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
�
�
. .
°
- `
''_' --_-' -