4256- 628.62 MANUAL 207396.• ..- ____07/26185 73.79 -- NWBELL_. ___- - _,-_TELEPHONE _. ._ -10- 4256 - 646 -64 MANUAL 207396 07/26/85 16107 NWBELL TELEPHONE 23- 4256 - 611 -61 MANUAL - ,,"� 207396 :7/26/85 59.29 NWBELL TELEPHONE 26- 4256- 689 -68 MANUAL �.. 2U7396 1;7/26/85 7.85 NWBELL TELEPHONE 27- 4256 - 661 -66 MANUAL i 207396� 17/26/85 46.75 NWBELL TELEPHONE 28- 4256 - 708 -70 -'- - MANUAL - ' v'Q,f 207396 U7/26/85 12705 WELL TELEPHONE 40 -4256- 801 -80 MANUAL 237396 _ •_ J7/26/85_�_____ -_ _ _ 210.30_ _ NWBELL- _ - ____ __TELEPHONE___ 40- 4256 - 803 -80 MANUAL 207396 07/26/85 167.32 NWBELL TELEPHONE 50- 4256- 821 -82 _ - . - MANUAL 207396 07/26/85 180.91 NWBELL TELEPHONE 50- 4256- 841 -84 MANUAL ro;l _.01237396 0.7/26/85 129.27 NWBELL - TELEPHONE 50- 4256 - 861-86 MANUAL_�_.�e -� 49723.04 . -- - -- s, Ion - - _.- �_____.- .________._.� -.r. � - - -- _.._. ._._...�......�- .__..... - ____- _._ ...••r 5- -- 20.743Q 07/31/85 199559.87 199559.87 • STATE TREASURER EMP PERA 10- 4145- 510 -51 MANUAL n ` *dk+ -CKS 74 e 1985 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 07 -31 -85 PAGE 14 CHECK NO* DATE AMOUNT VEND02 ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO* INV. 9 P.O. 9 MESSAGE 207442 �7 /26 /B S_ _ -__ 119654.99 -- PHP EMP PREMIUM MANUAL_ 119654.99 _ _ _ _. -_ . ' - - ikr fir - - -- - - - -- - - - __ ___ _ _ •rr- CKS - t �I -�_� -- - - -- r "I 207523 07/31./-85 89174.11 SOC14L SECURITY FICA PREM 10- 4149 - 510 +51 MANUAL 8 9874.1 1 • --- -- -I�- „� rrr -CK$ e 211067 48 /1a/85 438.50 — CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50 -4628- 842 -84 - MANUAL - _ 211067 0811a185 7920 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL �lglc 211067 08/12/85 4.00 ---- _ CAPITAL CITY DISTRI MANUAL 211067 08/12/85 114.32 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL _ -, 564.92 r. 211129 0 11129 - 118/12/85 - U.b/12/85 _ 19441.50 - - 29471.7 5 BFLLBOr - BELL301 50- 4626 - 822.82 50- 4626- 842 -84 �- - MANUAL -- x/211129 0o/12/85 29986.50 69899.75 + BELLBOY 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL MANUAL .s f,. _ --- '+ r, iirrii rrr -CKS 211135 0.7/31./85 .98- EAGLE MINE DISCOUNT 50- 3710- 003 -00 - MANUAL IJ, -, 211135 08/12/85 6.B8- EAGLE WINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL r 211135 08/12/85 2.50 EAGL= WINE 50- 3710 - 862- 86 MANUAL 211135 08/12/85 17.24 -- EAGLE WINE- - - - 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL j 211135 08/12/85 343.97 EAGLE WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 211135 _ 08/12/85 _ - _861.88 _ EAGLE .WINE _ .___. _ __• �� 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 211135 08/12/85 125.18- EAGLE WINE -- - - - 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL ., 211135 07/31/85 48.90 EAGLE WINE INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 862 -86 MANUAL j 19106.9T + �, irrrir •rr -CKS 211138 08/12/85 28.46- ED PHILLIP'S 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL -, ti 11 38 0.8/12/85 1.87- ED PHILLIP'S 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL ;. o _211138 _ 08/12/85 2.09- ED PMILLIPS 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 211138 U8/12i85 4.10- ED-PHILLIPS- ^"^ -50- 3710 - 842 -84- -_ ... - MANUAL .,' 211138 08/12/85 20988- ED P'HILLIPS 50- 3710- 862 -84 MANUAL G 211138 - 68/12185 9.64 -- - --� ED PHILLIPS __ _ 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 211138 06/12/85 6.86 - ED PHILLIPS__._ 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 211138 78/12/85 3.50- ED PHILLIPS 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 211138___U8/12/85 92.16- ED P- HILLIPfS �EO- 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL - 211138 OB/12/85 52.25 - PHILLIP-S _ __ _ _ 50- 3710- 862 -86 __ _ _.. MANUAL_ 211138 08/12/85 11.16- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL �,!t 211138 -- 08/12/85 1.19- ED PHILLIPS ,- _ -� - - - 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 211138 19423.20 ED PHILLIPS 50.6626- 822 -82 -�- _ MANUAL 211138 211138 08/12/85 08/12/85 343.10 4960704 ED PHILLIPS ED PHILLI °S 50 -4626- 842 -84 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL „ c �aI '� 211138 08/12/85 2.9612.25 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626862 -86 � _ MANUAL _ MANUAL ., 211138 08/12/85 93.65 ED PHILLIP'S 50.4628- 822 -82 MANUAL �;'�c 1'985 Cl ,. OF EDINA CHECK RL- STER 07 -31 -85 rAGE 15 CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT _ VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INY. q_P.O. A MESSAGE._ �- ` T 211138 08/12/85 104.50 ED PHTLLI °G 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL I�I ' .. 211138U8 /12/85. -_ -__ 175.00. _, -ED PHILLIPS _ 50 -4628- 842 -84 �_ -_ --_ - MANUAL_._._. •II 211138 U8/12/85 481.80 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 211138 08/12/85 205905 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL i, 211138 08/12/85 19043.75 ED PHILLIPS _ 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL �s 211138 UB/12%85 558.10 ED PHILLIPS - 50- 4628- 862 -86- MANUAL ° 211138 08/12/85 59.25 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL `Ic 211138 07/31,/85- 132.30 ____ _�ED,PHILLIPS -._._ INVENTORY 50- 4632- 8i2�84 _ __ - MANUAL. `I _. _r. -- -- 11,605.73 • =I r :•••• ••• -CKS I �i _I 211190 07/31./85 1.D1r GRIGGS COOPER DISCOUNT 50- 3710 - 003 -00 MANUAL 21119Q_ .._.___ 08/12/8! 69.74E GRIGGS. COOPER A NO. C__..__• _ 50- 3710 - 822 -82 _ MANUAL "I 211190. UB/12/85 _1.29 -- GRIGGS CO3PER AND C - 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL '' 211190 U8/12185 258.20✓ GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 211190 _ 08/12/85 3.87E GRIGGS -COOPER-AND C.___ 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL . __ a• 211190 - ubm /85 - �1 929- GRIGGS COOPER AND C - -T 50- 3710- 842 -84 - MANUAL ;��� 211190 08/12/85 1.29✓" GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 211190, -... 08/12/85 •,,____,•_,1.2900 __ GRIGGS_COOPER AND C -__ 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 211190 08/12/85 1.29 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 211190 08/12185 54.30✓ GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL „1 _. 211190 08/12/85_ 39487.10/ GRIGGS _CO3PER.AND C_ _ 50 -4626- 822 -82 MANUAL__ _.i= 2111 901 !� U6/12/85 6-,440.00 ; GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 46 26 84 2 -8 4 _ MANUAL d 211190 08/12/85 64.401► GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626 - 842 -84 MANUAL I 211190 _ ____..0,7/3b/85 �77.pD:._ _GRID5S COOPER - ____,.•INVENTORY 50- 4626- 842- 84 MANUAL, 211190. %JB/12/85 - � 64.40 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50 -4626- 842 -84 MANUAL ' 211190 U8112185 64.40- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626 - 842 -84 MANUAL I' 211190 12-910.23✓ GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 21119q 08/12/85 116.30;-' GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 842 -84 - MANUAL 211190 08/12/85 6- ,440.00" GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626 - 842 -84 MANUAL 211190. .__ U8/12/85 _,_2,714:89--' GRIGGS COOPER AND C _ _ _ 50 -4626- 862 -86 MANUAL a.� 211190 07/31,/85 50.47 GRIGGS COOPER INVENTORY - 50 -4632- 862 -86 - MANUAL ;, 199033.47 211271 .._..____DB/12/85 62.90 INTERCONTINENTAL PK - _ 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 211271 U8/12/85 .53- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 3 211271 06/12/85 .18 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL I;{ _ 2112 71 08/12/85 118.33 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710- 842 -84 _ MANUAL = -I I_ 211271 08/12/85 5.39 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 842 -84 - 'MANUAL "I 211271 08/12185 1.07 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 862 -84 MANUAL +_I 211271__08/12 /85 81.19•_Y 1 NTE2CONTINENjAL PK .. 50-3710-862-86 `.� 211271 U8/12/85 .35 - INTERCONTINENTAL PK �- 50- 3710 - 862 -86 - MANUAL 211271 08/12/85 9.43 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 211271_ 08/12/8'_ 59916.62 INTERCONTINENTAL_PK 50- 4626 - 842.84 MANUAL 211271 U8 /12 /85 28.20 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 211271 08/12/85 4.059.90 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL. 21127108 /12/85 11.96 _ _ INTERCONTINENTAL-PK__ 50- 4626 - 862 -86 _ MANUAL 211271 08/12/85 17.10 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL ' 211271 U6112185 39145.47 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL "I ^21.12.71 08/12/85 930 INTERCONTTNENTALAPK 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL i 211271 08/12/85 26.80 - INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628822 -82 MANUAL vl'9 211271 08/12/85 14.70 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -o4628- 822 -82 MANUAL Q 1985 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 07 -31 -85 PAGE 16 r. _ CHECK NO. DATE -_ AMOUNT VENDOR -ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. INV. 0 P.O. 0 MESSAGE 211271 0d/12/85 930 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL' !_ • 211271 08/12/85. _ _ 1.80 INTERCONTINENTAL PK. _ _ _50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL- __ -__ -L� 211271 06/1Z/85 - 53.95 _ INTERCONTINENTAL PK _ - 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 211271 08/12/85 269990 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL ; • 139238.77 • .fff.k * *­CKS { 211285 - - Od/12085 -- ��- -� .23 - - JOHNSON WINE - - -�- 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 211285 08/12/85 3.16- JOHNSON WINE 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL �,:I• 211285 08/12/85 1.32- JOHNSON WINE _ ^ _ _ _ 50- 3710- 822 -82_ __ _ MANUAL I 5 . 21128 - 08/12/85 '- 15.47 -T JOHNSON WINE - 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 211285 U8/12/85 3.50- JOHNSON WIVE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL �;,`■ 211 285 08/12/85 _ 2.41- __- JOHNSON WINE. _. _..__.__ _ 50- 3710.842 -84 _ _ MANUAL 211285 08/12/85 14.60- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL I- 21 1285 08/12/85 14.94- JOHNSON WINE 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 211285 08/12/85 5.98- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL -� 211285 - -- 08/12/85 - - 12.36 JOHNSON WINE ' - -_- - - - 50- 3710 - 862 -86- - - - MANUAL - 211285 08/12/85 11.74- JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL I',rc 211285 _ '08/12185 ._ .60 JOHNSON WIN£ _ _r_ -- 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 211285 Ub/12/85 773.90 JOHNSONI WINE 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 211285 08/12/85 120.66 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL c 211285 08/12/85 3.30 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 211285 - �0d/12 .18�� 300 JOHNSON WINE - - -- 50- 4628- 822 -82 " - - MANUAL ' 211285 Od/12/85 66.23 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL Jc 211285 08/12/85 - 158.10 - -- _JOHNSON WINE _ _ I' ' _ -- _•___�__________ 50- 4628 - 822 -82 211285 06/12/85 .60 JOHNSON WINE - 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 211285 06/12/85 175.20 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 21 1 285 _ 08/1 2/85 1 .20 _ JOHNSON WINE _ _ 50- 4628- 842 -84 _ _ MANUAL 211285 08/12/85 ! 730.35 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84' MANUAL 211285 08/12/85 13.50 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 211285 08/12/85 W!NE_ __. 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 211285 08/12/85 3.30 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 - MANUAL 211285 Ob/12185 2.40 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 211285 08112/8`._ 747.45 JOHNSON WINE _ 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 211285 - -- - O8/12/85 618.41 - JOHNSON WINE _ - - 50- 4628- 862 -86 -- - MANUAL ^� ?` . 211285 08/12/85 299942 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL _ 39643.77 • - -!: 211 354 "_ Q7/31./85 161e43 MINNEGASCO _ HEAT �10- 4254446 -44 - MANUAL ! 'i 211354 07/31./85 128.67 MINNEGASCO HEAT 10- 4254 - 540 -54 MANUAL' 1 211354 _ 07/31./85 -� _ 3915 MINNEGASCO _ _ HEAT_ 10- 4254 - 629 -62_ MANUAL { 211354 77/31 /P.5 93.03 MINNEGASCO -� i - _., HEAT 10- 4254- 646 -64 MANUAL I" 211354 07/31./85 4976 MINNEGASCO HEAT 20 -1130- 000 -00 MANUAL 21135407/31 /85 14.92 MIN4EGASCO HEAT 23- 4254 - 611-61 _ MANUAL _ 211354 0.7/31./85 2-,254.81 MINNEGASCO� HEAT 26- 4254- 689 -68-^ MANUAL j 211354 07/31./85 17010 MINNEGASCO HEAT 27- 4254 - 662 -66 MANUAL 211354 07/31./85•-- i-115.71 MINNEGASCO _ _ HEAT.._ _ 40 -4254- 801 -80 MANUAL �6�1 'I 211354 07/311/85 291.95 MINN =GASCO r 4 HEAT 40- 4254- 803 -80 MANUAL 1 �_�211354 07/31/85 3.00 MINNEGNSCO HEAT 50- 4254- 821 -82 MANUAL 211354 07/31/85 26.17 MINNEGASCO HEAT 50 -1254- 841 -84 _ _MANUAL >� 211354 07131.%85 43.91 MINNEGtGSCO HEAT SO�4254- 861 -86 _ MANUAL ' 39158.61 • >��c 9' • 1'985 Cl. OF EDINA CHECK R. .STER 07 -31 -85 AGE 17 _CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR _jTEM DESCR�PT ON ACCOUNT N0.-INY. I_P.O._q.. " MESSAGE __ _ •.•••. CKS_�I•J I ;.� 211378 08/12/85 167.50 MARK VII SALES INC 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL , 167.50 • e o I � 211415 07/31,/85 7,138.40 MED CENTEI HOSP PREM 10- 4156 - 510 -51 MANUAL 211415 07/31/85 71304 MED CENTE4 HOSP PREMIUM 10- 4156 - 510 -51 MANUAL 211415 07/31.185 713..84- MSD CENTEI CORRECTION 10-4156-51-0-51—.— . _ MANUAL_.__ - 7l138.40 •.•••• •.• -CKS �c id 211451 08/12/85 12. 75---' QUALITY WINE 50- 3700 - 862 -86 MANUAL jLaa 211451 08/12/85 0U AL ITY_WINE_ 50- 3710 - 822 -82 _ MANUAL,_�_;�_I 211451 ^^ Ob/12/85 6.65 ✓ / - 'QUALITY PINE —50 -3710- 822 -82� MANUAL 211451 08112185 .09`' QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 211451_, 08/12/85 __- _ 5.39 ✓: QUALIT7.WTNE _ —50-3710-842-84 50- 3710 - 842- 84 _ MANUAL r, 211451 08/12/85 64.58✓ QUALITY WINE 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL Ij 211451 08/12/85 9.40✓ QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL ` 211451_ 08/12/85 QUALITY_WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL_ "_ __�•� 211451 08/12/85 _ 25 QUALITY WINE 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 211451 08/12/85 26.41✓ QUALITY WTNE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 211451._ -_ Ud/12/85 4.6D✓ QUALITY urNE ___ -, 50- 3710- 862 -86 __.__- _____-- -- .____��._.__.� MANUAL . - - -- •'� 211451 08/12/85 .25- QUALITY WINE 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 211451 08/12/85 668.86 QUALITY WINE 50 -4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 211451 08/12/85 _3_92.29.48 ✓__ QUALITY _WINE _ 50- 4626 - 842 -84 _ MANUAL._, —__ 211451 08/12/85 .00 �QUALITI WINE �! 50- 4626- 862 -86 _ MANUAL 211451 08/12/85 12.75- QUALITY MINE 50- 4626 - 862 -86 MANUAL 211451 _ 08/12/85. -_T ._ 12.75 ,,--- ,_QUALITY_WINE ------ —_.___._ 50- 4626- 862 -86 �. PANUAL 211451 08/12/85 1,320.59✓ QUALITY WTNE 50- 4626 - 862 -86 MANUAL 211451 Ob/12/85 4.94✓ QUALITY PINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL R _ 211451 _ 08/12/85 332.75,` _ OUALITY_WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82_ MANUAL 211451 A- 08/12/85'- 269.80'¢` QUALITY WINE ^�- - 50- 4628- 842 -84 -' -- - - MANUAL 211451 08/12/85 470.00 QUALITY WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL' 211451 .— Ob/12/85_ — _279.DD! QUALITY_YINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 _ MANUAL 211451 08/12/85 233.10 QUALITY WINE - -- 50- 4628 - 862 -86 __V -... MANUAL ' 211451 07/31,/85 25.85, -" QUALITY WINE INVENTORY 50 -4630- 862 -86 MANUAL �e ' - -- 69672.85 • � � -_ __�__T -_ _ ______ _ - I ( „I ••••w• ••• —CKS 211540 C8/12/85 13.65- TWIN CITY WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL ' 211540 U8/12/85 4.45 -- TWIN CITY WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL I` 211540 08/12/85 _7.50- TWTN- CTTY_WINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 _ MANUAL _-j 211540 08/12/85 682.50. TWIN CITY WINE 50 -4628- 842 -84 TMANUAL j211540 08/12/85 3.30 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 21.154Q_ -._W 08/12_(85 __- 222.79 T0j.N- jTY .WINE 50_4628- 862 -86 MANUAL___ "_ -_ . +l z� 897.99 • -1 1: ! ••_•••. * -CKS �z _ _ i►�'C 211588 07131,/85 :227.70 VEST_RNI LIFE INS LIFE INS , REM -10- 4157 - 510-51 MANUAL 9 1985 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. zf- - ,I 227.70 + 1.20- - •--•_.� - -- ✓ . 218067 Ca 112/85 I-- 218067 - ^ -- 08/12/85 _ 218067 08/12/85 1 218Q67 - 08/13/85 218067 06/12/85 1 218067 08/12/f5 218967 06/1a/85 218061 _ 08/12/85 _ 218067 08/12/85 218067 08/12/85 218067 08/12/85 218067 08/12/85 x_218067 _ _ 08/1x/85 227.70 + 1.20- CAPITAL CITY DISTRI__ 2010- CAPITAL CITY DISTRI - '- 440.45 CAPITAL CITY OISTRT 4.50- CAPITAL CITY DISTRI _ 440.45 CAPITAL CITY _ DISTRI 440.45- CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 4.50 CAPITAL CITT DISTR* _ 4950. CAPITAL CITY DISTRI - 460.45 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 000 - CAPITAL CITY DISTRI_ _ •-. _. _ 5.00 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 271.97 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 2.50 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI _ 07 -31 -85 PAGE 18 I� INVo I P.O._0 MESSAGE _ ; ) 1, . rr• -CKS ` 50- 3700 - 842 -84 MANUAL e 50-3710-862-86------ MANUAL rts..CK ° 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL Q6/1 2/85 ;;i• 50- 4628- 822 -82 - �50- MANUAL.._.__ MANUAL 1� 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL ' 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL MANUAL �. 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL _08/12/85 08/12/85� _ _3.9043.00 367.20 - -- 50 -4628- 822 -82 - -- MANUAL -- MANUAL 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 218129 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL BELLBOr 50 -4628- 842 -84 -- - _ MANUAL I',:�• 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL_'• 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL rrtsr• rts..CK I =� 218129 Q6/1 2/85 367.20 BELL30T 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 218129 BELLBOY 50 -4626- 842 -84 MANUAL �. 218129 _08/12/85 08/12/85� _ _3.9043.00 367.20 _ BELLBOY T 50 -4626- 842 -84 -- MANUAL 218129 u8/13/85 367.20- BELLBOr 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL I',:�• 3 9 410.2 0 •99999 + ++-CKS �: e 218135 08/12/85 1!5.76- EAGLE WINE 50- 3710- 822.82 MANUAL y 218135 08/12/85 .21 EAGLE WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 218135 04/12/85 .96 ­­EAGLE WINE 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 218135 08/12/85 - -__ - 5.76- EAGLE WINE -- - - - - - - 50- 3710 - 842 -84 - MANUAL " r, 218135 08/12/85 24.93- EAGLE WINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 218135 08/12/85 50.33- EAGLE WINE 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL �. 218135 -- 0.8/12/85 - 5.75 -_ EAGLE WINE-- I-- - - - - -- -� -�- 50- 3710 - 862 -86 - MANUAL 218135 08/12/85 937.86 EAGLE WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 218135 08/12/85 47.95- EAGLE WINE 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 218135 C8/12/85 _ _ 10.45- EAGL= WINE _ - 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 218135 08/12/85 288.00 EAGL= WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL I.• 218135 08/12/85 19246.25 EAGLE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 21813 5 08/12%85 29516.61 _WINE EAGLE WINE 50- 4628- 862- 86 - - -' MANUAL �rl 218135 08/12/85 252.40 EAGLE WINE 50- 4628 - 862-86 MANUAL 17% 59079.06 • 1 �, 999999 +.*-CKS '. • -- '- - Mi 218138---- UB/12185 17.44 ED PHILLIPS SO- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL ' - v 218138 04/12/85 7.35✓ ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL �e 21 8138 _ __- Q8/12/85 49.32 �ED •PHILLIPS _ ._ _ _ - -__ _ 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL =I� M� -I 218138 u8/12/85 34.21 - / ED PHILLIPS 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL v 218138 08/12/85 10.07 -\ ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL + 2181.38 08/12/85 121.41✓ E0_PMILLIP6 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL �- -I' -- 2181 38 04/12/85 5 ,35- �'- -ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 842 -84 - - --' MANUAL' _ r i 218138 08/12/85 10.36 -✓ ED PHILLIPS 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL x ,d 1985 'C_ OF EDINA CHECK K STER 07 -31 -8S AGE 19 V � 218274____.__78 -_ 1 MANUAL t CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT 59.47- VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT AP.O. AND C 218190 08/12/85 _ ._N0.INV* COOPER AND ✓ C% 218191 08/12/85 18.37- 218138 08/12/85 5.23 / ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 218138.. _ 08/12185 r_ 10 3*57 ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 218138 U8/12/85 440908 '� ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 t_ 21b138 ;6/12/85 44.08+ ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 ' 218138 08/12/25 8.521-' ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 _.r 218138 08%12/85- �T2,466.06� -__ED 06/12/85 -� PHILLIPS T - - �- -` 50- 4626- 822 -82 218138 08/12/85 69070.36 ED PHILLIP'S 50- 4626 - 842 -84 218138 08 /12/85.-- -.-_ -- -_.. 59178.66✓_ -_ -- ED PHILLIPS _ -. �- _ 50- 4626- 862 -86 218138 08/12/85 367.6D, ED PHILLIPS - -- -- __.. _ �. 50- 4628- 822 -82 V218138 08/12/85 871.75✓ E PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 822 -82 2181 38 U.8/12/85 517.75✓ ED PIRILLI°S 50 -4628- 842 -84 218138 U012/8-5 503.25'r/� � ED _ _ PHILLIPS T� 50- 4628- 842 -84 ^- y 218138 08/12/85 267.5; ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 842 -84 218138 _ 08/12/85 __•,__ 1710.30✓ - ED PHILLIPS - - - r� - -- - - -- 50- 4628- 842 -84 J 218138 ud/12/85 29203.9 5- ED PHILLIPS _•_ .• _ __ 50-4628-862- 86 218138 08/12/85 426.00 ✓ - ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 862 -86 � 218138 _ _08/12/85_ -^ - 2610✓ .3 ED_PHILLIrS INTERCONTINENTAL 50- 4628 - 862 -86 �- ^ 21b13R Gb/12I85 2 203.95`✓^ ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628 - 862 -864 L 18,663.70,+ V � 218274____.__78 -_ 1 MANUAL t _- MANUAL__ 218194 ' _ 06/12/25 T 59.47- GRIGGS_CODPER INTERCONTINENTAL AND C 218190 08/12/85 16.61- _ GRIGGS COOPER AND C ^- - C% 218191 08/12/85 18.37- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 218190 Ud/12/85 __- __R_•__•_ 100.97 - GRIGGS. COOPER AND C 218190 08/12/85 29973.35 GRIGGS COOPER AND C ...., 21819(1 Lb/12/85 39918.61 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 21819(1_ 0.8/12/85 830.25 "S CO)PER AND _ 50- 4626 - 842 -84 __ ✓ 218190 06/12/85 -� 59048.25 _GRIG GRIGGS _ COOPER AND ,C -_____ _� C 218271 _- 12 ,515.04 _59103.25 I *1TE4C0NTINENTAL PK �_. _._.. - _ __ .50- 4626- 862- 86_�.� 50- 3710- 822 -82 - 50 -3710- 842 -84 50- 3710- 842 -84 50- 3710 - 862 -86 50- 4626 - 822 -82 50 -4626- 842 -84 _ 50 -4626- 842 -84 50 -4626- 862 -86 ■.- MESSAGE 218274____.__78 -_ 1 MANUAL t _- MANUAL__ MANUAL 08/12/85 MANUAL INTERCONTINENTAL MANUAL_ - - 50- 3710 - 842- 84 - -_.__ MANUAL col° MANUAL 10016- _ MANUAL _ MANUAL I; MANUAL s MANUAL _INTERCONTINENTAL MANUAL t,7!� MANUAL 218271 MANUAL 103.94- MANUAL PK MANUAL r: • MANUAL 08/12/85 MANUAL INTERCONTINENTAL PK I ;,1 ... -CKS 218271 08/12/85_ "e MANUAL PK MANUAL MANUAL 08/12185 MANUAL INTERCONTINENTAL MANUAL _ 50- 4626 - 842 -84 __ MANUAL 218271 MANUAL.. -;, MANUAL PK �'°�� .._ as a a a • ...__ ......... ,.._............�._u..._....._. _._�_. �._._...._w _____....,._.._ _..._ __._..._....�.. _ .._ __._ _.. � .._ _ - _ _ _ __ _..._...�.�..__..._. _ �,._.._...._ . _ _... _ .._ . - ._.. - --- _ 218274____.__78 /12/85_ 2.07 -. INTEICDNTINENTAL_PK t 50- 3710 - 822 -82 218271 08/12/85 97.69- INTERCONTINENTAL PK - - - 50- 3710 - 842- 84 - -_.__ ✓ 218271 08/12/85 10016- INTERCONTINENTAL PK --50- 3710 - 842 -84 218271 64.54- "' -_ "_ _INTERCONTINENTAL PK _.__.. _ - __ - -._ 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 218271 08/12/85 103.94- INTERCONTINENTAL PK _ 50- 3710 - 862 -86 C; 218271 08/12/85 4.99- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 862 -86 •.. -CKS 218271 08/12/85_ 41884.70 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -4626- 842 -84 21b271 08/12185 20.10. INTERCONTINENTAL PK l -� _ 50- 4626 - 842 -84 __ - 218271 08/12185 16.80 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 862 -86 218271 _- _08/12/85 _59103.25 I *1TE4C0NTINENTAL PK �_. _._.. - _ __ .50- 4626- 862- 86_�.� 218271 08/12/25 27.67 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626 - 862 -86 218271 08/12/85 39227.28 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626 - 862 -86 _ 218271 _08/12/85 103.62 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -4628- 822 -82 218271 0.8/12/85 .60 INTERCONTINENTAL PK� 50- 4628- 822- 82�� -- `�.' 218271 08/12/85 3.30 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 842 -84 "r 218271 _.__.08/12/85 _ 508.40 INTERCONTINENTAL PK _ 50- 4628- 842 -84 jj 218271 08/12/85 249977 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 862 -86 ,a J21b271 08/12/85 1.80 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -4628- 862 -86 Id r - ff 13.863.90 • �'°�� .._ as a a a • ...__ ......... ,.._............�._u..._....._. _._�_. �._._...._w _____....,._.._ _..._ __._..._....�.. _ .._ __._ _.. � .._ _ - _ _ _ __ _..._...�.�..__..._. _ �,._.._...._ . _ _... _ .._ . - ._.. - --- _ a.f -CKS L t MANUAL T MANUAL MANUAL ;Is MANUAL •_.. MANUAL ' MANUAL' I. f MANUAL i MANUAL MANUAL „f MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL. Cal MANUAL MANUAL „'� •.. -CKS ii ,. e lA 1985 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 07 -31 -85 PAGE 20 _. CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR_ _ -- ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. INV. C P.O. p_ MESSAGE ` 218285 - -- 0.8/12/85 - -- - - -_- 2.26• • _ JOHNSON WINE - - 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL_•__ 3 218285 Q6/12/85 20.27 -J - JOHNSON WINE -- -- -� -� 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL -,_ I' 218285 u8/12/85 30.12- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710.842 -84 MANUAL 218285 08/12/85 2.99- '- JOHNSON WINE 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 218285 0.8/12/85 3 0.20- JOHNSON WINE - ' -_- l50- 3710- 862- 86 - - - - -- MANUAL- 218285 06/12/85 12.55- JOHNSON WINE 50 -3710- 862.86 MANUAL 01 218285 - 08/12/85 1.50 - -- - _ - - JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 822.82_ - - MANUAL 218285 08/12/85 113.20 JOHNSON WINE -__ -�50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL �. _ 218285 08/12/85 1800 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 218,285 -- - 08/12/85 -- - -- 1,013.93 ` JOHN30N VINE 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 218285 08/12/85 1,506.35 JOHNSON PINE -- - - -- -� -� 50- 4628 - 842 -84 - - MANUAL -- ' _ 218285 08/12/85 27990 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 218285 68/12/85 -._ _ ,627.75 JOHNSON WINE _,- _ _ 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 216285 Ud/12/85 27.90 JOHNSON WINE _ 50- 4628- 862 -86 - MANUAL ! "I _ 218285 68/1205 149.85 JOHNSON WINE 5R- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL -r 218235 - U8 /12/85 ' ' - - - -1 .00 _JOHNSON WINE - -- 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 218285 US/12/85- •510.42 T JOHNSON WINE - -- - - 50- 4628- 862 -86 - MANUAL -' ✓ 218285 U8/12185 9000 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL '_• 4 90 8.31 • j �_. - _-.- - -- -- -- - _.. _. - I''i _ f•f fff •.• -CKS � 216378 08/12/85 83.75 '- MARK VII STILES INC ---7-50-4628-842-84- MANUAL ;• ' 83.75 • -� •••..CKS 218433 U8/12/85 -G8 - - - -'- .85 PAUSTIS B SONS -SONS 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL i 218433 /12/85 69.487 - -- - _- PAUSTIS 8 _- ' - - - -� -----50-4628-822-82 -- MANUAL -- _ 218433 08/12/85 3.75 PAUSTIS 6 SONS 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 218433 _ 08/12/85 _. - 250.56 - - - PAUSTIS 8 SONS -- 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL ..!, 218433 08/12/85 90.48 PAUSTIS 8 SONS _ - 50- 4628- 862 -86 - MANUAL 218433 0.8/12/85 1.70 PAUSTIS 9 SONS 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 416.82 + .•f fff i 218435 08/12/85 15.18 - PRIOR WIN= CO 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 218435 06/12/85 15.18 PRIOR WINE CO 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 218435 08/12/85 ^08/12/85 -! 15.18- '-� PRIOR WINE CO__ 50- 3710.842.84 MANUAL �I 218435 _ .21 PRIOR MINE CO _ 50- 3710- 862 -86 - - MANUAL - 218435 Od/12185 5.33- PRIOR WINE CO 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 218435. - -_ _0.8/12/85 758.78 PRIOR_WIN= CO - _ 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 218435 08/12/85 758.78 PRIOR WINE CO- 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 218435 08/12/85 758.78- PRIOR WINE. CO 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 218435 _08/12/85 266.30 PRIOR WINE CO 50 -4628- 862 -86_ MANUAL 218435 0.8/12/85 10.74- PRIOR YIN_ CO _ 50 -4628- 862 -86 __ _ ' MANUAL !, ,�... 994.04 I,.I vi -'. I^ 218451_ 218451 08/12/85 08/12%85 9.44- QUALITY_WINE QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL MANUAL I' 1I' �I 14.99• �la 218451 08/12/85 10.24 - -, QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL �J3I :;- 46 A v ' 1985 C,l F EDINA CHECK R, iER 07 -31 -85 X 21 r• 4 i•/ CHECK Ng._OATE AMOUgT Y.E,N00.2, LTEMDESCR "ICON ACCOUNT NO._INY._# P.O.- 0_MESSAGE =j 218451 08/12/85 3.87 - QU4LITV WINE 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL d ' 218451_ 08/12185 i .._�_ 3.87- QUALITY. WINE _. ._ __ _ 50- 3710 - 842- 84,.__.___ ___ MANUAL ° 218451 08/12/85 .__ 24.98- -_, QUALITY WINE _. 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL ' 1 218451 06/12/85 .90 QUALITY WINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 1 16.47- OUALITY_WINE__ 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL �.� 1 _218451 218451 _08/12/85 08/12/85 024 __ QUALITY WINE _ __ _ - _ 50- 3710- 842 -84 "� MANUAL 218451 0.8/12/85 38.67 -• QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL „8 218451 _ ._._ 08/12/85 ,.__. _17.72- QUALITY :1I NE _ -__ - - _ �� 50- 3710 - 842 -84 _ _ MANUAL_ 218451 08/12/85 16.58- QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL ' I 218451 08/12/85 20.76- QUALITY WINE 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL °e 218451 . 09- 50- 3710 - 862 -86 - _ MANUAL _ 218451 _0.8/12/85 08/12/85 �QUALITY_WINE 74.93 - QUALITY WINE _ 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL "I 218451 08/12/85 3.87- QUALIT?1 WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 218451 08/12/85 33.73- ____,,­.,QUALITV •WINE_..-__- ,.... -_.�_ 50-3710-862-86 MANUAL 218451 C8/12/85 749973 QUALITY WINE 50 -4626- 822 -82 MANUAL lu1 218451 08/12/85 823.75 QUALITY WINE 50- 4626 - 842 -84 MANUAL W 218451_ C6/12/85_ 1,933.70 QUALITY WINE _ 50- 4626 - 842- 84 - MANUAL _ 218451 —O8/12/85 ____" 39746.87' _ OUALITY WINE 50 -4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 218451 CB/12/85 472.35 QUALITY WINE 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 218451 ._. _ 08/12/85 ___- _."_.""_.____.193.80_QUALITY WINE_"_. _ 50- 4628- 822- 82,—_._... MANUAL 218451 08/12/85 512910 QUALITY WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 218451 08/12/85 1,249.20 QUALITY WINE "E 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL , t 218451 193.80 QUALITY _ 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 218451 0,8/12/85 44.99- "WIN QUALITY WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL ul 218451 08/12/85 11.89- QUALITY WINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 218451 _ -- -- 08/12/85 _ _.__.886.00.__ QUALITY WINE _- -- .- - -,__.- —50-46 _- _.. - -- 50 -4628- 842 -84 -- __ --__ _ ._ MANUAL....___ 218451 08/12/85 193.80 QUALITY WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL !" y 218451 L)6/12/85 1.686.50 QUALITY WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 218451 08/12/85 4.54- QUaLITY WINE _ 50- 4628- 862 -86 -� -- - MANUAL_ - -- 08/12/85 1903800 QUALITY WINE 50 -4628- 862- 86 MANUAL !•: �, I218451 (218451 0.8/12/85 829.40, QUALITY WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL pr JI .. :.►• •*• -CKS 8 218540. 06%12/85 4.24- TWIN CITY WINE ^'! 50- 3710- 822 -82 - MANUAL 218540, (18/12/85 18.47- TWIN CITY WINE 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL „E 218540 _., _ __.08/12/85 13.42 -__,- _,__.TWIN CITY _ WINE _ _50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL ._ 218540 08/12/85 3.30 TWIN CITY WINE 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 218540 UB/12/85 212.45 TWIN CITY WINE 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL d 218540, 0.8/12/85 13950 TWIN_CITY__WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 218540, 08/12/85 923.67 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 218540 08/12/85 11940 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL C 08/1x/85 671.27__ �WIN_Ci!TZ._ WINE 504628- 862786 MANUAL ' _.218540 1,799.46 • _ - - ,I - - -- 270,138.34 FUND 10 TOTAL GENERAL FUND bs '! 18.43 FUND 20 TOTAL PARK �� f 687991 _ - —_FUYO .23 - TOTAL. .ART CENTER a' 1, 4,926.00 FUND 26 TOTAL SWIMMING FOOL FUND ' 89148.07 FUND 27 TOTAL GOLF COURSE FUND 3 044.08 FUND 2t TOTAL PECREATION _CENTER FUND 186.23 FUND 29 TOTAL SUN RANGE FUND 13 25,174.73 FUND 40 TOTAL UTILITY FUND ; ' -rI 46 A vvos cxrr OF cozm« _..0 oyNI--_--- n1a"ovm~y1 ___159190.~?8 a4s°7m4°om ' ^ .. ^} ' � � cwcCm ncszmxcm 07-31~85 pwGc a2 _-V:,Nowl-_ I?cn DESCRIPTION- _- ACCOUNT NDo INVe # Pop° m ncmaAmc rowo 50 TOTAL Lzmumn ozspcwmwwn Fmmm i3 ^' FUND 6g_ TOTAL -__---_�omo��u��� - - - ' -- ., rorAL ]' .. ---' ------' -- ----�i~ .. � PAGES ' XPROUGH � tINANCE .. ---' ------' -- ----�i~ .. � . ' � --- — - � ---------� � |'|= .'. qp �1 � � . . ° - ` ''_' --_-' -