Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1977-07-11_COUNCIL MEETING
7/11/77' Agenda Page Two B. Connection Charges - Sanitary Sewer SS -142 and Watermain WM -212 1. Outlot B, Gleason 5th Addition 2. Lot 4, Block 1, Graytower. Estates C. City Hall Parking Lot (Continued from - 6/20/77) D. Boards and Commissions (Continued from.:6 /20/77) * E. Disposition of Lots - Lake Edina Village Replat * F. Sale of Outlot I, Iroquois Hills 4th Addition and Outlot I, Iroquois Hills 5th * G. Condemnation Award - Twin City Federal (H.R.A.) * H. H.R.A. Status Reports I. Replacement of Water.Department Control System * J. Minnesota Housing Finance.Agency Home Improvement Grant Application K. Special Concerns of Mayor and Council L. Post Agenda and Manager's Miscellaneous Items 1. Edina Transit Committee Reconmiendation for Paratransit Project VI. ORDINANCES First Reading requires offering of Ordinance only. 3/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass Second Reading. 4/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass if Second Reading should be waived. A. -First Reading 1. Ordinance No. 101 -A1 - Order of Business for Council Meetings (Continued from 6/20/77) B. Second Reading 1. Ordinance No. 311 -A9 - Sanitation and Enclosures for Dogs VII. RESOLUTIONS A. Tax Forfeited Lands ANY OTHERS WHO DESIRE HEARING BEFORE COUNCIL VIII. FINANCE * A. Liquor Fund as of 5/31/77 B. CLAIMS PAID: Motion of , seconded by. , for payment of the following claims as per Pre-List: General Fund, $96,753.41; Poor,$275.30; Park, $6,013.23; Art Center, $175.65; Park Construction, $3,919.00; Pool, $3,347.05; Golf, $11,951.50; Rec. Center, $2,991.51; Gun Range, $1,077.80; Waterworks, $11,644.73; Sewer, $6,867.04; Liquor, $143,870.30, Construction, $19,780.11; Total, $308,666.63 AGENDA EDINA CITY COUNCIL JULY 11, 1977 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL MINUTES of Special Meetings of June 13, 27 and 30, and Regular Meeting of June 20, 1977, approved as submitted or corrected by motion of , seconded by I. REPORTS AND PUBLIC HEARING ON PLANNING MATTERS Presentation by Planning Department. Spectators heard. First Reading of Zoning Ordinance requires offering of Ordinance only. 4/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass Second Reading or if Second Reading should be waived. Lot Divisions, Plats, Buildable Lots, and Flood Plain Permits require 3/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass. * A. Russell R.* Wilson Subdivision of Lot 6, Prospect Hills First Addition Located West of Dublin Road -and North of Kerry Road 1. Preliminary Plat - S -77 -10 (Continued from 6/20/77) B. Edina Interchange 4th Addition Located West of Ohms Lane and North and and West of W. 74th St. 1. Preliminary Plat - S -77 -11 (Continued from 6/20/77) C. Ordinance No. 803 - Ordinance Consolidating Planning Commission and Environmental Quality Commission - Second Reading D. Set Hearing Dates 1. Lots 3 and A, Auditor's Subdivision No. 172.- 4626 France Ave. R -1 Residential District to R -2 Multiple Residence District`- Z -77 -11 (7/6/77) 2. Gabbert and Gabbert Registered Land Survey West of.York.Ave'..and North of W. 70th St. - C -4 Commercial District to C =3 Commercial District and Preliminary Plat - :Z -77 -14 .(7/6/77) II. PUBLIC HEARING ON STREET VACATION Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by Engineer. Spectators heard. If Council - wishes to proceed, action by Resolu- tion. 3/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass. A. Portion of Zenith Ave. at W. 54th St. III. AWARD OF BIDS Tabulation of Bids by City Manager. Action of Council.by Motion. A. Watermain Improvement No. WM -319B IV. COMMUNICATIONS * A. Mr. William Harrison - Street Improvement No. B =87 * B. Ms. Judy Schueneman - Amundson Road Improvements C. Petitions 1. Alley Vacation — Between France and Drew Avenues and between W. 55th Street and Cemetery V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS A. Set Hearing Dates 1. Appeals on Board of Appeals and Adjustments Decisions * a. James Otto - Appeal of Administrative Decision - L. 4, B1, 1, :Braemar Parc b. Eberhardt Company - Sign Ordinance Variance EDINA WEST CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION 6075 Lincoln Drive Edina, Minnesota 55436 June 24,, 1977 The Edina Fire Administration Office 4801 W. 50th Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55424 Gentlemen: The Edina West Condominium Association wishes to express sincere thanks to the Edina Fire Depart- ment for the extraordinary good service and for providing care for a resident, Mrs. F. Sussman, who was taken ill, on June 14. It was because of your help'and immediate response that Mrs. Sussman is now well on the way to re- covery and we are grateful. Sincerely, Ruth C. Downey Secretary Edina West Condominium Asso. cc: Edina City Council,) / To: The Mayor and City Council Warren C. Hyde, City Manager From:' Florence Hallberg, City Clerk Subject: Institute for Municipal Clerks Thank you for giving me the opportunity to attend the first of three annual Minnesota Clerks Institutes put on by the Department of Conferences at the University of Minnesota Nolte Center for Continuing Education and Extension. It was a rewarding experience of learning and sharing. The course has been approved by the International Association of Clerks and Finance Officers toward their certification program and patterned after institutes which a number of Minnesota Clerks have attended at Syracuse University and at the University of Iowa. The course carries 3.3 Continuing Education Units which program is a part of a national effort to recognize self development and enrichment thru continuing education. The three Minnesota Clerks who attended the Syracuse Institute and the six who have been attending the Iowa Institute worked with the Minnesota Certification Committee to develop a program to meet various needs of both large and small cities. Over the three year program there will be 100 hours of instruction, 50 hours of which will be in public administration and the remainder in social and interpersonal con- cerns. This year's institute included the following: Introduction to Fiscal Management Introduction to Revenue Sources Arley Waldo, Professor Applied Economics & Agriculture, U. of M. Introduction to Alternative Budgeting /Zero Base Budgeting Michael Gleeson, Assistant Professor, School of Public Affairs, U. of M. Budgeting in Practice: Problems that Municipalities Face - Panel Discussion - Moderator, Jay Greenberg, Asst. Professor, School of Public Affairs and Assistant Director, Continuing Education in Public Policy. Basic Interpersonal Communications George Shapiro, Professor, Department of Speech Communications, U. of M. How to make an Environmental Assessment Our own Gordon Hughes Election Laws: Origin and Operation Jan Nelson, Anoka County Republican Chairwoman Motivation of Self and Others Paul Cashman, Professor, Department of Speech Communications, U. of M. Where Local Government Came from and Where it is Going Tom Scott, Professor, Department of Political Science. U. of M.. Associate Professors, Center for Urban & Regional Affairs, State of Minnesota Regional Development in Minnesota, Richard Dethmers, Minnesota State Planning Agency. What Should Local Government Officials Know About State Agencies The impact of Federal Funding on What Local Governments Can Afford to Do? James Solem, Director, Office of Local & Urban Affairs, State of Minnesota Legal Requirements of Minute.. Taking Clayton LeFevere, Attorney, LeFevere, Lefler, Pearson et al Legislative Process: An Overview Lyall Schwartzkopf, Minneapolis City Clerk And now I ask myself, "What did I gain from this institute ? ". Just being once again a student on the.U. of M. campus was an exciting experience which made me wish I had completed my four years. Had I taken courses from the men I heard during this institute, my decision might well have been different. I believe that Joe Kroll, Program Director, Department of Conferences and Continuing Education in Public Policy at the University, did an excellent job in planning the institute and that I was very fortunate in being able to attend.. And I continue to remember George Shapiro's questions "What do you mean ? ", "How do you know ? ", "What Difference does it make ?" and "What can be done about it ? ". June 26, 1977 24 L CitY-' of �pn a 4801 WEST FIFTIETH STREET • EDINA. MINNESOTA 07424 927.8861 July 12,1977 Peter Lametti Construction Company 615 Drake Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 Re: Notice of Award - Contract No. 77 -3A (ENG) Watermain Section IV Gentlemen: The City of Edina hereby accepts your revised Bid Proposal of April 29, 1977, in the amount of $42,841.00, for Watermain as included in our Contract No. 77 -3A (ENG). The following improvement is included under this contract: Section IV - Watermain - Imp. No. WM -319B $42,841.00 LOCATION: Oxford Ave. from Interlachen Blvd. to Hollywood Rd.; Hollywood Rd. from Oxford Ave. to Rutledge Ave. All work on this project shall be .completed by September 15, 1977. The formal contract will be prepared for your execution within the next few days. Requests for payments and all correspondence related to this contract shall refer to the improvement number listed above and Contract No. 77 -3A (ENG). . You are requested to proceed with the work under the authority of this Notice of Award pending execution of the formal contract. Please submit your Performance Bond to the City Clerk prior to actual commencement of work. The Performance and Payment Bond form is enclosed. Insurance certificates submitted for Contract #77 -3 are sufficient to also cover this contract. Please acknowledge receipt on the original and one copy enclosed herewith and return such original and one copy to the City Clerk. Yours very truly, Warren C. Hyde, City Manager Peter Lametti Construction Company Notice of Award - Contract No. 77 -3A (ENG) July 12, 1977 Page 2 ay I t-� (�� Robert C. Dunn, P.E. Director of Public Works and City Engineer The above Notice of Award received this day of July, 1977. Contractor gy. Enclosures cc: City Clerk (Original and One-Copy) Peter Lametti Construction Company Engineering Department Police Department Public Works Department WCH /lkw 3EI I R' City of cEdina 4801 WEST FIFTIETH STREET - EDINA, MINNESOTA 88424 92%9861 July 6, 1977 o. TO: Property owners included in the Oxford Ave. /Hollywood Rd./ Vandervork Ave., Watermain Project, WM -3196. FROM: City of Edina Engineering Department. SUBJECT: Award of Contract. At the May 16, 1977, City of Edina Council meeting, the low bid for subject project was not accepted since a majority of affected property owners had indicated in answer to'a questionnaire that the then estimated cost of $2,622.85 per connection was too high. Mayor Van Valkenberg explained that the improvement has been-- ordered.by the Council and that the Council is now attempting to find an economical and reasonable way for its construction. Since that meeting, we have reviewed our plan and the low bid submitted with the contractor and have determined that by reducing the area of street surfacing to be disturbed, we can reduce the bid to the amount estimated.at the March 21, 1977 hearing, which made the:estimated cost $1,915.89 per connection. It will be our recommendation to the Council at the July 11, 1977 City Council meeting that we award the contract and proceed.with the project on that basis. Please call me at 927 -8861 if you have any questions. Yours very - truly, Robert C. Dunn, P.E. Director of Public Works and City Engineer RCD /lkw Cep,° o °' F •July 8, 1977 Mr. Warren Hyde City Manager City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Subject: NSP Access Road Dear Mr. Hyde: In'- connection with the subdivision proceeding for the Edina Inter- change Center, Fourth Addition, presently before the City Council for preliminary approval, Garron Corporation, as agent for and in behalf of New England Mutual Life Insurance Company, the existing fee owner of the property, hereby offers to sell land to the City of Edina for the purposes of constructing an access road from Ohms Lane to the western boundary of the Edina Interchange Center, Fourth Addition to service the Northern States Power Company land for the amount of $1.50 per square foot plus the assumption of existing special assessments. Said offer to sell shall be subject to the following: 1. The offer to sell shall be valid only until January 1, 1978. 2. The exact location of the proposed access road shall be as mutually determined by the existing fee owner and the City of Edina but, in no event, shall said access road location act as a detriment to surrounding land owned by the existing fee owner. We understand that the City Council preliminary approval of the proposed e ina rchange Center, Fourth Addition shall be con t - tingen upon the rms and conditions of this letter. ® �32 U Le iZZ Steven E. Glage President sl 7400 METRO BOULEVARD* EOINA,•MINNESOTA 55435*612/631 -4000 S' V 1 1 _ f • j k I r CAHILL •. ELEM SCHOOL .l subdivisi NORTH REQUEST NUMBER: 5 -77 -10 LOCATION:W. of Dublin & N. of Kerry Rd. REQUEST: two -lot single family plat. O 250 500 750 1000 I. . village Planning department village of edina EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT June 1, 1977 III. New Business: 6. Subdivision Russelt R. Wilson Subdivision of Lot 6, Prospect Hills 5 -77 -10 First Addition. Generally located west of Dublin Road and north of Kerry Road. Refer to: preliminary plat, location map, Planning Commission minutes of May 3, 1972. Approximately five years ago, the Planning Commission reviewed a three - lot subdivision of Lot 6, Prospect Hills First Addition. As proposed at that time, the three lots would measure 30,400 square feet, 18,900 square feet, and 15,460 square feet,respectively. At that time, the Planning Commission denied the proposed subdivision based on the sizes of the three .lots as they compared with surrounding residences. The - Planning Commission, however, advised the proponent that a two -lot subdivision would be appropriate. The proponent has submitted a revised preliminary plat delineating.two lots. Lot A, which is the location of the proponent's home, measures 33,541 square feet. Lot B measures 249800 square feet. The site is characterized by steep slopes and is heavily wooded. In addi- tion, an existing outlot located at the north end of the subdivision.is proposed to be purchased from the City of Edina to add to Lot A. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the preliminary subdivision in that: 1. The proponent has revised the subdivision as was previously requested by the Planning Commission. 2. Subject property will continue to be used as large single family lots. Approval is contingent on: 1. Parkland dedication fees. 2. Acquisition of the existing outlot on the north end of the subject property from the City of Edina. 3. The proponent obtaining a tree cutting permit prior to construction on Lot B. GH:nr 5 -26 -77 .sec.8,T.116, R.21 r I ` 78�0o sq. f t. ; R15. NO 971 1 1 4 { P PEC 51600 sq ft 63000 601. 89100 ft. 3 51300 sq ��rr •�`�� � 2 � 73800 sq• ff. 9 56700 Oo - -- 10 V& 4 4100 sq.ft. � 14 t 4 1g- gyp• 4860�sq.ft. 31500 sq.ft. ' RIfTM 1S A ,F iI t2 HILLS • I I Lot Division- - ' Prelim. Plat owner . Russel R �wilson 225 825 Planner - Brauer & Associates =V4 ® • -1' w p f. -K I - 8. i n ma .at p 75 525 Subdivision No. S " 77--10 SUBDIVISION DEDICATION REPORT TO: Planning Commission Park Board Environmental Quality Commission FROM: Planning Department Q SUBDIVISION NAME : ec.l 8A PAOSf�� LAND SIZE: A 8'7� � � LAND VALUE: � (By: Date: The developer of this subdivision. has been required to A. grant an easement over part of the land . .� B. dedicate % of the land C. donate $ j��� 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 5% of land dedicated) 1. If property'is adjacent to an existing park and the addition beneficially expands the park. II 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. E3. 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. D 5. If the property is a place of significant natural, scenic or his- toric value. n 6. B. Cash Required 1. In all other instances than above. 2. lotdivision preNminary plat Property Description..- Lot 6, Prospect Hills 1St Add., Sec. 8, T 116 , R.21 Owner -Russel R. Wilson 7008 Dublin Rd. Edina, Mn. I98.08, _ EXISMG ours �V7 Lot A 33541 sq.ft. WILSON RESIDENCE 70 24800 sq . �-- \ R -I,, rverry mu. . % 0, ® A mac$'* „�, i X30 lop C�4?�n f -1 ill? e . _... u.:..:ns. F .�.Y Cri.:: is:: ww.:-:•.: CYs.._' i' Ja. i.. � .U.:;�a:.. ".:.i.+..�6.- L'�.ds.L . t J. 3� � t � � a i I f , lotdivision preNminary plat Property Description..- Lot 6, Prospect Hills 1St Add., Sec. 8, T 116 , R.21 Owner -Russel R. Wilson 7008 Dublin Rd. Edina, Mn. I98.08, _ EXISMG ours �V7 Lot A 33541 sq.ft. WILSON RESIDENCE 70 24800 sq . �-- \ R -I,, rverry mu. . % 0, ® A mac$'* „�, i X30 lop C�4?�n f -1 ill? e . _... u.:..:ns. F .�.Y Cri.:: is:: ww.:-:•.: CYs.._' i' Ja. i.. � .U.:;�a:.. ".:.i.+..�6.- L'�.ds.L . t c� I �© I I 3� � Q 3 � a c� I �© I I r i O/ , 00 1 0 lo sq ft t . 1 FA 0 i 1� l has discussed witn the proponenL Ule JJOS Jbil.lt ' of P.L"�J - + simplify the legal description; however., according to the ordinance, despite the apparent complexity of the division, a lot division does qualify in this instance because no additional buildable lots are being created. Staff recommended approval of the requested lot division in that it is only a minor adjustment of the property lines and is consistent with the approved construction plans for the site. Approval, however, should be contingent on the attachment of Tract 3 to Tract B of Registered Land survey No. 1393. Mr. Greg Gustafson was present and said the. lot division would affect no other property owners other than the one concerned,'Jerry's Enterprises, Inc. He further said they applied for a lot division rather than a plat because of financial reasons and lack of time. Mr. Kremer move; by the st ff and with seconded the motion. 6. Subdivision S -77 -10 i for approval of the proposed division for the reasons stated the contingency as stated in the staff report. Mr. Runyan All voted aye. Motion carried. Russell R. Wilson Subdivision of Lot 6, Prospect Hills .First Addition. Generally located west of Dublin Road and north of Kerry Road. Mr. G. Hughes recalled that approximately five years ago, the Planning Commission had reviewed a request for a three -lot subdivision of the same property. At that time, the Commission had advised the proponent to modify his request into two lots rather than three lots because of surrounding lot sizes. He said the proponent has now returned with a two -lot subdivision request; Lot A of the sub- division, the location of the proponent's existing house, would be 33,541 square feet, and Lot B would measure 24,800 square feet. Mr. G. Hughes said the site is characterized by rather steep slopes and is heavily wooded. In addition, an existin butlot on the north end of the site, owned by the City, would be purchased by the proponent and added to Lot A. Mr. G. Hughes said it may be noted that past procedures for similar requests were for lot divisions; however, a preliminary plat is now required pursuant to new ordinance requirements as it is creating a new buildable lot. Mr. G. Hughes said staff recommended approval of the.proposed subdivision in that: 1. The proponent has revised the subdivision as was previously requested by the Planning Commission. 2. Subject property will continue to be used as large single family lots. Approval is contingent on: 1. Parkland dedication fees. 2. Acquisition of the existing outlot on the north end of the subject property from the City of Edina. 3. The proponent obtaining a tree cutting permit prior to construction on Lot B. Mr. Don Brauer, the architect, was present to answer questions and indicated he felt the request was an appropriate one. Mr. G. Johnson moved for approval of the subdivision request with the con- ditions and for the reasons stated in the.:staff report. Mr. C. Johnson seconded. All voted aye. Motion carried. r I 1'L, YELLOW TAXI COMPANY - SHARE and RIDE Service Area - -- Richfield - Bloomington - Edina Purpose - -- Serve off peak hours. Enable residents to reduce need for 2nd or 3rd cars. Proposed Hours - -- 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. weekdays 6:00 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. weekdays 8:00 a.m. to 11:30 p.m. Saturdays and Sundays Proposed Fare - -- Compromise between bus and taxi fares - $1.00 per passenger Service - -- Compromise between bus and taxi service Passenger must agree to: 1. Share cab 2. Be ready for at least one hour 3. Stay within Service Area Commencement of Service - -- September 1, 1977 or upon approval of necessary governmental agencies Advantages: 1. Flexibility - same vehicles used for: a) Regular taxi service b) Package delivery c) Shared ride 1 2. Reduced capital requirements: a) All equipment presently operating except additional two way radio equipment b) Subsidies limited to operating funds only f o RESPONSIBILITIES Yellow Taxi: ` 1. Provide enthusiastic support. 2. Provide necessary equipment. Determine additional two -way radio needs. 3. Agree to share information with all state agencies. Richfield - Bloomington - Edina 1. Provide enthusiastic support. 2. Obtain enabling ordinances to permit shared ride. 3. Assist in promotion. Department of Transportation: 1. Provide enthusiastic support. 2. Assist in processing of grants and assist in monitoring performance. 3. Assist in promotion. M.T.C.: 1. Provide enthusiastic support. 2. Determine degree of coordination with regular route service. Met Council: 1. Provide enthusiastic support. 2. Approve proposal grants. 3. Assist in promotion. Business Community: 1. Provide enthusiastic support. 2. Assist in promotion. July 8, 1977 MEMORANDUM TO: Warren C. Hyde, City Manager FROM: Gordon Hughes, City Planner RE: Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) Housing Rehabilitation Grant Funding Application Attached are a- proposed resolution and an application for funding. to con- tinue implementation of the MHFA Home Improvement Grant Program in Edina. During Phase I of the program (7 -76 to 7 -77), approximately $28,000 was made available to 13 low income homeowners to correct defects or deficien- cies affecting their health or safety and for energy efficiency improvements. The attached application for Phase II funding requests $34,848, the maximum allotted Edina by the Metropolitan Council. Five percent of the amount is proposed to be reserved for administrative expenses (also the maximum allowed). The remainder, $33,106, would be allocated and distributed to eligible applicants according to the City's Phase I program procedures. (Applications were collected until a certain date; .then, all proposed improve- ments were ranked according to priority and funded, highest priority first, until all available funds were exhausted.) As during Phase I, all home improvement grant. recipients must have 'an adjusted gross income of $5,000 or less. During Phase II, however, the emphasis on funding for elderly recipients has been reduced,-and the MHFA is now . encouraging funding for families and physically handicapped individuals. Seven homeowners have already expressed their. intent to apply for a home improvement grant when funds become available, and several others on our list for Community Development loan funds may be eligible. The application and resolution must be approved by the City Council and re- turned to the MHFA by July 22, 1977. GH:ln:nr Attachments: Application Resolution cc: Mayor and City Counci i APPLICATION for GRANT FUNDING Minnesota Housing Finance Agency Home Improvement Grant Program Year II Name of Applying Entity CITY OF EDINA Address City Zip 4801 West 50th Street Edina 55424 Contact Person Phone 1.ynnae Nye (612 927 -8861 Funding Requested $ 34,848.00 Administrative Allowance Requested $1,742.00 I. Administering Entity Information CLEARLY DESCRIBE THE SPECIFIC GEOGRAPHICAL AREA WHICH YOU WILL SERVE.IN THE GRANT PROGRAM (.example:. "all of Mower County except the City of Austin ") All of-the City of Edina.' II: Funding Request Each Regional Development.Commission has recommended funding levels for areas within its jurisdiction. Consult the ,attached list to locate your maximum funding level. The funding levels listed are for a 12 -month period, however, -in most cases, contracts for a similar level of funding will be renewable for the following year. III. INDICATE THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING REQUESTED: $ 34,848.00 Administrative Costs (a) Funds for the administration of the grant program must come primarily from local sources. However, a small percentage:of the total grant funding requested may be allocated to help cover -such costs if other sources are not sufficiently available. The maximum administrative allowance for cities 1 5%• for count and m lt' t d (b) u i -coun a ministrators; 7 %. An amount not to exceed this listed maximum may e.included as part of your total administrative budget. INDICATE THE PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL FUNDING' REQUESTED FOR ADMINIS- TRATIVE COSTS 5 % INDICATE THE.AMOUNT OF FUNDING WHICH WILL BE DEDUCTED FROM YOUR FUNDING REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS: $ 1,742.00 INDICATE THE TOTAL ANTICIPATED COST OF ADMINISTERING THE GRANT PROGRAM IN YOUR SERVICE AREA: $ 3,100.00 (NOTE: If this figure varies significantly from.the percentages cited above, please attach an explanation of the,variance.) 1 INDICATE THE SOURCES AVAILABLE FOR F..UND'ING'.ADMIN`ISTRATIVE COSTS AND THE CORRESPONDING AMOUNTS: MHFA (from IIIa above) 1,742.00 COUNTY FUNDS 0.00 CITY FUNDS o.'oo COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS`:_ 1,358..00 VOLUNTEER (explain) Public Education 0.00 OTHER (explain) TOTAL IV. Staff Capabilities- (a 3,100.00 INDICATE YOUR PREVIOUS DIRECT EXPERIENCE IN AND INVOLVEMENT WITH HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAMS: ° (1) x PHASE I MHFA GRANT PROGRAM �2) CSA WEATHERIZATION PROGRAM 3) x COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REHABILITATION PROGRAMS (4) FARMER'S HOME ADMINISTRATION (FmHA) SECTION 504 (home repair) (5) HUD SECTION 115 and 312 (6) x HUD SECTION 8 - EXISTING �7) BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS REHABILITATION PROGRAM 8) x MHFA HOME IMPROVEMENT LOAN PROGRAM (9) NO PRIOR EXPERIENCE (10) OTHER (explain) For each of the items checked above,.please indicate: (A) The length of time your agency has been involved with the program; (B) The total amount of funding.channelled through your agency in the program; and (C) The nature of your agency's involvement in the program (e.g., "total responsibility ", "intake only ", etc.) See attached description of previous experience in and in - volvement with housing rehabilitation programs 2 (b) (c) LIST ALL STAFF POSITIONS WHICH WILL BE DIRECTLY INVOLVED WITH THE GRANT PROGRAM. ALSO DESCRIBE THE DUTIES OF THOSE POSITIONS AND' THE AMOUNT OF TIME FROM .EACH TO BE ASSIGNED TO THE GRANT PROGRAM: STAFF.(by position.) DUTIES HOURS /WEEK PER NUMBER OF WEEKS e.g. 1.6 hrs / Publicity, appli- Wk for 20 wks) I Housing Assistance Planner City `Planner I Secretary : cation processing, priority deter-mina- 12 hrs /wk. for tion, "inspection,_" 24 hours disbursement of funds, etc. Presentation to 3 hrs w or City Council 1 week 4 hrs /wk. for Typing, Telephone 24 weeks INDICATE HOW INSPECTION SERVICES WILL BE-PROVIDED IN THE FOLLOWING AREAS: - PLUMBING City HEATING city ELECTRICAL will require state electrical inspection STRUCTURAL city ENERGY RELATED city where possible OTHER (specify) V. Applicant Selection (a) An Administering Entity may, if it desires, establish priorities for the awarding of grant funds. In the event that the number of applications exceeds the number of Grants which can be feasibly awarded, this schedule of priorities may be used as the basis for ranking such applications. Use of such selection criteria constitutes a "targeting" of funds and must be included in the Application for Grant Funding as approved by City Council or County Board. MHFA Grant Funds may be targeted for particular geographic areas; types of improvements, population groups, or to meet specific planning goals or other relevant objectives. Funds may not be-Rtargeted'in such a way as to exclude any particular applicant otherwise eligible under the Procedural Guides from making an application and being considered eligible for a Grant. (b) INDICATE THOSE PRIORITIES WHICH WILL BE USED IN SELECTING APPLICANTS: (1) x PARTICULAR IMPROVEMENT TYPES (specify) See attached Schedule of eligible improve- ments ranked-according to priority. (2) PARTICULAR TYPES OF FAMILIES (e.g.: large families, one - member famili.es, qtc.) (specify) (3) PARTICULAR APPLICANT AGE GROUPS (specify) (4) PARTICULAR GRANT SIZE NEEDED - (specify) (5)- PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOODS OR GEOGRAPHIC AREAS (specify) (6) FIRST COME, FIRST SERVED (7) OTHER .(specify) INDICATE WHETHER OR NOT YOU INTEND TO USE A-GRANT REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR SELECTING APPLICANTS City Council will act on'staff recommendation for.al- x YES NO location after reviewing a tabulation of the ranking of all proposed improv IF NO, HOW WILL APPLICANTS BE SELECTED? ments according to prior- ity (see'attached Schedule). VI. Outreach Methods (a) DESCRIBE THE METHODS THAT WILL BE USED TO PUBLICIZE THE AVAIL - ABILITY OF GRANTS FUNDS: Information will be sent to neighborhood associations and civic organizations. A detailed announcement will appear in the Edina Sun (local newspaper). Staff will an- nounce availability of funds and discuss the program rom ime to time during the "Edina Report" broadcast on WWTC Radio. Public service announcements will be sent to local radio and-m s.a ions. 4 (b) FOR COUNTY AND MULTI - COUNTY APPLICANTS ONLY To encourage the equitable distribution of grant funds throughout county jurisdictions, MHFA is-requiring each county and multi- county applicants to explain the strategy which it will use to ensure that funds are distributed fairly to small geographic areas and /or local units`of government. (Descriptions of successful working distribution models are available from MHFA upon request.) . DESCRIBE THE DISTRIBUTION STRATEGY WHICH WILL BE USED IN YOUR SERVICE AREA. (include attachments as necessary) Not applicable to the City of Edina. 5 VII. County Board /City Council Resolution Attached is-a Resolution Authorizing Application for MHFA Housing Rehabilitation Grant Funds. This resolution must be completed by the appropriate City Council or County Board. ATTACH A COPY OF THE COMPLETED RESOLUTION TO THIS APPLICATION. VIII. Submission This application is approved and submitted -by: Warren C. Hyde City Manager Authorized Representative of Title Applying Entity (print) Signature Date NOTE: THIS APPLICATION WILL BE INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE AS A CONTRACTUAL DOCUMENT IN THIS RESPECT IT WILL BE USED AS A BASIS FOR MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE. WHILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION MAY BE ATTACHED, NO ALTERNATIVE APPLICATION FORMS WILL BE ACCEPTED. Two copies of this application must be submitted directly to: Minnesota Housing Finance Agency Home Improvement Grant Program Hanover Building . 480..Cedar Street St. Paul, MN 55101 All Applications must be received no later than July 22, 1977. 6 Description of Previous Experience in and Involvement with Housing Rehabilitation Programs: 1. Phase I Minnesota Housing Finance Agency Grant Program. A. Length of Time of Involvement: June, 1976, to Present (13 months). B. Total Funding: $28,512.00 C. Nature of Involvement: total responsibility. 2. Community Development Rehabilitation Programs. A. Length of Time of Involvement: June, 1976, to Present (13 months). (on -going programs) B. Total Funding: Community Development funds: $40,000.00 to date; additional $40,000 anti- cipated in August, 1977. (Also utilized to date Minnesota Housing Finance Agency Loan Program Funds in the amount of $144,636.00.) C. Nature of Involvement: Community Development rehabilitation program is operated in conjunction.with Minnesota Housing Finance Agency Home Improve- went Loan Program; generally eligible homeowners who qualify for and obtain Minnesota Housing Finance Agency loan from First Edina National Bank may receive "grant" from City for a percentage of the total loan needed. City of Edina has total responsibility for all aspects of program planning and implementation except processing of Minnesota Housing Finance Agency loan applications. 3. HUD Section 8 - Existing. A. Length of Time of Involvement: i ly, 1976, to Present .(on- going). B. Total Funding: City is reimbursed by Metro H.R.A. for all administrative expenses - approximately $3,000 to date. Funding has been allocated by Metro H.R.A. for 47 units. C. Nature of Involvement: To date, involvement has been limited to processing applications, performing "tenant briefings," and budgeting'-administrative expenses. 4. Minnesota Housing Finance Agency Home Improvement Loan Program. See explanation of length of time, amount of funding, and nature of involve- ment under Community Development Rehabilitation Programs (No. 2). Participating lender has received a Phase IV commitment of $100,000 and City expects to receive additional Community Development funding (Year III) in the amount of $40,000.00. MINNESOTA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY HOME IMPROVEMENT GRANT PROGRAM CITY OF EDINA SCHEDULE OF ELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENTS RANKED ACCORDING TO PRIORITY 1. Improvements Correcting Defects or Deficiencies Affecting Health and Safety: A. Plumbing - Installation, Repair or Replacement 1. Bathroom fixtures and connections 2. Domestic water heaters .3. Sewage disposal systems B. Electric Wiring C. Heating and Ventilating Systems 1. Furnaces and boiler systems; pipes, ducts and radiation; and floor furnaces and wall heaters 2. Exhaust and ventilating fans D. Other Structural Repairs and Alterations 1. Items which improve the accessibility of the property to a handicapped oc- cupant 2. Roofing repair or replacement 3. Foundations. walls, etc. 2. Energy Efficiency Improvements: A. Insulation 1. Blanket, batt, reflective, loose fill types 2. Storm doors and windows 3. Weatherstripping and other insulation 3: Improvements Resulting in Improved Habitability: A. Plumbing Installation, Repair, or Replacement 1. Bathroom fixtures and connections 2. Domestic water heaters, softener and connections B. Electric Wiring C. Heating and Ventilating Systems D. Other Structural Repairs and Alterations 1. Repair or replacement of roof, gutters, and downspouts 2. Foundations, walks, etc. 3. New doors, windows, chimneys, etc. 4. Porch and window screen E. Exterior Finishing 1. Siding and brick, cement, etc. finishing 2. Painting and waterproofing F. Interior Finishing 1. Plastering, wallboard composition, ceramic, plastic and metal tile •2. Composition, linoleum, tile and wood flooring 3. Painting, papering, or other interior work 4. Other Eligible Permanent Improvements IN 7 -7 -77 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR MHFA HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT FUNDS Whereas, the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, State of Minnesota, has been authorized to undertake a program to provide grants of funds to property owners for the purpose of housing rehabilitation; and e Whereas, _ . The city of Edina has developed an application as an Administering Entity for the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency Home Improvement Grant Program; and Whereas, The city of Edina has demonstrated the ability to perform the required activities of the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency Home Improvement Grant Program; • Now, therefore, be it resolved, that The city of Edina is hereby authorized to make application to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for a grant of funds pursuant to the Home Improvement Grant Program; Be it further resolved, that The city of Edina is hereby authorized as an entity to be charged with the administration of funds made available through the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency Home Improvement Grant Program, in the county /city of Edina Approved 1977 By authorized officer Its title HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SUMMARY STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES AS OF JUNE 30, 1977 REVENUE (see separate schedule for details ) ...............$1,476,085.81 PROCEEDS BOND SALE ......................... 2,2005000.00 $3,676,085.81 EXPENDITURES (see separate schedule for details) .......... 3,656,246.12 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURES ................... $ 19,839.69 PROPOSED REVISION OF BUDGET: PRESENT BUDGET .......... :.......................... $3,555,663.00 INCREASE TO REFLECT INCREASE IN REVENUE............ 104,337.00 PROPOSED REVISED BUDGET ................... $3,660,000.00 !`d' HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED REVENUES AS OF JUNE 30, 1977 e Sale of Land: Union Oil Site (City of Edina) $ 65,780.00 Liquor Store Site 105,002.00 $ 170,782.00 Community Development: 29,064.00 1975 (Returned, see expenditures) $ 79,764.00 1975 - 1976 1977 30,000.00 $ 138,828.00 • Special Assessments: $ 68,369.00 General - Over All 1,301.70 1 Peterson 2,765.13 Larson First Edina National Bank 6,752.13 Hooten /Lee 5,678.00 4,570.00 • Sather /Fox 250.00 Hirschey 810.00 $ 709,495.96 Hooten State Aid: Bury and Carlson (21,246.18 Engineering) $ 233,707.99 Collins Electric (8,034.34 Engineering) 88,377.72 A.C.G. Mechanical (1,415.22 Engineering) 15,567.42 Arteka, Inc. (57.58 Engineering) 633.42 Traffic Signals (7,325.90 Engineering) 80,584.90 $ 418,871.45 Reimbursements: 23,038.70 City of Edina - Waterworks Fund $ 4,953.30 City of Edina - Storm Sewer 1,099.00 Herfurth 2,417.40 $ 31,508.40 City of Edina - Liquor Fund Miscellaneous 6,600.00 TOTAL REVENUE .............. $1,476,085.81 LAID ACQUISITION 49k Street Lot: Lund Herfurth Northside Lot: Clancy's Lund's Edina Properties Other: Union Oil: Site Real estate tax Relocation Shell Oil Mobil Oil Twin City Federal Savings &,Loan Liquor store site First Edina National Bank Red Barn Business Properties TOTAL LAND Design: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES As of June 30, 1977 BUDGET Paid through Over (Under) TRANSFERS June 30, 1977 Committed Total Cost Budget Budget IN (OUT) $ 80,987.00 $ 80,987.00 $ 80,987.00 $ -0- 4,977.00 4,977.00 4,978.00 (1.00) $ 85,964.00 $ -0- $ 85,964.00 $ 85,965.00 $ (1.00) $ 44,055.00 $ 44,055.00 $ 44,055.00 $ -0- 80,991.00 80,991.00 80,991.00 -0- 35,704.00 35,704.00 35,704.00 -0- $ 160,750.00 $ -0- $ 160,750.00 $ 160,750.00 $ -0- $ 120,276.19 $ 82,571.40 $ 120,276.19 $ 121,125.00 $ (848.81) $ (800.00)' 4,229.74 29,500.00 4,229.74 (150.00) 4,229.74 4,300.00 10 000.00 536.00 10 000.00 10 000.00 -0- $ 133,464.00 $ $ 134,505.93 $ -0- $ 134,505.93 $ 131,125.00 $ 3,380.93 3,500.00 842.50 842.50 842.00 .50 1.00 6,313.25 6,313.25 6,313.00 .25 1.00 41,679.00 $ 23,521.00 65,200.00 41,679.00 23,521.00 23,522.00 128,064.00 128,064.00 144,264.00 (16,200.00) (16,200.00) 109.00 (109.00) (109.00) 30,000.00 30,000.00 . 30,000.00 30,000.00 2,500.00 2,500.00 2,500.00 2,500.00 $ 430,054.68 $ 184,085.00 $ 614,139.68 $ 571,047.00 $ 43,092.68 $ , 43,215.00 Total project $ 82,571.40 $ 82,571.40 $ 77,000.00 $ 5,571.40 $ 5,600.00 Northside ramp 29,340.80 29,340.80 29,500.00 (159.20) (150.00) Southside ramp 21,375.00 $ 6,125.00 27,500.00 26,964.00 536.00 550.00 TOTAL DESIGN $ 133,287.20 $ 6,125.00 $ 139,412.20 $ 133,464.00 $ 5,948.20 $ 6,000.00 Surveying Northside Parking Ramp: General contract -D. J. Krantz Comstruc.tion Braun Engineering -Soil borings Construction Bulletin- Advertising City of Edina - Sac charge Nordquist Sign- Yield signs Builders risk insurance TOTAL NORTHSIDE RAMP UNDERGROUND UTILITIES: Northern States Power Company Minnegasco Edina Electric Northwestern Bell Telephone Company TOTAL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES Southside Parking Ramp: Purchase from City of Edina Advertising Building Permit Construction - New Addition TOTAL'SOUTHSIDE RAMP PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: A..C.G. Mechanical Inc. Bury and Carlson Collins Electric Company Artika, Inc. Environmental Utilities, Inc. Signal improvements TOTAL PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES (CONT'D) BUDGET Paid through Over (Under) TRANSFERS June 30, 1977 Committed Total Cost Budget Budget IN (OUT) $ 13,962.90 $ 13,962.90 $ 14,559.00 $ (596.10) $ (500.00) $ 561,881.00 $ 561,881.00 $ 561,900.00 $ ( 19.00) 1,743.75 1,743.75 1,750.00 ( 6.25) 57.80 57.80 57.00 .80 1.00 605.50 605.50 605.50 608.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 -0- 741.00 741.00 741.00 741.00 $ 565,089.05 $ -0- $ 565,089.05 $ 563,767.00 1,322.05 $ 1,350.00 $ 14,783.79 $ 18,200.00 $ 32,983.79 $ 58,000.00 $ (25,016.21) $ (24,600.00) 3,160.00 3,160.00 10,000.00 ( 6,840.00) ( 6,700.00) 6,508.35 433.00 6,941.35 10,000.00 ( 3,058.65) ( 2,900.00) 6,000.00 61000.00 10,000.00 ( 4,000.00) ( 4,000.00) $ 24,452.14 $ 24,633.00 $ 49,085.14 $ 88,000.00 $ (38,914.86) $ (38,200.00). $ 452,174.41 $ 452,174.41 $ 440,953.00 $ 11,221.41 $ 110295.00 26.64 26.64 26.64 30.00 273.80 273.80 273.80 275.00 547,600.00 5473,600.00 513,600.00 34,000.00 35,500.00 $ 4521474.85 $ 547,600.00 $1,000,074.85 $ 954,553.00 $ 45,521.85 $ 461100.00 $ 46,142.23 $ 1,612.00 $ 47.,754.23 ($ 47,800.00 $ (45.77) 542,981.01 34,365.58 577,346.59 ( 521,100,.00 56,246.59 $ 56,500.00 137,078.78 137,078.78 ( 137,100.00 (21.22) 59,057.55 59,057.55 ( 59,100.00 (42.45) 1,850.00 1,850.00 ( 1,900.00 (50.00) 91,259.00 91,259.00 91,300.00 (41.00) $ 787,109.57 $ 127,236.58 $ 914,346.15 $ 858,300.00 $ 56,046015 $ 56,500.00 V. CONTINGENCY ITEMS: Advertising Roger Fondell- window wells Reliable Electric - connections Minnesota Lumber & Wrecking -Union Oil Building Twin City Testing - Soil tests Braun Engineering - Soil tests Up A Tree Inc. - Garbage area construction Victor Carlson & Sons Inc. - Sidewalks Kraus - Anderson - Thresholds Arnold Bing - disconnect fountain Aqua City Plumbing - Cleaning water lines Williams Steel and Hardware - Steel for door Axel Ohman - Granite front Burton Olson - Planters Fendell Cement, Inc. - Store entrance Wes Belleson's - Mechanical work . B. A. Rose Music Company - Labor City of Minneapolis - Traffic Signal Ray Londberg - duct work TOTAL CONTINGENCY ITEMS STANCHFIELD ALLEY: City of Edina --Permit Advertising Construction cost TOTAL STANCHFIELD ALLEY MISCELLANEOUS Conferences and schools Northern States-Power Company Ernst & Ernst - Audit Horwitz Mechanical - replace drain Speaker Checks Poucher - Printing of bonds TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS concrete work work HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES (CONT'D) BUDGET Paid through Over (Under) TRANSFERS June 30, 1977 Committed Total Cost Budget Budget IN (OUT) $ 125.08 $ 125.08 $ 130.00 $ (4.92) 1,422.85 1,422.85 1,425.00 (2.15) 136.60 136.60 140.00 (3.40) 650.00 650.00 650.00 -0- 71.50 71.50 75.00 (3.50) 923.00 923.00 925.00 (2.00) 1,120.00 1,120.00 1,125.00 (5.00) 900.00 900.00 900.00 -0- 130.32 130.32 150.00 (19.68) 219.05 219.05 225.00 (5.95) 65.85 65.85 75.00 (9.15) 441.53 441.53 450.00 (8.47) 640.00 640.00 650.00 (10.00) 600.00 600.00 600.00 -0- 2,388.00 2,388.00 2,400.00 (12.00) 243.81 243.81 250.00 (6.19) 28.05 28.05 30.00 (1.95) 1,136.26 1,136.26 1,150.00 (13.74) 138.00 138.00 150.00 (12.00) $ 11,379.90 $ -0- $ 11,379.90 $ 11,500.00 (120.10) $ -0- $ - 10.00 $ 10.00 $ 10.00 $ -0- 61.40 61.E +0 62.00 . (.60) $ 20,704.00 20,704.00 20 728.00 (24.00) $ 71.40 $ 20,704.00 $ 20,775.40 $ 20,800.00 (24.60) $ -0- $ 320.00 $ 320.00 $ 325.00 $ (5.00) 3,051.01 .3,051.01 3,100.00 (48.99) 750.00 750.00 750.00 -0- 35.40 35.40 40.00 (4.60) 50.00 50.00 50.00 -0- 6.99 6.99 10.00 (3.01) 380.50 380.50 725.00 (344.50) $ 4,593.90 $ -0- $ 4,593.90 $ 5,000.00 $ (406.10) $ -0- Terry Foster - relocation assistant City of Edina - interest Legal: Administrative Construction TOTAL LEGAL Payment to City of Edina: Personal services Rent Automobile expense Aerial photo Commodities and services Work orders Return of HUD Grant Improvement - Red Barn Area Improvement - Miscellaneous Properties Contingency HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES (CONT'D) TOTAL $22647,287.04 $1,008,959.08 $3,656,246.12 $32555,663.00 $ 100,583.12 $ 104;337.00 BUDGET Paid through Over (Under) TRANSFERS. June 30, 1977 Committed Total Cost Budget Budget IN (OUT) $ 400.00 $ 400.00 $ 400.00 $ -0- $ -0- 9,373.85 9,373.85 9,373.85 9,400.00 $ 6,384.71 6,384.71 6,400.00 $ (15.29) 23,489.79 $ 10,125.50 33,615.29 33,600.00 15.29 $ 29,874.50 $ 10,125.50 $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $ -0- $ -0- $ 126,351.86 $ 5,000.00 $ 131,351.86 $ 47,650.00 $ 83,701.86 $ 84,281.00 9,900.00 1,800.00 11,700.00 11,700.00 -0- 2,250.00 750.00 3,000.00 3,000.00 -0- 50.00 50.00 50.00 -0- 4,062.80 4,062.80 4,100.00 (37.20) 13 484.44 13 484.44 13 500.00 15.56 $ 156,099.10 7,550.00 $ 163,649.10 80,000.00 83,649.10 $ 84,281.00 29,064.00 29,064.00 29,064.00 29,064.00 35,200.00 35,200.00 35,200.00 -0- 45,700.00 45,700.00 20,200.00 25,500.00 26,000.00 158,873.00 (158,873.00) (158,873.00)` TOTAL $22647,287.04 $1,008,959.08 $3,656,246.12 $32555,663.00 $ 100,583.12 $ 104;337.00 Vr' HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (Revised 6- 30 -77) PROJECT ESTIMATE $3,555,663 PROJECT INCOME $1,289,187 BALANCE $2,266.476 MATURITY SCHEDULE TAX INCREMENT CUMULATIVE YEAR I H.R.A. BONDS I GENERATED I DEFICIT /SURPLUS 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 138,600 138,600 191,100 187,950 184,800 181,650 231,000 224,700 218,400 212,100 205,800 304,500 291,900 279,300 266,700 254,100 294,000 277,000 28,282 39,870 112,224 160,645 188,879 204,075 219,776 236,000 252,763 270,083 287,981 306,475 325,586 345,334 365,742 386,832 351,653 -0- - 110,318 - 209,048 - .287,924 - 315,229 - 311,150 - 288,725 - 299,949 - 288,649 - 254,286 - 196,303 - 114,122 - 112,147 78,461 12,427 + 86,615 + 219,347 + 277,000 -0- Y� '76 '77 '78 '79 '80 '81 '82 '83 '84 '85 '86 '87 '88 '89 '90 '91 '92 '93 '94 i TNPLATION $ 194,111 185,186 185,186 185,186 185,186 185,186 185,186 185,186 185,186 185,186 185,186 185,186 185,186 185,186 185,186 185,186 185,186 185,186 185,,186 B ANK IMPROVEMENT; PER YEAR -'78 $123,195 200,423 208,440 216.778 225,449 234,467 ,243,845 253,599 263,743 274,293 285,264 296,675 308,542 320,884 333,719 347,068 360,951 375,389 390,404 C NEW VALUE OF LAND & BLDGS. BASE- $3,401,290 5% 3,759,761 5% 3,872,554 3% 3,988,731 3% 4,108,393 4,231,644 4,358,594 4,489,352 4,624,032 4,762,753 4,905,636 5,052,805 5,204,389 5,360,520 5,521,336 5,686,976 5,857,585 6,033,313 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ASSESSED VALUE (Revised 6- 30 -77) D INCREMENT OF "C FROM WHICH TAXE ULL BE GENERATE 358,471 471.264 587,441 707,103 830,354 957,304 1,088,062 1,222,742 1,361,463 1,504,346 1,651,515 1,803,099 1,959,230 2,120,046 2,285,686 2,456,295 2,632,023 R CAPTURED INCREMENT A + B + D $ 317,306 385,609 752,097 873,228 998,076 1,126,756 1,259,385 1,396,089 1,536,991 1,682,221 1,831,913 1,986,207 2,145,243 2,309.169 2,478,135 2,652,300 2,831,823 3,016,870 3,207,613 F NEW CONSTRUCTION (NON- CUMULATIVE) NEW MKT.VALUE ASSESSED 4% $180,251/$77,508 1,095,000/470,850 975,000/419,250 380,000/163,400 G 77,508 551,458 992,766 1,195,877 1,243,712 1,293,460 1,345,199 1,399,007 1,454,967 1,513,165 1,573,691 1,636,639 1,702,104 1,770,188 1,840,996 1,914,636 1,991,221 2,070,870 H TOTAL $ 317,306 463,117 1,303,555 1,865,994 2,193,953 2,370,468 2,552,845 2,741,288 2,935,998 3,137,188 3,345,078 3,559,898 3,781,882 4,011,273 4,248,323 4,493,296 4,746,459 5,008,091 5,278,483 ----• Jd /1Afl -,�-4, 2 3� - - 175, coo &f5 70 4- 90,3 c. LY = - -- BYE /S'_--- -- - - -- 30 _aoo------- - - - - -- - -- ..----- ..._ - -__ � -- --- - - - - -- - 3So 0o -- - - - - p -- D(a1q _ t--77, Z —Z- /. o - - -- - - - -- - - .. -- - — - - -- - - -- - -- - - -- - - - -- oo-o l 400, oo -- 2 EjcGc, v o a o, a- 3 a0 0 o v - - -- - - -- .. 4 Lo o 0o i C;, C, �' 3a �. 3D C o00 i7S o00 � .. CARDARELLE & ASSOCIATES, INC. L AND D U N V f YON • 6440 FLYING CLOUD DRIVE w ,a EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 55747, June 29, 1977 Mr. Jarl Dalen City of Edina 4801 test 50th Street Edina, Minnesota Dear Mr. Dalen: Regarding Outlot I, Iroquois Hills Fourth Addition and Outlot I, Irocuois Hills Fifth Addition, I am agreeable to swap these two lots for two in Lake Edina Village Replat, Lots 2 and 3, Block 1. It is my understanding that I can purchase Lot 1 for $15,000.00 and Lot 4,for $10,000.00. This will include all special assessments and taxes to date, also the special assessments and taxes on the Outlots will be paid. First Edina National Bank has the mortgage on our property. This mortgage will be transferred to these two lots as soon as all the legal work can be done. I.hope to do this in thirty days. Since there are soil problems on these two lots, we would like to have 180 days to determine what soil corrections or re- subdivision will be required. We will then pay off the balance on a per lot basis of $10,000.00 for Lot 4 and $15,000.00 for Lot 1, on or before June 30, 1978 or before any soil corrections are begun. Thank you for your consideration in this matter and we hope to get this cleared up in thirty days. nce nk R. Ca FRC:mw cc: Ben Bauer - First Edina Ile .d r hardt t Mortgage Bankers • Realtors June 24, 1977 , y Property Managers • Insurance Agents City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Attention: City Clerk Re: B -77 -14 Sign Ordinance Variance 3250 West 66th Street, Edina, Minnesota Gentlemen: Consistent with the letter from the City of June 20, a copy of which is attached, please be advised that we intend to appeal the decision of the Board of Appeals to the Edina City Council relative to the above denial of our request for a variance. Please advise of the appropriate information and procedures to pursue that appeal to the City Council. Ve "uly yours, James W. "Nelson President dmw enc. 3250 west 66th street•p.o.box 1385•minneapolis, minnesota 55440-phone (612) 920 -9280 '1, 13 Glee rr:n -.load Cna. id ne . a eJ'.ir: c C t�77 De! i r 'I,>- 3":z ur, r'e5 'Jr-11 t n:, In tire`^ :r•J to the ...'_Li7: RO-C, _ r: ,S,Ect:•. :Davinp, - tt_..'.:dJ the °':11 Cn inc11 :_ee: is `: ?1 he-ir,,.' obi n1one ex reEsed concernl"1g both sides, I Yr:..; very die:, . -ointed t,-:at t1.e Couucll did not vote t or• It C^ :_ .a. •1 :! nt tE, i'1'.I ii:E• t_npr. 51•[10E it E ?? been tr:.,ele' until 1':'a; ist, I feel ce.i -e_1led to ap.in ex :rEEF my th ^ughtQ. TnE op- )oeit'lons content° on Is t;,•-t: 1. The road is %fit r�eceesary bec is a cood - arRllel road exlete P. It i._ '�n'r,,A F !;[? c ^End t7 r,�A- —v S•:�':cn`� :e hr ^. r7Od 3. It v'o'xl.f clstarl: wildlife to lra_ld c road L. �-.- ^urdr_on o-d wo-xld ao thr°a. a ^roY•oeed park. As rein in fevor of the continuation of the ;mu ndson Raid ?ro ject, I wo.tld�like to counter their contentions ivith the folloWir,a: 1. The 1:73 'Task Force saw the mundcon Road Project as being' the most deeixoble plan for t: a Southwest quadrant beca' -lee: Q.. Cah ll pse, :roil-' to ,: natural artery for ind -letria.l traffic sto and from the Industrial Park b. kith Dey:ey ;'_'_1 c'ul de sac Ed, this plan wo :ld serve as 6v ideal b'affer between the ind'ietrial and residential arECs c. Ariundeon Road would be an attractive entryway into br a ar ?ark, Braemar Hille aind :.yde ?ark A. The Amundern Road 4'roject v:o.xld also divert any .commercial traffic bet�:een Co'anty :road 1° end the and the Eden Prairie industrial &rea and Tdin^ InOustrial perk. ON. yot only is the money ovsilable at the •resent time for the rro jec t, bat k. bV, the UTC the entry road Is bullt into the .park tree and P. rood into the Findell pr•o ^erty constricted, there will only be a small remaining portion (?er'ha'::s 30 -35%) of the road left to construct 1`. to w&it and eee : hat traffic .pattern develo 's v.,-ill only allow conetracti,on cocte to soar in the face of inflation. 3. In retard to ::ildlife, by the time the forerertion construction is coT -nleted and the car1k developed, wildlife as the people on Lanham Lane and the Brae-mar Oaks Arartmenta have known, will not exist. �. As the city, at the time the Task Force made its recommend£ - tior,e, had not tox�ht the ;'art oronerty, I see this a.s the one v -Aid 'remi ee the o..oner.ts have. 'However: a. PresEnt''_y Ta jot ro�,da r�tiss by, if not thru, 'any of our cities maJor narks (i.e. Braemar, Cornelia., Garden, Country- side and 'J'orictown; . b. Ls 'r. Roe-land pointed o:at at the April meetinE, the west side would be a small neighborhood playgro•ind, the east Fide -%.n ectivi.ty nark. r V. c. !.. '*chcr o ' ; i:':, I fr_ Ci ; �1 ;^��' 1 . :21drFLn e-: -n be i nfor-m- c'. to where `.:1 -'. pho old Ci•ild•ren fo :-Ir . -nd -in 0e- i=: :10 be lice 0 ,- gni"e., cat, t.. E wo•..id 1:(: tae or•1•6 r; �t.�:^'.].F _ of -'- .c rarks '.ocsti:.n. In eddit'_on to co, .xnteri -)r7 tie a.':.csiti.oc;F :olr.ts, I %o'uld. like to c conetr'a^Lion O° ri-n-ine -non ^osc Y'roJEct, the irea°trisl traffic ::O.11a L;- c:;ann,c'Led at "yy from resIdentla"L areas: a. m,. b r -rF a ^i f ` � 1E- dill would '- �+e n•��r..Fr c� c ;.... a err =e �choo dally ��e ear -T ° L•�:,. road is not a t c 99030 :�iai��ir.c4. _ � 'c.', i� t• r it �.�,� t cnr`. •er d----.y .re . ".ro jectc� to °ly'ti f ro�t7 the inductria • t� y area v_a reside^ e — L., Q Ue yo the CY�os-to�:.. at - '. a. Rd. b .he total nurl:bEr of c ^li 6 r:' :i r ected dni'y wo-ald 'cF nvEr 3,000. ;'r::^;; wort: time c_ ti.n.vt of t pose involved in the, ,.:r•o;•oeed ::ark area O. "^,lc :7 it' De f Or iirF �':orit•hs Cf the school yea r, not merely the sum - mer ronthe of the a.r a ::rimne 'uee. 0 . = - c-E -Rents In the area;. cC ricer :3Ed ti7a.t advocate the continua - tion o-O tae tiro jec t a:..° ereYlola by rea.ltors and city officials of the Amundson ^ocd al .n rr,�' oo-z7ht '- Elieving their Invest-nent sound. b. Have been told their ,ro srty values will droo ae mach as Ve 100U if the :project is not continued c. Realize that o pronente on Innnham Lane had access to the same information at Cit;� .:a'_1. It is difficult to under - stand why they invested if they were not in-favor of the project. d. Lanham Dane residents nrorerty is well :above the croposed road and -v ill not be directly affected a.e those ►:ho desire the road a-re and ::ill continue: to be if the road isn't built e. Feel it should be remembered that Braemar Oaks residents are not ;proerty owners. Alt,ho it would be inconvenient for them to move, they wouldn't incur a financial lost. Advocatee of the road are not just from one isolated urea, b:t t h s y come from: a. De�.ey rill Road b. ::eat 70th Street c. Gleason =A cad d. Cahill Road (51co)' �.. I have stoker, with Mr. Hoffman and was told that if the op?oei- tior had not raised its head, the mundson : ro ject would ?resently be on 'go'. Surely this beinE the case, the council mast real- ize t`a! the necessari rese rch and study went into develo ping the Aan. In conclucibn, it is any .:h ^t is best deed, u:hatic beet f the cointF crepented my contention that• the Councils decision should for the greatest number of ceo- "le involved. In- or the City of Edina itself. I urge you to consider herein and vote to ::-saes the Amundson road Project. cncerely ' S, eman /lud S h uen 731 Gleason road o In 49201LON Lane i% f✓ Y1 �., r r'. f c� .. l� 5 Edina, MN 55435 All 7e O / d 1 -- - - %L 44-11 - -- - - Z _ - - - - - - Wiz-- /Y� --�� �c�:-- �=- �-•c._ . ' 15-1 Ile /-- t BNAIS No. 1428 Route to . . . Scanning the States Focusing on arrest records, life in- surance coverage, and personnel file access, three states enact job-related legislation. In Virginia, job applicants need not disclose any information about arrest records that have been expunged un- der a new court procedure designed to safeguard "an innocent citizen's ability to obtain employment." The new expungement procedure makes it a misdemeanor for employers to re- quire applicants to furnish informa- tion about police or court records that have been wiped clean. In Minnesota, employers that spon- sor group life insurance plans for more than five employees cannot re- quire a worker to participate in such a plan, unless the employer is paying the full cost of coverage. An employ- er may not discharge, discriminate, or "otherwise retaliate" against employ- ees who refuse to contribute to such plans, according to the new law, which is not applicable in situations where plan participation is required under a bargaining agreement. In Utah, state employees have gained access to their personnel files, which they may inspect and copy up- on written request. "Confidential' are exempted from dis- closure. The access right is similar to those previously adopted in Califor- nia and Maine. In the Binders Payroll /Compensation —A 5.9 per - cent increase in social security bene- fits becomes effective in July, and is reflected in the new OASDI Benefits Computer. See 353:169 -172. June 30, 1977 Supreme Court Summary Welfare for Strikers .. . A Health, Education, and Welfare Department regulation permitting states to deny welfare benefits to a family if the father is unemployed because of a strike or his own misconduct is upheld by the U.S. Su- preme Court. Reversing a lower court, the Supreme Court decides that the regula- tion does not violate the Social Security Act. The Act directs the Sec- retary of HEW to prescribe standards for states to follow in judging whether a father is unemployed for purposes of determining the fam- ily's eligibility for benefits under the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program. The regulation was reasonable and within the Secre- tary's authority, the Court says, maintaining that the "exclusion of individuals who are out of work as a result of their own conduct" is "consistent" with AFDC's goal of aiding families of the "involuntarily unemployed." (Batterton v. Francis, US SupCt, No. 75 -1181, June 20, 1977) ... Compensation for Dockers Employees injured while handling maritime cargo that has been car- ried inland are eligible for coverage under the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, according to the Supreme Court. In 1972, Congress extended the Act's coverage "shoreward," the Court points out, because "modern cargo - handling techniques had moved much of the longshoreman's work off the vessel and onto land." Rejecting employers' attempts to narrow the coverage of the dockworkers' compensation program, which pays higher benefits than most state workers' compensation programs, the Court says that bene- fits for employees injured at a pier terminal and a truck- loading site should not be conditioned on the "fortuitous circumstance" of wheth- er the accidents occurred on land or at sea. (N.E. Marine Terminal v. Caputo; Int. Terminal v. Blundo, US SupCt, Nos. 76 -444, 76 -454, June 17, 1977) Cotton Dust Clash: CWPS v. OSHA The best method to protect cotton workers from byssinosis, com- monly called "brown lung" disease, is to adopt a performance health standard that would impose fines on employers when employees con- tract the respiratory disease, asserts the Council on Wage and Price Stability. The Council's suggestion appears in a paper submitted to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which is considering a new standard for exposure to cotton dust. OSHA's proposed standard would reduce permissible cotton dust levels in the air by one fifth. According to CWPS, however, "the prob- lem is not that there is too much cotton dust; the problem is that there Rights of redistribution or reproduction belong to copyright owner. Copyright © 1977, THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS, INC., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20037 Bulletin to Management is too much byssinosis." Instead of a stiff air standard, the Council Personnel Shop Talk says, more research should be conducted into the causes of the dis- For many deaf employees, obvious ease. Also, CWPS says, once workers develop the first stage of the impediments exist to "normal" disease, a fine should be levied against the company to force it to devel- communications with co- workers op technology to prevent the disease. This approach could work, the and to telephone contact with per- sons both inside and outside the Council maintains, because the early stages of the disease are detect- workplace. Some companies, how - able and reversible. ever, have taken steps to recognize Frank Greer, a special assistant to OSHA director Eula Bingham, the special needs of their deaf work- says the CWPS suggestion is a `tragic way to view" worker protection ers and to help bring them into the and is an "inappropriate way for a government agency to act." Greer communication mainstream. Both Connecticut General Life declares_ that, in formulating cost - benefit ratios, CWPS should calcu- Insurance Co., Hartford, and Grum- late the "cost of a family losing its breadwinner in his 40s, or the costs man Aerospace Corp., Bethpage, of a person spending the last 10 years of his life on a breathing ma- N.Y., have announced the installa- chine." tion of telephone typewriters at lo- cations where hearing- impaired per - A New Job Market Measure sons are employed. The system makes it possible for a nonhearing Listing the jobs for which workers are in the greatest demand across person to send and receive mes- the country, a new monthly report, "Occupations in Demand at Job sages to and from any other phone Service Offices," is launched by the Department of Labor. The June similarly equipped. After dialing the issue of the report, which is distributed to job counselors, employment desired number, the caller types the service offices, and other locations, shows 150 occupations in high de- message on a keyboard. The ma- chine then converts the words to mand among the 460,000 permanent, full -time openings listed in May tones, which are carried over regu- by Job Service offices. lar telephone wires. At the other The average number of job openings in 148 job bank districts in May end, the tones are translated back was 3,100, the Department says, noting that this figure continues an into words and are printed out either upward trend that began in January, when the average number of open- on a viewing screen or on teletype paper. For employees who have ings was 1,890. Included in industries that recorded increased employ- such machines in their homes, the ment opportunities since January are: building and construction trades system reduces the hassles with pre - and recreation- services (up more than 100 percent); public administra- viously. troublesome . procedures, tion and recreation services (up about 80 percent); primary metals, mo- such as calling in sick. for freight transportation, and leather and food products (up 60 -70 per - While the teletypewriter enables the hearing and nonhearing to com- cent); and real estate and oil and gas extraction (up 50 -60 percent). municate at a distance, a new club at Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton, Ore., is Quota Crackdown Canned encouraging improved face -to -face An employer's unilateral institution of a production quota -dis- communication between the two ciplinary system and subsequent refusal to allow a union representa- groups. "Tek Total Communica- tive to attend "counseling sessions" concerning employees' failures to hears composed of both deaf and hearing employee members, meets meet the quota violated the Taft Act, NLRB rules. once a month during lunch hour to To enforce its new production standards, an employer established a practice sign language skills and ex- disciplinary procedure calling for counseling, suspensions, and termi- plore new ways to normalize the nations for employees whose productivity lagged. Both the new stand- work situation for deaf individuals. ards and the disciplinary system were instituted without notice to, or an offer to bargain with, Teamsters Local 104, the certified bargaining The importance of quality work - representative. In two separate cases, an arbitrator upheld the employ- manship can be difficult to impress er's unilateral action. Later, responding to charges that the firm illegal- on employees who don't see the end - products of their labors. For ly had refused to bargain about the new systems, an NLRB administra- this reason, a parts - producing divi- tive law judge cited the Board's Spielberg doctrine (Labor Relations sion of TRW Inc. periodically ar- 77:402) and deferred to the arbitration awards. ranges "High Quality Attitude" Holding that the ALJ improperly applied Spielberg, the Board points trips for groups of employees. The out that the arbitrators neither addressed nor ruled on the unfair labor Workers spend a day touring a cus- tomer's plant and discovering how practice issues raised by the employer's conduct. Both arbitrators, the their efforts fit into the bigger pro - (Continued on page 7) duction picture. Bulletin to Management, published weekly by The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., 1231 -25th St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037. Tel. (202) 452 -4200. Subscription rate $78 a year. Second class postage paid at Washington, D.C., and at additional mailing offices. Printed in U.S.A. John D. Stewart, Editor in Chief: William Beltz, Executive Editor; John V. Schappi, Associate Editor; Howard J. Anderson, Managing Editor; Ed Neumeyer, Nancy H. Montwieler, Charles F. Piontkowski, Ethlyn Davis, Roslyn T. Rosenberg, Paul A. Massey, Senior Editor. Board of Editors: Bill Manville, Linda J. Stratman, Roger F. Campbell, Jr., Anne M. Lange, Glenn Alan Young, Susan F. Rasky; Mary Green Miner, Director BNA Surveys. Index: Oscar L. Noblejas, Chief Editor. BNA POLICY AND PRACTICE SERIES including Bulletin to Management, Labor Relations, Wages and Hours, Personnel Management, Payroll, and Fair Employment Prac- tices —$425 a year, $405 for renewal. Page 2 work with peop supervisory abuse ... Swearing Match The case discussion below is one of a regular series de- signed to illustrate the handling of everyday problems in human relations. It is based on actual arbitration cases, although names and dialogue are fictitious. Users may find these discussions helpful in supervisory training. Per- mission is granted to subscribers to reproduce materials on this page, with credit to BNA POLICY & PRACTICE SE- RIES, for training purposes within the subscriber's own or- ganization. "What do you mean, the matter's closed ?" snapped Oscar Pontvecchio. "That man shoves me and curses me, makes the vilest references imagi- nable about those I hold near and dear, and you want me just to forget the whole thing ?" "Seems as though we're in a bit of a pickle on this one," supervisor Sheila Washington explained. "His version of that incident differs remarkably from yours, and you have to keep in mind that he is part of the management team." "Did you even bother to check with the people who were standing there witnessing that shameful scene ?" Pontvecchio asked. "Obviously not, since this whole thing reeks of a royal cover -up. I'm de- termined to get an apology from that hooligan, how- ever, so don't think it all ends here." Was management's failure to act justified? Facts: An employee was sent by his supervisor to another department to pick up some equipment. Upon starting back with a load of material, the worker dropped several items. Immediately, an as- sistant supervisor approached, allegedly cursed the employee, and told him to pick up the items. Point- ing out that he had his hands full, the employee said that he would retrieve the fallen material after he unloaded the rest of the equipment. When he re- turned to pick up the items, the worker again was confronted by the supervisor. According to the em- ployee, the supervisor shoved him against a door and addressed him in "abusive, obscene language." The employee subsequently complained to higher management about the incident, but the supervisor denied using any abusive language and instead June 30, 1977 charged that the employee had responded to a legiti- mate order with an obscene "insult" and an "in- vitation to fight." Claiming that it was "stymied" in trying to determine what actually happened, man- agement decided to let the matter drop. Protesting management's failure to take any ac- tion against the supervisor, the employee insisted that if the employer did not prohibit such supervi- sory behavior, workplace "harmony" would be im- periled. The supervisor, the employee contended, should be made to apologize for his conduct. Award: The arbiter holds that the employer must prevent a recurrence of such conduct. (68 LA 893) Discussion: The arbiter says that he "can appreci- ate the quandary" in which the employer found it- self due to the "conflicting versions of the facts." The "case in some respects presents a swearing match," he observes, adding that he "cannot know with certainty what happened." A "preponderance of the evidence," however, convinces him that the employee "was not insubordinate" and that the su- pervisor was at fault. The employee, the arbiter points out, was in the midst of performing a task for his own supervisor when he suddenly was "blasted" by the assistant supervisor's "verbal abuse." Although a "negative response" in such circumstances "would be under- standable and very possibly excusable," the arbiter says, the employee simply -replied -that he -would re- trieve the items as soon as his hands were free. Thereafter, the employee was shoved and again verbally abused, the arbiter finds, stressing that the incidents were witnessed by a co- worker. The evidence shows, the arbiter decides, that the supervisor abused the employee "both physically and verbally." He concludes that management is obliged "to take steps to ensure that such conduct does not happen again." Pointers: Ordering the supervisor to apologize "would be beyond my province," the arbiter as- serts, explaining that management generally is per- mitted "to select, promote, demote, discipline, and terminate its supervisors with little interference." Even in cases where penalizing a supervisor is "the only practical way" to prevent employees from being mistreated, the arbiter says, arbitrators "nor- mally should stop short of specifying punishment of a supervisor and should leave" the form of the dis- cipline to the employer. Thus, for example, in simi- lar cases involving supervisory abuse of employees, one arbiter held that management has the "dis- cretion" to choose "what discipline, if any, to im- pose upon its supervisors" (67 LA 284); and anoth- er arbiter said that he was "without authority to im- pose discipline of any nature" on the supervisor. (67 LA 785) ('ILA" references are to BNA's weekly Labor Arbitration Reports) Page 3 BULLETIN TO MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT DATA 0 EMPLOYMENT M WAGE State Personal Ini State per capita personal income in 1976 ranged from $4,575 in Mississippi to $10,178 in Alaska, according to the U.S. Department of Commerce. The U.S. average per capita income was $6,441, an increase of 9.1 percent. Mississippi's per capita income, although ranking 50th, grew faster (121/4 percent) than most states except for Michigan (13'ri percent) and Maine (1216 percent), which ranked 44th. In the bottom half of the rankings, 17 out of 25 states grew faster than the national average of 9.1 percent between 1975 and 1976, and another equaled the national s. pace. The West accounted fc states: Alaska, Wyoming, I ico, Texas, Oregon, and Aril three others: Maine, New ditional fast growing states and South Carolina in the the fast - growing states ran cent, with an average gai national average by more The smallest gains w percent), Montana (3 per Where Gaid ( Percent changes in personal incomi Source: Department of Commerce WAGES AND SALARIES CHANGE TOTAL FARM MANUFAC- CONTRACT SERVICE AS % OF % OF CHANGE TURING CONSTRUC. INDUS- AVERAGE TOTAL % TION TRY NATIONAL U.S. United States 18.1 6.4 17.7 4.5 18.7 100 100.0 Fast- Growing States 1 Alaska 32.6 15.7 16.3 88.2 39.6 180 .2 2 Wyoming 24.4 102.3 13.0 -4.5 20.6 135 .2 3Idaho 24.0 10.0 34.3 4.7 25.5 133 .3 4 Michigan 23.5 -24.1 39.0 4.4 17.3 130 4.5 5 Maine 23.5 103.6 22.9 46.2 21.2 129 .4 6 Nevada 23.3 43.5 30.7 46.4 25.5 129 .3 7 Utah 23.1 20.1 14.6 36.9 27.8 128 .5 8 New Mexico 22.7 28.9 23.6 12.3 28.7 125 .4 9 Texas 22.6 86.6 20.4 24.5 22.4 125 5.4 10 Oregon 22.6 33.3 29.7 13.7 24.3 124 1.0 11 South Carolina 22.1 19.9 41.9 -.1 22.1 122 1.0 12 New Hampshire 21.9 19.9 27.4 29.9 27.1 121 .3 13 Arizona 21.3 82.9 22.5 -6.6 24.1 118 .9 14 Vermont 21.3 78.3 17.6 10.3 22.2 117 .2 Average 83.5 44.4 85.3 21.9 24.9 130 1.1 Near - Average Growing States 15 Colorado 20.9 -24.0 12.6 15.6 25.8 115 1.2 16 Mississippi 20.7 27.5 26.1 6.5 22.3 114 .8 17 Alabama 20.6 19.9 24.4 4.0 22.0 114 1.3 18 Kentucky 20.3 25.5 21.1 16.9 20.3 112 1.3 19 Georgia 20.0 26.6 29.7 -1.5 18.3 110 2.0 20 Tennessee 19.7 53.7 21.7 -3.6 19.8 109 1.6 21 Oklahoma 19.5 -20.8 21.8 2.7 20.4 107 1.1 22 Louisiana 19.4 -36.5 18.9 30.7 20.1 107 1.5 23 Washington 19.3 -29.9 17.0 25.7 24.9 106 1.8 24 California 19.3 30.5 16.1 9.3 20.7 106 11.1 25 North Carolina 19.0 2.0 30.8 3.8 18.3 105 2.1 Source: Department of Commerce o opff ■ PRODUCTIVITY COST OF LIVING 0 MANPOWER June 30, 1977 Mme 1975 line of the fastest growing Io, Nevada, Utah, New Mex- 9. New England accounted for impshire, and Vermont. Ad- re Michigan in the Mid -West, thern states. Income gains in from 321h percent to 21 per- t 23'14 percent exceeding the 5 percent. recorded in Nebraska (2'/4 ), Hawaii (41'4 percent), and - 1976 Minnesota, Connecticut, and Iowa up about 6 percent each. Sharp declines in farm income were noted in North Dakota (off 6'14 percent) and South Dakota (off 2'14 percent). The table below and the table on the reverse do not reflect the major comprehensive revisions of the national income and product accounts announced January 16, 1976, accor- ding to the Commerce Department. This is due primarily to the different time periods reported on. The table below shows changes from the beginning of 1975 to the end of 1976 while the table on the reverse shows gains during calendar year 1976. Carne From t quarter 1975 to 4th quarter 1976 Published by The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. WAGES AND SALARIES CHANGE TOTAL FARM MANUFAC- CONTRACT SERVICE AS % OF % OF CHANGE TURING CONSTRUC- INDUS- AVERAGE TOTAL. % TION TRY NATIONAL U.S. Near - Average Growing States -Cont 26 Wisconsin 19.0 9.9 15.4 19.1 21.9 105 2.1 27 Rhode Island 18.6 15.4 21.4 4.1 19.1 103 .4 28 Indiana 18.5 28.8 20.4 .8 19.8 102 2.4 29 Kansas 18.5 -2.8 13.7 23.4 22.6 102 1.1 30 Virginia 18.4 -8.0 20.1 3.2 20.7 101 2.3 31 Missouri 18.3 1.1 18.7 20.8 18.6 101 2.1 32 Maryland 18.1 4.0 20.8 3.4 18.6 100 2.1 33 West Virginia 17.9 -57.3 11.7 -4.1 16.6 99 .7 34 Illinois 17.7 5.1 16.3 -.4 15.7 98 6.0 35 Florida 17.1 17.5 15.4 -17.3 17.5 94 3.8 Average 19.1 4.0 19.2 6.8 20.1 105 2.2 Slow - Growing States 36 Pennsylvania 16.5 9.2 8.9 -3.8 .18.6 91 5.6 37 Ohio 16.5 15.1 13.6 .3 17.4 91 5.0 38 Arkansas 16.3 -21.7 27.5 8.9 22.0 90 .8 39 Delaware 16.0 6.8 13.5 .3 16.2 88 .3 40 Massachusetts 15.9 8.8 14.5 -17.8 15.5 87 2.8 41 Iowa 15.5 -7.8 6.8 16.5 23.5 85 1.3 42 Minnesota 15.5 -42.3 15.7 8.7 20.7 85 1.8 43 Montana 15.1 -30.9 26.7 -.2 21.6 83 .3 44 New Jersey 14.6 33.9 10.2 -13.2 15.7 80 4.0 45 Hawaii 14.1 -13.9 5.0 -18.4 18.2 78 .5 46 New York 13.8 30.8 8.9 -19.5 12.0 76 9.6 47 Nebraska 13.7 -31.7 14.0 23.1 22.7 75 .7 48 Connecticut 13.0 22.3 6.4 -15.6 14.2 72 1.7 49 South Dakota 7.4 -64.6 12.9 -.7 21.7 41 .3 50 North Dakota 3.2 -64.0 5.7 2.9 26.9 17 .3 Average 13.8 -10.0 12.7 -1.9 19.1 76 2.3 Published by The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. Bulletin to Management United States New England Connecticut Maine Massachusetts New Hampshire Rhode Island Vermont Mideast Delaware Maryland New Jersey New York Pennsylvania Great Lakes Illinois Indiana Michigan Ohio Wisconsin Plains Iowa Kansas Minnesota Missouri Nebraska North Dakota South Dakota State Personal Income TOTAL PERSONAL INCOME PER CAPITA INCOME % OF 6,430 6,975 8.5 % 3,906 % NATIONAL 6,745 MILLIONS OF CHANGE i CHANGE 26,469 AVERAGE 10.2 1975 1976 1975.76 1975 1976 1975.76 IN '76 RANK 1,257,535. 1,382,457 9.9 5,903 6,441 9.1 100 128,397 74,106 80,536 8.7 6,080 6,590 8.4 102 76,699 21,558 22,981 6.6 6,965 7,373 5.9 114 3 5,070 5,762 13.6 4,785 5,385 12.5 84 44 35,290 38,251 8.4 6,066 6,585 8.6 102 14 4,396 4,912 11.7 5,375 5,973 11.1 93 30 5,457 6,021 10.3 5,888 6,498 10.4 101 16 2,337 2,610 11.7 4,962 5,480 10.4 85 37 Southeast Alabama Arkansas Florida Georgia Kentucky Louisiana Mississippi North Carolina South Carolina Tennessee Virginia West Virginia Southwest Arizona New Mexico Oklahoma Texas Rocky Mountain Colorado Idaho Montana Utah Wyoming Far West California Nevada Oregon Washington Alaska Hawaii Page 6 274,290 297,897 8.6 6,430 6,975 8.5 108 3,906 4,244 8.6 6,745 7,290 8.1 113 5 26,469 29,161 10.2 6,459 7,036 8.9 109 9 49,135 53,327 8.5 6,716 7,269 8.2 113 6 118,953 128,397 7.9 6,564 7,100 8.2 110 8 70,276 76,699 9.1 5,941 6,466 8.8 100 18 251,116 278,076 10.7 6,128 6,793 10.9 105 75,703 83,459 10.2 6,792 7,432 9.4 115 2 30,042 33,175 10.4 5,656 6,257 10.6 97 24 56,490 63,678 12.7 6,169 6,994 13.4 109 10 62,747 68,759 9.6 5,832 6,432 10.3 100 20 26,134 29,006 11.0 5,674 6,293 10.9 98 22 96,582 103,022 6.7 5,788 6,130 5.9 95 17,437- 18,478 6.0 6,076 6,439 6.0 100 19 13,706 15,003 9.5 6,046 6,495 -7.4 101 17 22,835 24,394 6.8 5,817 6,153 5.8 96 27 26,146 28,693 9.7 5,490 6,005 9.4 93 29 9,413 9,690 2.9 6,106 6,240 2.2 97 26 3,680 3,474 -5.6 5,781 5,400 -6.6 84 41 3,364 3,290 =2.2 4,924 4,796 - Z6 '!-"74"' !'c-' "'49" 241,378 267,060 10.6 5,054 5,544 9.7 86 16,799 18,711 11.4 4,648 5,105 9.8 79 47 9,770 10,700 9.5 4,617 5,073 9.9 79 48 47,069 51,434 9.3 5,640 6,108 8.3 95 28 24,981 27,691 10.8 5,072 5,571 9.8 86 35 16,590 18,588 12.0 4,886 5,423 11.0 84 39 18,555 20,689 11.5 4,895 5,386 10.0 84 43 9,568 10,771 12.6 4,079 4,575 12.2 71 50 26,833 29,582 10.2 4,922 5,409 9.9 84 40 13,006 14,599 12.2 4,615 5,126 11.1 80 46 20,559 22,894 11.4 4,909 5,432 10.7 84 38 28,732 31,581 9.9 5,786 6,276 8.5 97 23 8,916 9,822 10.2 4,946 5,394 9.1 84 42 100,503 112,902 12.3 5,486 6,040 10.1 94 11,822 13,208 11.7 5,316 5,817 9.4 90 31 5,467 6,089 11.4 4,768 5,213 9.3 81 45 14,263 15,650 9.7 5,259 5,657 7.6 88 33 68,951 77,956 13.1 5,635 6,243 10.8 97 25 31,738 35,124 10.7 5,585 6,072 8.7 94 15,200 16,797 10.5 5,998 6,503 8.4 101 15 4,248 4,756 12.0 5,177 5,726 10.6 89 32 4,062 4,215 3.8 5,433 5,600 3.1 87 34 5,954 6,731 13.0 4,938 5,482 11.0 85 36 2,274 2,625 15.4 6,079 6,723 10.6 104 13 187,822 207,838 10.7 6,487 7,048 8.6 109 139,388 154,173 10.6 6,596 7,164 8.6 111 7 3,950 4,475 13.3 6,673 7,337 10.0 114 4 13,163 14,743 12.0 5,752 6,331 10.1 98 21 22,292 24,458 9.7 6,284 6,772 7.8 105 12 3,355 3,888 15.9 9,535 10,178 6.7 158 1 5,674 6,101 7.5 6,658 6,969 4.7 108 11 Pension Pointers Final regulations affecting persons providing services and office space to pension and welfare plans under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act are announced by the Labor Department and Internal Revenue Service. The regulations also cover a related class exemption from the Act's prohibited transac- tions provisions for insurance agents and brokers, pension consul- tants, investment company principal underwriters, and others. The service - provider regulations outline the circumstances in which a party in interest, including ficu- ciaries, may receive reasonable compensation for providing neces- sary services and office space to a plan; describe when plan assets may be invested in deposits of banks or similar financial institutions that are fiduciaries or interested parties; and establish conditions under which an- cillary services may be provided to a plan by banks or financial institu- tions acting as fiduciaries. The class exemption permits the listed parties to receive com- pensation, including both fees and commissions, for selling insurance and investment company products and for providing consulting and other services to employee benefit plans, if certain- conditions- are -met; The regulations appear in the June 24 FEDERAL REGISTER. TRENDS ... une 30, 1977 Board says "ignored" NLRB's "well- established" policy that, "in the absence of a specific contract right, the unilateral institution of produc- tion or work standards with accompanying penalties" is an unlawful refusal to-bargain. The employer also violated the Act by barring union representatives from the counseling sessions, the Board concludes, ex- plaining that the "counseling was a preliminary step to the imposition of discipline" and thus fell "clearly within the scope" of the U.S. Su- preme Court's Weingarten (Labor Relations 34:55) ruling. (Alfred M. Lewis, Inc., 229 NLRB No. 116, May 24, 1977) From Lobbies to Linkups Organized labor is developing new strategies designed to win con- gressional approval of its priority legislative programs. Stung by the defeat of the situs picketing bill, the AFL -CIO is redirecting its tradi- tional lobbying efforts into an educational, public - relations campaign aimed at stirring up grass -roots support for labor's goals. High on labor's legislative shopping list is passage of a Taft Act re- form bill, which AFL -CIO officials have characterized as one of orga- nized labor's most important pieces of legislation in years. Other key legislative goals include an increase in the minimum wage rate and ex- tension of bargaining rights to federal, state, and agricultural employ- ees. An example of labor's new, grass -roots tactics appears in the mini- mum wage campaign where labor groups have linked up with civil rights and women's organizations to form a coalition seeking a greater increase than the $2.50 per hour standard proposed by the Administra- tion. A similar coalition will surface this summer to aid labor's drive for passage of the labor law reform bill. Even before the situs picketing setback, the AFL -CIO's executive cotincil` approved" the formation' of a special task force to plan and coordinate_labor's.legislative programs. Headed by Victor Kamber, a former research director of the federation's building trades depart- ment, the task force has an $800,000 budget. The "entire system of retirement needs," including public and private plans and social security, will be "ex- amined very carefully by a "blue ribbon" commission, President Carter announces. Expressing his concern about the "wide difference" in retirement benefits re- ceived by similarly employed workers, Mr. Carter says that another issue to be addressed by the commission is whether or not many private plans are "financially sound." The commission, the President says, will ad- vise him "on what ought to be done to correct these inequities." • Threatened by increased competition, the Office and Professional Employees International Union resolves to strengthen its organizing efforts at banks, law firms, so- cial service agencies, and Blue Cross /Blue Shield. Ad- dressing the union's triennial convention, OPEIU Presi- dent Howard Coughlin warns that at least six "inter- national unions are seeking to organize employees of banks" and that other unions are "active in the in- surance field." In other action, convention delegates ap- prove a dues boost totaling 25 cents by October 1, 1979, and increase the strike fund assessment by five cents, effective October I, 1977. Total cash compensation of chief executives in 100 major corporations rose approximately 17 percent last year, according to Towers, Perrin, Forster & Crosby, management consultants. Median earnings of the CEOs reached $420,000 in 1976, up from $357,800 the year be- fore. Median pay figures for the next two highest -paid executive groups were $293,000 and $237,200, which represented increases of about 20 and 16 percent. Medi- an bonuses totaled about 60 percent of the CEOs' 1976 compensation, the TPF &C study shows, adding that stock options remained the most popular long -term in- centive, although a "significant" trend toward perform- ance- related awards also appeared. • A cutback in cost -free medical coverage for approxi- mately 821,000 active and retired miners is announced by trustees of the United Mine Workers' health and re- tirement funds. Miners covered under the 1950 and 1974 benefit funds must begin paying 40 percent of their doc- tor bills and the first $250 of their hospital expenses, ac- cording to the trustees. The cutback is necessary, trustees explain, because wildcat strikes cost the funds $65 million in coal production revenues over the past three years. Page 7 Bulletin to Management polic; r JUNE, 1977 association of metropolitan municipalities 480 Cedar St., St. Paul, Minn. 55101 1977 OMNIBUS TAX ACT By Roger Peterson This was an unusual year for Uties tax -wise in the Legislature. Due to the early concentrated publicity about property taxes increasing be- tween 20 and 25 %, the Legislators were determined to provide pro- perty tax relief, as well as tighten the screws down on city and county spending. Both houses passed tax bills that were in their own way un- acceptable to cities. We started the Tax Conference Committee from the point of a levy limit decrease from 6% to 5% in one bill and a total elimination of special levies in the other bill. We ended the conference committee preserving the best points -in both bills and eliminating most of the bad elements from both bills so that on the whole, organi- zationally, we either held our own or made a few gains. That is not to say this bill is a panacea for all cities, but many did receive significant relief. While cities were not granted any new wild levy power, there was recognition that some flexibility and growth was needed. Levy Limits Special levy for judgments is restricted to Torts. The following special levies are eliminated: lawful orders, state mandated programs, normal PERA and social security pen- sions, increased county court costs, public assistance program administrative costs, and natural disaster costs. • Current levy made under these, except natural disasters, will be added to the base. At the time a levy would have ended it will then be subtracted from the base. It was the legislative intent that any future need for these items be brought to its attention by special legislation for each local community. • Special levy for matching grants will be only to the extent of the minimum required local share. • All other special levies, including unfunded laibility pensions per the 1969 guidelines act remain. • The four year commercial/ industrial special levy not only remains intact but at the end of four years, 50% of the amount levied will be used to increase the levy limit base.` • The six percent limit increase remains and is applied against the previous year's base. • The declining population provi- sion is eliminated and increasing population provision retained.' • Any city or town having a levy limit base per capita less than 80% of the county average may have its per capita increased to the 80% average.- • A one time reverse referendum provision without penalty is added which may be used in 1977 or 1978 to increase the levy limit base up to 10 %, if the previous year's levy was 98% or more of the allowable levy. This requires 4 weeks publi- cation, a public hearing, and 30 days wait. If no petition is filed equal to 5% voting in the last general election or 2,000 voters, whichever is less, the resolution increasing the base is effective. If a petition is received, a referendum election must be held. The increase must be certified by October 1st, so timing is critical. The process should start by no later than mid July. Does not apply to first class cities or counties containing first class cities.* NO. 9 • Special levy for shade tree disease was provided through the Shade Tree bill. • Preliminary opinion from the Commissioner of Revenue indi- cates mandatory planning costs will be outside the levy. A separate mailing will discuss the various funding mechanisms for this item. Local government aids • Increases from $45 in 1977 to $52 in 1978 (15.6 %) to $59 in 1979 (13.5 %) distributed to each county and the metropolitan area based on 1970 census population.' • Distribution within county will be the greater of 1970 population or the average of 1970 and current estimated population.' . • The mill _ rate and sales ratio factors remain as they were except for Minneapolis and St. Paul. A theoretical mill rate will be calculated based on allowable levy. 60% of this rate plus 40% of the actual mill levy will be used for the mill rate factor.' • Municipal board orders will include population numbers for state aids. • Local governments may object to aids and if found to have not received the proper amount be awarded more from the general fund. Effective 1980 there will be an improper assessment penalty based on the co- efficient of dis- persion of $1 per capita between 10 and 12.5, $3 per capita between 12.5 and 15 and $5 per capita over 15.' • Increases attached machinery aids by 25% to cities, counties and towns.' *Take special note. — important change or provision. Tax Act Cont. Page 4 -41T ft- -1 Annual Meeting in Review r-- r •fT 1WA gyp' 4 / • , ��y�/ 1 fj 1 , 1 �1 f A, i b I 1r )) • t �t it . .j 'Board Meets Every M onth The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities' Board of Directors meets on the first Thursday of every month (except when a holiday comes on or near that date). Meetings start at 7:30 P.M. and are held in the conference room at the Association office, 300. Hanover Bldg., 480 Cedar St., St. Paul. All city officials are welcome to attend the Board meetings, express their views on any subject and bring any subject to the attention of the Board. Due to security regulations, the building front door must be locked at 8:00 P.M. Anyone arriving after that time, please find a phone (nearest is Capp Towers) and call the Association office for ad- mittance (222- 2861). MAY 1977 i j lid i �. 1 .. r. Nearly 100 city officials gathered at the Fox and Hounds Restaurant in Maplewood on the evening of May 25th for the third Annual Meeting of the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities. The main order of business was election of officers for the 1977 -1978 fiscal year and recog- nition of those who have served the organization this past year. The other major order of business was a legislative summary of the main bills which passed in the 1977 session. Detailed accounts of these items can be found elsewhere in this News- letter. We wish to express our thanks to Ziegler Caterpiller, Inc. for pro- viding afree social hour for our members and the Fox and Hounds' staff for their excellent service. SLIDE PRESENTATION A new version of "The Associ- ation of Metropolitan Municipalities — An Investment In The Future" should be complete by early July. This tape and slide presentation de- picts the accomplishments and goals of the Association and will in- clude information on policy status through the 1977 legislative session. If any member community would like this presentation made at a local council meeting or other civic affair or knows of anon- member city that might be interested, please notify the AMM office (222- 2681). Representatives from the Board and staff will appear before.. your council to show the 15 minute pro- gram and be available to outline cur- rent activities and policies, as well as respond to questions. Schwarzkopf, Demos named. officers Lyall Schwarzkopf, Minneapolis City Clerk, was elected President of the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities at the 1977 Annual Meeting this May 25th. Also chosen at the meeting were June Demos, Roseville Mayor, for Vice President, and nine new Board members. Mr. Schwarzkopf served as Association. Vice President this past year and as a Board Director since the organization formation in 1974. Lyall's background is well suited for pursuing Association legislative in- terests. He was appointed Minne- apolis City Clerk in 1972 and is pri- marily responsible for his city's lob- bying effort at the State Legislature. He served as a State Representative for nine years (1963 -1972) and has a Bachelor's Degree in political science from the University of Minnesota. In addition to his many other activities, Mr. Schwarzkopf is a member of the Committee on Aging for the Minneapolis United Way, a Board member of the Institute of Municipal Clerks, and will serve as a Board Director for the League of Minnesota Cities this coming year. Mrs. Demos has a long history of involvement in Roseville com- munity activities and government. Since 1963 she has served on the City Growth Committee, Govern- ment Study Committee and Plan- ning Commission. In 1969 she was appointed to the District 623 School Board and in 1973 served on the legislatively created Local Govern- ment Commission of Ramsey County. June was elected to the Roseville City Council in 1973, at which time she served as liaison to the Planning Commission and be- gan her participation on various 1. Association committees studying metropolitan issues. She was elected to a four year term as Mayor of Roseville in 1975 and elected to the Association Board of Directors in 1976. Seven persons elected to the Board of Directors for two year terms were: Dick Asleson, Apple Valley Administrator; Walt Dziedzic, Minneapolis Alderman; Jack Irving, Crystal City Manager; Myra Lobeck, Oakdale Councilmember; Bruce Nawrocki, Columbia Heights Mayor; Mark Vaught, St. Paul Assistant to the Mayor; and Duane Zaun, Lake- ville Councilmember. Elected for a one year term were Robert Hansen, White Bear Lake Mayor and Irving Stern, St. Louis Park Mayor. Current Board members serving the remaining year of two year terms are: Wayne Courtney,. Edina Councilmember; Maynard Eder, Lake Elmo Deputy Treasurer; David Hozza, St. Paul Councilmember; James Krautkremer, Brooklyn Park Mayor; Duane Miedtke, St. Anthony Mayor; and Larry Thompson, Way- zata City Manager. Josephine Nunn, Champlin Mayor, will serve as Past President. Tax act continued from page 1 Property Tax and Relief Measures Contract for Deed sales certif- icates must be recorded with County Auditor for assessment purposes. Clarifies the 10% or 25% of Dif- ference market value increases. • Provides a local government must certify its new levy by October 10th each year or receive the same levy as in the previous year.* . •• Property tax statements will be mailed by January 31st so that cir- cuit breaker claims may be filed with income tax returns. Provides that a homeowners assessment be reduced if it exceeds 10% of the average assessment in that taxing district based on sales ratio studies. This will apply mainly to new construction and sales but can apply to any homestead property if the revenue department can establish rules of proof.' • AG land value shall be the aver- age of sales price and free market rental income rate capitalized at 9% which will decrease farm market values. • State Share of AFDC payments increase from 50% to 60 %. • Reclassifies AG and Homestead property (1977- 78 -79). AG Home- stead — 20 and 33-1/3 to 18 and 31 to 16 and 30. Homestead — 25 and 40 to 22 and 36 to 20 and 33 -1/3. • Homestead base increases to $15,000 in 1978. • AG Homestead acreage increases from 120 to 160 in 1979. • AG mill differential increasesfrom 12 to 15 mills in 1978. • EARC local effort reduces from 29 mills to 28 in 1978 and 27 in 1979. Other measures in the Omnibus Tax Bill included: • Individual income tax and em- ployer's excise tax changes. • Dependent care income tax credit increases. • Occupation tax changes • Taconite production tax increase. • Establishment of a permanent legislative tax study commission which, among other issues, will concentrate on local government financing.' Circuit breaker changes and more refund based on income. In conclusion, this year has to be classified as the year in which the legislature recognized growth. The aid formula uses population and the levy base grows for in- dustrial but does not decline for population loss. •'Legislature Appropriates Over $28 Million For Local Shade Tree Disease Control By Vern Peterson One of the major priorities of the Association during the recently completed Legislative session was to'obtain legislation which would enable the cities in this metro- politan area to fashion a shade tree disease control program tailored to each city's diverse needs. The Association policy contained several elements which we felt were essential to the success of local pro- grams and which should be con- tained in the state legislation. I am happy to report that by working very closely with the chief House and Senate authors (Rep. Tom Berg and Senator Skip Humphrey) and the Department of Agriculture virtually 100% of the Association policy recommendations were incor- porated into the final bill as passed. The key provisions of this new law (Session Laws, 1977, Chapter 90) are as follows: $21,650,000 in state funds for 1977 and 1978 for matching grants to local units of govern- ment for sanitation purposes. The State can match up to 45% of the local costs for a sani- tation program on public and private property. Sanitation is defined as the identification, in- spection, disruption of a com- mon root system, girdling, trim- ming, removal and disposal of dead or diseased wood of elm or oak shade trees. 2. $4,400,000 in matching State funds for 1977 and 1978 for re- forestation. Grants for refor- estation are for public property only and the State match shall not exceed the lesser of 50% of the cost or $40 multiplied by the number of trees planted. 3. $550,000 in matching state funds for 1977 and 1978 for wood utilization and disposal systems. For disposal grants, State match is limited to 50% and is further limited to cities over 40,000 population or combinations of cities meeting this population criteria through joint powers agreements. 4. The cost to a local unit for shade tree diseased control is a special levy and is not subject to levy limits. It is a two year special levy commencing with the levy made in 1976, payable in 1977 and terminating with the levy made in 1977, payable in 1978. However, local units can make a supplementary levy in 1.977, payable in 1978, for cost incurred in 1977 for which a levy was not made in 1976, payable in 1977. Also incorporated in the law as passed is a legislative "intent" state- ment which directs the Pollution Control Agency to give high priority to economic considerations in re- lation to granting permits for con- trolled open burning sites for the disposal of diseased wood. Last, but not least, is a provision which al- lows the Department of Agriculture to make advance payments on a quarterly basis to the local units. Each local unit can determine if it wishes to receive advance pay- ments or wait until the end of the year to receive its grant on a reimbursement basis. The war to save the magnificent urban forest which exists in this metropolitan area is far from won. Hopefully, however, local units of government will now have the necessary tools to win enough "battles with the beetles" so that re -' forestation efforts with other shade tree species can keep pace with the elm and oak loses. CHASKA — Newest Member The most recent municipality to become a member of the Associ- ation of Metropolitan Municipalities is the city of Chaska, located on the Minnesota River in Carver County. Chaska's latest population estimate is 7,082. The Association official membership now stands at 55 cities. The Mayor. of Chaska is Leon Schmidt and the councilmembers are: Milo Born, Barry Fox, Cyril Leivermann, Jr., and Clyde Ryberg. Chaska City Administrator is Jim Main. Everyone welcomes Chaska to the Association and looks forward to their input at the various committee and membership meetings. Association 1977 Legislative Policy Success — 56% Legislation, department of revenue regulations, and metro- politan area policy adopted during the 1977 Legislative session fully implemented twenty five of the fifty five separate Association policies and partially implemented another five. The 1977 Omnibus Tax Act and the Shade Tree Disease Control bill, as reported in separate stories, accounted for several policy enact- ments. In addition, the Legislature created a Tax Conciliation Court and made some adjustment to the timing of a property tax appeal and a method of award per our policies. Several policies dealt with pre- serving current law and bills intro- duced for changes were defeated. These included eliminating bill- board advertising property tax, limiting assessment procedures for office and hotel property and es- tablishing construction incentives borne solely by local government. One of the major concerns prior to the 1977 Session involved various policies related to housing in the metropolitan area. Funds for re- habilitation and increased M.H.F.A. appropriations were granted, state mandated zoning restrictions were not enacted, and at this time it ap- pears that the Metropolitan Council will undertake a detailed housing market analysis in the near future. Two other very important policies were continuation of Tax Increment Financing and the establishment of a local Government Revenue and Finance Study Commission. Both of these were successful this year. However, there will be an interim study on tax increment financing and some modification will be made by the 1978 Legislature. A total AMM policy summary is currently being prepared and will be sent to each city in the near future. Memorandum G l2 7/-7 7 TO: Mr. Warren Hyde, Yanager FRO ;t: Arlin Waelti, Administrative Assistant RE: Question: Wether the one percent reduction in aggregate assessment by the City Board of Review applies to the current or previous year's aggregate assessment. CONCLUSION: The Edina Board of Review may reduce the entire valuation of the City by no more than one percent of the aggregate assessment made by the Edina Assessor during the current 1977 year. DISCUSSION: Minnesota Statute 273.061, subd. 9 provides that "...A local board of review shall have the power to reduce assessments upon petition of the taxpayer but the total of such adjustments shall not reduce the aggregate assessment made by the county [citJ assessor by more than one percent of said aggregate assessment." Minnesota Statute 273.063 provides that in cities having a population of 30,000 persons or more, the duly appointed city assessor shall have the powers and duties of the county assessor. Therefore, the "aggregate assessment made by the county assessor" in Minn. Stat. 273.061, subd.9 above refers to the current assessment just completed by the City Assessor. It is this aggregate assessment that can be reduced by only one percent. If the aggregate assessment is lowered by more than one percent, none of the adjustments made will be allowed. New legislation passed in 1977, Chapter 434, Laws 1977, allows the county to further reduce the aggregate assessment of the entire county by no more than another one percent. Minn. Stat. 274.13, subd. 1 (5). However, the county still has the authority to raise the aggregate valuation as a class without due process notice. This is distinguished from the situation where the county might raise an individual property valuation. In an individual property valuation, the property owner would have to be notified first and given an opportunity to be heard. The third step in this process is provided in Minn. Stat. 270.12, subd, 2 (6) where the Commissioner of Revenue sits as the State Board of Equalization and as such may not reduce the aggregate value of all property in the state by more than one per cent below the total reported by the county boards of equalization. He may order a reassessment of property in any district in which he deems itnecessary. I have double checked all of the above coni'lusions with William Slavin, Director of Property Appraisal, Division of Property Equalization, Department of Revenue. i'Mk CURRENT ASSETS: CASH: Demand Deposits Working Fund Accounts Receivable Loan To Other Funds Inventory: Liquor Wine Beer and Mix Prepaid Expenses: Unexpired Insurance Supplies Inventory LIQUOR FUND BALAN'C E SHEET CITY OF EDINA AS AT MAY 31, 1977 ASSETS TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS FIRED ASSETS AT COST: Land Land Improvements Buildings Furniture and Fixtures Leasehold Improvements Less: Allowance for Depreciation and Amortization Construction in Progress CURRENT LIABILITIES: 474,502.21 3,500.00 $ 478,002.21 100.00 415,000.00 $ 295,158.41 189,839.88 31,075.34 516,073.63 $ 1,678.20 400.00 2,078.20 $1,411,254.04 $ 152,518.85 $ 21,474.17 481,643.80 149,325.01 3,035.55 $655,478.53 228,072.46 427,406.07 $ 579,924.92 39,281.35 619,206.27 TOTAL ASSETS $2,030,460.31 LIABILITIES AND SURPLUS Trade Accounts Payable $ 83,093.80 Accrued Payroll 7,754.46 $ 90,848.26 Due to Other Funds 3,188.50 SURPLUS: Invested in Fixed Assets $ 619,206.27 Unappropriated 1,317,217.28 1,936,423.55 TOTAL LIABILITIES AND SURPLUS $23,030,460.31 LIQUOR DISPENSARY FUND COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF INI:OME AND EXPENSE CITY OF EDIPIA Five Months Ending May 31, 1977 and May 31, 1976 INCREAME•OECREJISE0 1977 11976 fi York -iisl� Crandview ' Total 50th St. Yorlydnle " . Grandview Total -'.50th St. Yorkdale Grandview Total ALES: LIG;,or $148,481.37 $372,781.73 $333,005.44 $ .854,268.54 $207,342.85 $381,113.91 $307,816.90 $ 896,273.66 $ 58,861.48* $ 8,332.18* $ 25,188.54$42,005.12* Wine 46,502.58 157,566.46 130,528.33 334,597.37 61,068.53 138,372.90 98,388.08 297,829.51 14,565.95* 19,193.56 32,140.25 36,767.86 lacer 42,422.14 123,650.93 •95,922.04 261,995.11 65,776.64 119,650.28 84,373.56 269,800.48 23,354.50* 4,000.65 11,548.48 7,805.37* Miaand Miscelloneoy, 3,763.23 12,043.34 9,755.84 25,562.41 5,723.56 11,796.32 8,752.34 261272.22 1,960.33* 247.02 1,003.50 _ 709.81* $241,169.32 $666,042.46 $569,211.65 $1,476,423.43 $339,911.58 $650,933.41 $499,330.88 $1,490,175.87 $ 98,742.26* $15,109.05 $ 69,880.77$13,752.44* Less bottle reFunds 7,336.54 22,707.48 20,916.23 50,960.25 6,420.24 10,774.77 8,739.30 25,934.31 916.30 11,932.71 12,176.93 25,025.94 NET SALES _3,832.78 $643,334.98 $548,295.42 $1,425,463.18 $333,491.34 $640,158.64 $490,591.58 $1,464,241.56 $ 99,658.56* $ 3,176.34 $ 57,703.84$38,778.38* :C ;T OF SALES: Inventory - lanuo4 109,208.09 218,953.44 195,612.91 523,674.44 172,534.05 214,596.83 219,022.28 606,153.16 63,325.96* 4,356.61 23,509.37 *82,478.72* ?urchases 202,130.96 522 694.41 476,510.45 1,201,335.82 282,023.92 539,395.82 431,058.42 1,252,478.16 79,892.96* 16,701.41* 45,452.03 51,142.34* $311,339.05 $741,647.85 $672,023.36 $1,725,010.26 $454,557.97 $753,992.65 $650,080.70 $1,858,631.32 $143,218.92* $12,344.80* $ 21,942.66133,621.06* Inventory- May31 112_,747;73 199,242.36 204,083.54 516,073.63 169,350.04 221,938.85 233,559.96 624,848.85 56,602.31* 22,696.49* 29,476.42408,775.22* $198,591.32 $5421405.49 $467,939.82 $1,208,936.63 $285,207.93 $532,053.80 $416,520.74 $1,233,782.47 $ 86,616.61* $10,351.69 $ 51,419.08$24,845.84* GROSS PROF$ '35,241.46 $100,929.49 $ 80,355.60 $ 216,526.55 $ 48,283.41 $108,104.84 $ 74,070.84 $ 230,459.09 $ 13,041.95* $ 7,175.35* $ 6,284.76$13.932.54* :FEPATIN G EXPENSES SC! ;in3 18,956.14 28,052.51 25,080.16 72,088.81 24,122.86 27,569.94 _21,694.42 73,387.22 5,166.72* 482.57 3,385.74 1,298.41* O.crhead 5,228.61 13,728.07 10,657.14 29,613.82 5,381.17 10,949.01 8,817.86 25,148.04 152.56* 2,779.06 1,839.28 4,465.78 Ad- inistrative 17,016.57 20,426.34 17,915.96 55,358.87 21,337.87 22,888.92 21,499.12 65,.725.91 4,321.30* 2,462.58* 3,583.16 *10,367.04* TOTAL OPEnATIh 41 .201.32 $ 62,206 92 $ 53,653.26 $ 157,061.50 $ 50,841.90 $ 61,407.87 $ 52,011.40 $ 164,261.17 $ 9,640.58* $ 799.05 $ 1,641.86$ 7,199.67* EXFENSE' NET OrERAT.N% 5,959.86* $ 38,722.51 $ 26,702.34 $ 59,465.05 $ 2,558.49 *$ 46,696.97 $ 22,059.44 $ 66,197.92 $ 3,401.37* $ 7,974.40* $ 4,642.90$ 6,732.87* PROFIT OTHER INCGr.1E: Ccsh DiscOuot 20862.74 7,053.46 6,571.57 16,487.77 21828.55 6,324.59 4,646.05 13,799.19 34.19 728.87 1,925.52 2,688.58 Cash over or under 19.16 26.48* 80.52 73.20 2.24 50.60* 15.49_ 32.87* 16.92 24.12 65.03 106.07 Irccme on rove! 518.75 518.75 518.75 518.75 other _ 612.82 612.82 2,095.18 2,202.29 1,649.81 5,947.28 1,482.36* 2,202.29* _ 1,649_.81* 5,334.46* NET INCOM11 4,013 47 $ 7,026.98 $ 6,652.09$ 17,692.54 $ 4,925.97 $ 8,476.28 $ 6,311.35 $ 19,713.60 $ 912.50* $ 1,449.30* $ 340.74$ 2,021.06* 1,,946.39* $ 45,749.55 $ 33,354.43 $ 77,157.59 $ 2,367.48 $ 55,173.25 $ 28,370.79 $ 85,911.52 $ 4,313.87* $ 9,423.70* $ 4,983.64$ 8,753.93* PERCENT TO NET SAL Gress profit 15.07% 15.69% 14.66% 15.19% 14.48% 16.89% 15.10% 15.74% O;erating expenses 17.62 9.67 9.79 11.02 15.25 9.59 10.60 11.22 uperoting profit 2.55 %* 6.02% 4.87% 4.17% .77 %* 7.30% 4.58% 4.52% Other income 1.72 1.09 1.21 1.24 1.48 1.32 1.29 1.35 NET INCOME- .83 %* 7.11% 6.08% 5.41% .71% 8.62% 5.79% 5.87% I.