Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-11-16_COUNCIL PACKETAGENDA EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EDINA CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 16, 1992 ROLLCALL ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA - Adoption of the Consent Agenda is made by the Commissioners as to HRA items and by the Council Members as to Council items. All agenda items marked with an asterisk ( *) and in bold print are Consent Agenda items and are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of such items unless a Commissioner or Council Member or citizen so requests, in which case the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the Agenda. EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY * I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of HRA Meeting of November 2, 1992 * II. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS III. ADJOURNMENT EDINA CITY COUNCIL COMMENDATION - Edina High School 1992 Girls Tennis Team PROCLAMATION - Home Care Week in Edina I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of the Regular Meetings of October 19 and November 2, 1992 II. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REPORTS ON PLANNING MATTERS Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by Planner. Public comment heard. Motion to close hearing. Zoning Ordinance: First and Second Reading requires 4/5 favorable rollcall vote of all members of Council to pass. Waiver of Second Reading: 4/5 favorable rollcall vote of all members of Council required to pass. Final Development Plan Approval of Property Zoned Planed District: 3/5 favorable rollcall vote required to pass. Conditional Use Permit: 3/5 favorable rollcall vote required to pass. A. Preliminary Plat Approval - Mark Dalquist Addition - Lot 11, Auditor's Subdivision No. 325 (Contd from 11/2/93) B. Appeal of Zoning Board of Appeals Decision - Variance to Install Satellite Antenna on Roof - 5324 62nd Street West (Contd from 11/2/92) III. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS IV. AWARD OF BIDS * A. Extension of City Properties Garbage Contract V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS A. Approval of Traffic Safety Committee Minutes of November 10, 1992 B. Set Hearing Date - 1993 Board of Review (4/12/93) C. 1993 Council Meeting Dates D. Minnesota Chemical Health Week E. LWV Open Forum - City Services Agenda Edina City Council November 16, 1992 Page 2 VI. COMMUNICATIONS /PETITIONS ' A. 10/15/92 Letter Regarding Metered Ramps Hwy 100 - Sentinel Management Company VII. INTERGOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES' A. Proposed 1993 LMC Policies and Priorities VIII. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF MAYOR AND COUNCIL IX. MANAGER'S MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS X. FINANCE * A. Payment of Claims as per pre -list dated 11/11/92: Total $1,170,4.41.98 and for confirmation of payment of Claims (October handwritten checks): Total $386,853.66 SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING'MEETINGS /EVENTS Thurs Nov 26 THANKSGIVING DAY - CITY HALL CLOSED Fri Nov 27 DAY AFTER THANKSGIVING HOLIDAY - CITY HALL CLOSED Mon Nov 30 Truth in Taxation Hearing - 1993 Budget 7:00 P.M. Council Chambers Mon Dec 7 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. Council Chambers Wed Dec 9 Continued Truth in Taxation Hearing 7:00 P.M. Council Chambers (if needed) Mon Dec 14 Joint Council /School Board Meeting 5:00 P.M. District Boart Mon Dec 21 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. Council Chambers MINUTES OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY NOVEMBER 2, 1992 ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Commissioners Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, and Richards. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ADOPTED Motion was made by Commissioner Smith and was seconded by Commissioner Kelly to approve the HRA Consent Agenda items as presented. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice; Smith, Richards Motion carried. *MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 19, 1992, APPROVED Motion was made by Commissioner Smith and was seconded by Commissioner Kelly to approve HRA Minutes of October 19, 1992. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *CLAIMS PAID Motion was made by Commissioner Smith and was seconded by Commissioner Kelly to approve payment of HRA claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated October 28, 1992, and consisting of one page totalling, $40,219.16. Motion carried on rollcall` vote - five ayes. There being no further business on the HRA Agenda, Chairman Richards declared the meeting adjourned. Executive Director COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, IIOV 11, 1992, 1:17 AM page 1 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 12349 11/16/92 $3,434.72 BRW INC. PROF FEES ARCH AND EN 66654 CENTENNIAL LAK PRO FEE ARCH/ < ■> $3,434.72" 12350 11/16/92 $1,350.12 DORSEY & WHITNEY PROFESSIONAL FEES AUD 295804 CENTENNIAL LAK PRO FEES AUDI <•> $1,350.12" 12351 11/16/92 $18.00 KUCERA, JODI PARKING PERMIT REFUND 1029 50TH STREET PARKING PERMI < ■> $18.00" 12352 11/16/92 $435.00 VANTAGE ELECTRIC MISCELLANEOUS 012283 50TH STREET MISC <•> $435.00" $5,237.84" COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY WED, NaV 11, 1992, 1:22 AM page 1 ------------=----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- FUND # 01 $5,237.84 $5,237.84" oe,� v• onPopul o iaas RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION EDINA HIGH SCHOOL 1992 GIRLS' TENNIS TEAM WHEREAS, the Edina High School 1992 Girls' Tennis Team was Lake Conference Champions, Section VIAA Champions and State AA Champions; and WHEREAS, success has come to the members of the Team because of their extraordinary ability, hours of practice and the leadership of their coaches; and WHEREAS, as representatives of the City of Edina, the members of the Team exemplified the highest standards of athletic proficiency and good sportsmanship. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that sincere congratulations be extended to members of the Team: Maggi Agustsson, Lauren Barnett, Julie Erskine, Anne Faust, Ashley Fuller, Heather Hannan, Alexandra Hays, Kathryn Meyer, Elizabeth Mitchell, Erin Nagy, Molly Simons, Kathryn Tagatz, Kirsten Tagatz, Anne Underwood, Carrie Veker and Kirstin Veker, and to their coaches, Steve Paulsen and Daniel James. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution be recorded in the Minutes of the Edina City Council and that copies be given to members of the Team. ADOPTED this 16th day of November, 1992. MAYOR o e�! ch lass PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, Edina citizens of all ages and economic levels are concerned about high - quality, affordable, long -term health care. Home care provides a wide range of these needed health and supportive services to the ill, elderly, disabled, and infirm in their own homes. The concept of home care is the oldest and most enduring tradition of health service delivery in the United States of America; and WHEREAS, surveys show that most people prefer to receive medical care and related supportive services in their own homes. There is also a significant and growing body of evidence that home care services stimulate quicker and fuller recoveries and improvements than comparable services within institutions; and WHEREAS, home care allows our disabled and chronically ill citizens of all ages to remain with their loved ones in surroundings that are familiar and comfortable. In so doing, home care helps preserve one of the country's most important social values, keeping families together; and WHEREAS, as our citizens require more in -home care, Edina's home care agencies are meeting that challenge. Home care agencies are providing services ranging from assistance with personal care to high -tech intravenous drug therapies; and WHEREAS, with rapidly rising health care costs, home care offers a practical means of providing health care and related services to those who desperately need them. By offering these services in the home, we can treat our elderly, disabled, and chronically ill population comfortably, cost- effectively, and with high - quality, individualized health care and supportive services; NOW, THEREFORE, I, Frederick S. Richards, Mayor of the City of Edina, do hereby proclaim November 29 through December 5, as HOME CARE WEEK in Edina, coinciding with our National "Home Care Week ", and urge all citizens to recognize the efforts of home care providers, and the families and friends of the elderly and disabled who providO such important services in the home. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed November 16, 1992, and affixed the Seal of the City of Edina. With this proclamation, I want to welcome a new home health care agency to our community. Firstat Nursing Services is a locally owned and operated Home Health Care Company and joins the other fine Edina home health care agencies in providing care to the citizens of Edina. Mayor If,-- t SM Nursing Seruices 1 tat SM Nursing Services I Douglas E. King Principal. 6750 France .-\ve. South. Suite 290. Edina. MN 55435 (612) 920.6060 FAX (612) 920-3316 6750 France Ave. South. Suite 290. Edina. MN 55435 (612) 920-6060 FAX (612) 920 -3316 NON 1 tat SM Nursing Services I Douglas E. King Principal. 6750 France .-\ve. South. Suite 290. Edina. MN 55435 (612) 920.6060 FAX (612) 920-3316 6750 France Ave. South. Suite 290. Edina. MN 55435 (612) 920-6060 FAX (612) 920 -3316 TWENTY REASONS FOR here is no question in my mind that home care is the wave of the future. There is growing public demand for health care services that are available to the public in their own homes. The reasons for this trend are complex. They have to do with tradition, with tech- nology, and with cost effectiveness. 1. It is delivered at home. There are such positive feelings that all of us associ- ate with being home. Our home is our castle, our refuge from the storm. When we are not feeling well most of us ask to go home. When we are feeling well, we enjoy the sanctity of our residences and the joy of being with our loved ones. 2. Home care represents the best tra- dition in American health care. Home health agencies were started as public agen- cies to seek out the poor and the needy who otherwise would go without care. No one was turned away. This is still true for most of America's home health agencies. 3. Home care keeps families together. There is no more important social value. It is particularly important in time of illness. 4. Home care serves to keep the eld- erly in independence. None of us wants to be totally dependent and helpless. With some assistance, seniors can continue to function as viable members of society. S. Home care prevents or postpones Institutionalization. None of us wants to be placed in a nursing home unless this is the only place where we can obtain the 24- hour care that we need 6. Home care promotes healing. There is scientific evidence thatpatients heal more quickly at home. 7. Home care is safer. For all of its lifesaving potential, statistics show that a hospital is a dangerous place. The risk of infection, for example, is high. It is not uncommon for patients to develop new health problems as a result of being hospi- talized. These risks are eliminated when care is given at home. 8. Home care allows a maximum amount of freedom for the individual. A hospital, of necessity, is a regimented, regu- lated environment. The same is true of a nursing home. Upon admission to either, an individual is required to surrender a signifi- cant portion of his rights in the name of the common good. Such sacrifices are not re- quired at home. by Val J. Halamandaris 9. Home care is a personalized care. Home care is tailored to the needs of each individual. It is delivered on a one -to-one basis. 10. Home care, by definition, involves the individual and the family the care that is delivered. The patient and his fam- ily are taught to participate in their health care. They are taught how to get well and how to stay that way. 11. Home care reduces stress. Unlike most forms of health care, which can in- crease anxiety and stress, home care has the opposite effect. 12. Home care is the most effective form of health care. There is very high consumer satisfaction associated with care delivered in the home. 13. Home care is the most efficient form of health care. By bringing health services home, the patient does not gener- ate board and room expenses. The patient and/or his family supply the food and tend to the individual's other needs. Technology has now developed to the point where al- most any service which is available in a hospital.can be offered at home. 14. Home care is given by special people. By and large, employees of home health agencies look at their work not as a job or profession but as a calling. Home care workers are highly trained and seem to share a certain reverence for life. 15. Home care is the only way to reach some people. Home health care has its roots in the early 1900s when some method was needed to provide care for the flood of immigrants who populated our major cit- ies. These individuals usually did not speak English, had little money, and did not un- derstand American medicine. The same conditions exist now to some extent be- cause of the new wave of immigrants and the large number of homeless individuals who roam our streets. 16. There is little fraud and abuse associated with home care. Other parts of the health care delivery system have been riddled with fraud and charges of poor care. There have been few, if any, major scandals related to home care. 17. Home care improves the quality of life. Home care helps not only add years to life, but life to years. People receiving home care get along better. It is a proven fact 18. Home care Is less expensive than other forms of care. The evidence is over- whelming that home care is less expensive than other forts of care. Home care costs only one -tenth as much as hospitalization and only one - fourth as much as nursing home placement to deal with comparable health problems. 19. Home care extends life. The US General Accounting Office has established beyond doubt that those people receiving home care lived longer and enjoyed living. 20. Home care is the preferred form of care, even for Individuals who are terminally ill. There is a growing public acceptance and demand for hospice care, which is home care for individuals who are terminally ill. In short, home care is the oldest form of health care. Health care has been tradition- ally given at home throughout the centu- ries. It is also the'newest. Modem technol- ogy has developed to the point where virtu- ally anything that is available in a hospital can be provided at home. 'There is signifi- cant evidence that it is less costly than other forms of care, and that it is the most satisfy- ing form of health care available to the American public. Little wonder that the public is demanding that it be made more available. It is an idea whose time has come. Please send me your reasons for why you have found home care to be preferable as a health care alternative. Send them to me cto CAR- ING, 519 C Street, NE, Washington, DC 20002 - 5809 —VJH. Reprinted from CARING Magazine, Vol. IV, No. 10 (October 1985). CELEBRATE HOME CRE11 NATIONAL HOME CARE WEEK NOVEMBER 29- DECEMBER 5,1992 a• 1992. National AssxauonforHorne Care 519 C S!reet. NE Wasn,-•cton DC 20002 -5809 CELEBRATE HOR CARE11 All across America, home care providers bring high- quality health care and supportive services into people's homes. Whether it's for a simple or complex condition, needing short-term or long -term care, your local home care agency has the solution. NATIONAL HOME CARE WEEK NOVEMBER 29- DECEMBER 5, 1992 Representing the nation's home care agencies, home care aide organiiatlons, and hospices. Ads may be used without further consent from the National Association for Home Care. For additional information and more extensive use of art, please contact the National Association for Home Care, 519 C Street. NE, Washington DC, 20002 -5809; 202/547 -7424. ©1992, National Association for Home Care HOAHE CARE11 NATIONAL HOME CARE WEEK NOVEMBER 29- DECEMBER 5,1992 s 1992. Na:ona Assocaaon for Home Ca,e 519 C Street. NE Washington. DC 20002 -5809 CELEBRATE All across America, home care providers bring high - quality health care and supportive services into people's homes. Whether it's for a simple or complex condition, needing short-term or long -term care, your local home care agency has the solution. NATIONAL HOME CARE WEEK NOV. 29-DEC. 5,1992 HOMICARE11 1992. National Assoaatron lor Home Care 519 C Street. NE Washington. DC 20002 -5809 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL OCTOBER 19, 1992 ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith and Mayor Richards. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ADOPTED Notion was made by Member Smith and eras seconded by Member Rice to approve and adopt the Consent Agenda items as presented. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice,.Smith, Richards Motion carried. D.A.T.E. AWARD PRESENTED TO JERRY'S SUPER VALUE Curt Wiehle, Disability Awareness Team of Edina (D.A.T.E.), explained that Governor Carlson.has proclaimed the month of October as Disability Employment and Awareness Month. D.A.T.E. is commending Jerry's Super Value for their continuing practice of hiring the disabled. The federal government recently passed the Americans With Disabilities Act guaranteeing rights to people with disabilities and ensuring that they will have equal employment. Mr. Wiehle presented a plaque to Ken Heintzen of Jerry's Super Value for their commendable effort in hiring persons with disabilities. EMPLOYEE DON ENGER COMMENDED Manager Rosland introduced Don Enger, an employee of the Edina Police Department since 1960. He mentioned a letter from Noel Rahn, 7119 Antrim Road, recognizing the extraordinary efforts of Mr. Enger after a burglary at the Rahn home. Manager Rosland commended Mr. Enger for his tireless efforts in solving the crime and'presented him with a silver pen bearing the City logo. Council members joined in commending Mr. Enger for his tremendous effort. *?MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 5. 1992, APPROVED Notion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by,Member Rice to approve the Minutes of the regular meeting of October 5, 1992. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. PUBLIC HEARING CONCLUDED ON SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENT NO. HRA 90 -10 FOR 50TH STREET AND FRANCE AVENUE BUSINESS DISTRICT Assistant Manager Hughes recalled that the subject assessment, Streetscape Improvement No. HRA 90 -10 for the 50th and France Avenue business district, was continued from the Council.meeting of October 5, 1992. On October 5, the City received correspondence from Cineplex Odeon with respect to the Edina, Theater. The letter advised of a discrepancy in the measurement of the theater. According to Cineplex Odeon, the gross floor area of the building comprises 14,731 square feet and not 27,835 square feet as listed on the assessment roles. Staff has reviewed building plans for the theater and concludes that Cineplex Odeon's measurements do not include the second story or mezzanine levels of the building. Therefore, staff recommends that the assessment be levied based on the original calculation provided in the assessment roles. A letter had also been received from Dr. James Layer, owner of the 50th and France Building at 3939 W. 50th Street, not refuting the assessment but asking that more explicit information be provided to property owners who are receiving assessment notices. Assistant Manager Hughes said the analysis for the streetscape improvement showed a total construction cost of $2,284,304.20, less 808 tax increment reimbursement, for a total assessable cost of $456,860.84 proposed to be assessed against all commercial properties at 50th and France at $1.214 per square foot. Assessment to be spread over ten years. No further comment or objection was heard. Member Bice introduced the following resolution and moved adoption: SPECIAL. ASSESSMENT LEVIED ON ACCOUNT OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City has given notice of hearing as required by law on the proposed assessment rolls for the improvements hereinafter referred to, and at such hearing held on October 5, 1992 and concluded on October 19, 1992, has considered all oral and written objections presented against the levy of such assessment. 2. The assessment as set forth in the assessment rolls on file in the office of the City Clerk for the following improvement: Streetscape Improvement No. ERA 90 -10 does not exceed the local benefits conferred by said improvement upon the lot, tract or parcel_of land so assessed, and all of said assessment is hereby adopted and confirmed as the proper assessment on account of said respective improvement to be spread against the benefitted lots, parcels and tracts of land described therein. 3. The assessment shall be payable in equal installments, the first of said installments, together with interest at a rate of 8.5% per annum, on the entire assessment -from the date hereof to December 31, 1993, to be payable with the general taxes for the year 1993. To each subsequent installment shall be added interest at the above rate for one year on all then unpaid installments. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows: Name of Improvement No. of Installments STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENT NO. HRA 90 -10 10 years (Levy No. 12595) 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith prepare and transmit to the County Auditor a copy of this resolution and a certified duplicate of said assessment with each then unpaid installment and interest set forth separately, to be extended on the tax lists of the County in accordance with this resolution. 5. The City Clerk shall also mail notice of any special assessment which may be payable by a county, by a political subdivision, or by the owner of any right -of- way as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.061, Subdivision 4, and if any such assessment is not paid in a single installment, the City Treasurer shall arrange for collection thereof in installments, as set forth in said section. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Kelly. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Resolution adopted. *PUBLIC HEARING ON SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR TREE REMOVAL IMPROVEMENT NO. TR -92 - 4231 OAKDALE AVENUE CONTINUED TO 11/2/92 Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice to continue the public hearing on the special assessment for Tree Removal No. TR -92 at 4231 Oakdale Avenue to November 2, 1992. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. FINAL REZONING TO PRD -2 PLANNED RESIDENCE DISTRICT AND FINAL PLAT APPROVED FOR VERNON HILL ADDITION Presentation by Planner Planner Larsen reminded Council that at the September 21, 1992, meeting preliminary rezoning and preliminary plat approval for eight double dwelling units or a total of 16 units was granted for the subject property consisting of four acres, located south of Vernon Avenue and north of Vernon Court. The proponent is now requesting final rezoning and final plat approval. Staff would recommend final rezoning and final plat approval, subject to: l) Subdivision dedication based on an unimproved land value of $400,000.00, 2) Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Grading Permit, and 3) Retaining wall plan engineered by and signed by a registered professional engineer. Planner Larsen recalled that one condition of preliminary approval was the granting of proposed front yard setback variances by the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Board heard and granted the variances at their October 1, 1992, meeting, subject to the condition that the homeowner's agreement address the parking issue. The Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Board will consider a grading permit that would cover grading and drainage issues for this project at their October 21, meeting. The proposed development plans remain the same as those given preliminary approval. Presentation by Proponent David Carlson, developer, said he had met with Pat and Doug Borth, 6521 Gleason Court, (the property directly east of the proposed development) and would like the record to show that he agreed to the following: 1) to extend the Borth's existing fence along their west property line to their garage, 2) to move three trees that might be in conflict with the property line, and 3) to install a split rail fence on the property line. He also met with Naomi Evans, 6518 Gleason Court, and had agreed to: 1) move the invisible fence for her dog onto her property, and 2) provide three 10 foot evergreen trees on her property. Mr. Carlson stated that Gerald Backman from Schoell & Madson, Inc. was present to answer any engineering questions. Mayor Richards noted that a letter from Naomi Evans, 6518 Gleason Court, was presented to the Council stating her concerns about the proposed development and the results of the meeting with Mr. Carlson. No other comments or objections were heard. Member Kelly moved Second Reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 850 -A1 as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 850 -A1 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE (NO. 850) BY ADDING TO THE DOUBLE DWELLING UNIT DISTRICT (R -2) FOR VERNON HILL ADDITION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. Subsection 850.06 of Section 850 of the Edina City Code is amended by adding the following thereto: "The extent of the Double Dwelling Unit District is enlarged by the addition of the following property: That part of lot 23 lying W of a line running N from A pt in S line of lot 23 dis 676 3/10 ft E from SW cor thof and par with W line thof and lying N of hwy also subject to Vernon Court Auditor's Subdivision No. 169 Hennepin County, Minn. City of Edina. PID# 06- 116- 21 -21- 0005(24). The easterly 150.00 feet of the westerly 825.74 feet of the Northeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 116, Range 21 as measured at right angles to the west line of the Northeast Quarter and lying northerly of the northerly right of way line of County Road No. 62. PIN# 06- 116 -21 -21 -0006. Section 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and publication. ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Member Paulus. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Ordinance adopted. Member Kelly then moved adoption of the following resolution, subject to (i) payment of a subdivision dedication fee of $32,000.00, (11)) Pine Mile Creek Watershed District grading permit, (iii) retaining gall plan engineered by and signed by a registered professional engineer, and (iv) development agreement to include items agreed to by the developer as recorded above: RESOLUTION GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL FOR VERNON HILL ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota that that certain plat entitled "VERNON HILL ADDITION ", platted by David Carlson Company, Inc. and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of October 19,' 1992, be and is hereby granted final approval. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Paulus. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Resolution adopted. APPEAL OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS DECISION CONTINUED TO 11/2/92: STAFF TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT IN SUPPORT OF BOARD "S DECISION DENYING VARIANCE TO INSTALL SATELLITE ANTENNA AT 5324 WEST 62ND STREET Presentation by Planner Associate Planner Aaker informed Council that on October 1, 1992, the Zoning Board of Appeals heard and denied James Aufderheide's request to allow a roof mounted satellite dish antenna at 5324 West 62nd Street to remain mounted without benefit of a permit on their single family home. Section 815 of the Edina City Code states that unless otherwise exempt, no antenna, dish antenna or tower of any kind shall be erected, constructed or placed anywhere in the City without first obtaining a permit from the City. Additionally, only dish antennas less than six feet in height and less than nine square feet in cross section area are exempt from the permitting process, and unless otherwise exempt, a dish antenna may not be located on the roof of an R -1 or R -2 zoning district dwelling unit. The ordinance limits the location and placement of satellite dishes to the rear yard area only. Setback must be closer to the principal building than the buildable area of any neighboring R -1 or R -2 lot and must respect setbacks of the principal building. In addition, the height of the dish cannot exceed 12 feet from the base of the mount attached to the ground to the top of the dish. The applicant has 'indicated that the dish height as measured from the roof to the top of the structure is 12 feet and has provided a site plan to clarify his request. The drawing illustrates where the dish has been located on the roof and proximity to trees which the applicant has stated blocks signals if the dish were to be located in a conforming location. The Board did not accept the proponent's contention that the obstruction of some of the signals caused by trees is a unique and specific hardship and denied the variance request. Staff would recommend upholding the Board's position. On October 5, 1992, a letter was received from Mr. Aufderheide appealing the decision of the Board and asking to be on the Council agenda October 19, 1992. Attorney Gilligan interjected that, if the Council desires to deny the requested variance, counsel would recommend the matter be continued and that staff be directed to prepare findings of fact in support.thereof. It was noted that letters objecting to the roof mounted satellite dish were received from the following: Ross and Chris Rifkin, 5320 W. 62nd Street; Douglas Mahal, 5320 Maddox Lane; Douglas Lambert, 6205 Hansen Road; D.F. Darney, 5324 Maddox Lane; Bill Dubbs, 5316 Maddox Lane; and William and Elizabeth Short, 6209 Hansen Road. By letter dated October 14, 1992, Walter Rockenstein II, attorney for James Aufderheide, submitted substantial documentation in support of the variance request. Presentation by Proponent James Aufderheide, 5325 West 62nd Street, stated he felt he has met the hardship requirements for granting the requested variance. Further, he believed the variance should be granted for the following reasons: 1) heavy tree cover would not allow the satellite signal to be received if placed on the ground as any shadow on the antenna would prohibit reception, 2) a mesh dish antenna was selected to lessen impact and was placed on the lowest possible roof area in the rear, 3) neighbors have given conflicting opinions of where they would prefer placement of the dish, and 4) many signals via satellite are not available through any other median, specially Korean programming (cultural and language) which is important to the family because his wife is Korean: Mr. Aufderheide concluded by saying he hoped the Council'would see the benefits of satellite reception and the effort he had made to accommodate everyone involved to the of his ability. Public Comment Dan Darny, 6324 Maddox Lane, commented that Mr. Aufderheide, being in the business of selling and installing satellite dishes, should have known that a permit was required. He said the satellite dish.was directly - within his sight line and was very offensive. Further, he felt the dish was larger than the ordinance allows and that Mr. Aufderhiede should obey the ordinance as written. Debra Snyder, 5321 West 62nd Street, concurred with Mr. Darny that he has the full view of the roof mounted dish and that she was somewhat relieved when it was installed on the roof ,because she would be impacted if it were ground mounted. Although she could understand the Aufderheide's need for satellite reception, she pointed out that Mr. Aufderheide did know the regulations when he installed the dish on his roof as he worked with the City when the current ordinance was being considered. Knowing that, she questioned why he bought the home when'he knew its limitations for locating a satellite dish. Mrs. Snyder said she felt in fairness to all concerned, she hoped an alternate location could be found for the dish that would be acceptable. Council Action Member Smith made a motion to continue the matter to November 2, 1992, and that, staff be directed to prepare findings in support of the decision of the Board of Appeals to deny the variance request to-install a satellite antenna on the roof at 5324 Qest 62nd Street. Motion was seconded by Member Kelly.' Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. FIRST READING GRANTED FOR ORDINANCE NO. 1992 -1 - AMENDING CITY CODE BY ADDING NEW SECTION 1046 (PARKING AND STORAGE OF VEHICLES) Assistant Manager Hughes recalled that on October 5, 1992, the Council continued discussions concerning the proposed Code Section 1046 regarding parking and storage of vehicles.. To affect an amendment to the Code, the Council should adopt an enacting ordinance. Accordingly, staff has prepared Ordinance No. 1992 -1 for the purpose of amending the -Code by adding a new Section 1046 which is identical to the draft that was discussed on October 5, 1992. Assistant Manager Hughes gave a brief overview of the proposed new Section 1046 as follows: 1. Commercial usage vehicles and inoperable vehicles must be stored indoors. 2. Outdoor storage of RVs, boats, ATVs, snowmobiles, special purpose trailers would be allowed, but limited to no more than two such vehicles per lot, only one of which could be a RV. 3. Vehicle must be owned or leased by the occupant of the lot where stored. 4. Vehicle must be stored in the side yard but not closer than five feet to the side lot line or 25 feet from the rear lot line. No storage would be allowed in the front or side street setback area. 5. Vehicles stored outdoors must be parked closer to the house of the vehicle owner than to the buildable area of an adjacent lot. 6. Vehicles may be.parked in the driveway for seven days or less for loading and unloading purposes or to accommodate visitors. Such vehicles must be parked at least 15 feet from the street and five feet from the side lot line. 7. Section 1046 provides for a variance system administered by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Residents.within 200 feet of the proposed variance would be notified of the variance hearing. If granted, the Board may attach conditions to the variance, i.e. screening, etc. Board action may be appealed to the Council. The variance may be transferred to another vehicle provided that vehicle is not longer, wider, taller or older than the vehicle for which the variance was initially granted. Assistant Manager Hughes explained that these provisions are the same as the ordinance reviewed by Council in August, 1992. What has been added, at the Council's direction, is a grandfather system whereby existing RVs, boats, ATVs, snowmobiles and trailers may continue to be parked in the driveway in R -1 and R -2 lots, subject to the following: 1. Vehicle must be operable. 2. No more than one vehicle would be permitted in each driveway. 3. Vehicle must not be within 15 feet of the street or five feet from the side lot line. 4. Grandfathered vehicle would not be transferable to a different vehicle or lot. Public Comment: Gary Bartolett, 7421 Gleason Road, said the statement in the ordinance that says any City employee may enforce the grandfather provision sounds like vigilantism. He questioned the definition of commercial vehicles based on size not on use, which he feels is discriminatory regulation. He objected to the proposed Section 1046 because he felt all of the problems are still there, only the verbiage has been changed substantially since August. Howard Walters, 420 John Street, commented that he had attended a standing room only Council meeting five years ago regarding the same subject. He said he uses his RV for business, pleasure, and community service regularly and would like this to continue. His concerns were: 1) what if his guests stayed longer than the allowed seven days, 2) variance not transferable to a new vehicle or lot, and 3) one. driver households cannot store RVs off site. He objected to any change to the existing ordinance. Gary Alan Bartolett, 7421 Gleason Road, spoke to his letter received October 9, 1992. He called proposed Section 1046 unfair and possibly an illegal infringement on the rights of private property owners. The City has no legal claim to what is parked on his driveway which is private property. Further, he believed Section 1046 is unconstitutional, which would be decided by the courts. Council has two choices: 1) reject Section 1046, or 2) pass Section'1046 and waste taxpayer's money on legal fees and monetary damages. He concluded by saying that he hoped the Council Members would give serious consideration to the possible ramifications of their action.:. Bill Hansen, 5801 Johnson Drive, voiced concern about the grandfather clause in the proposed ordinance as it would allow storage parking area in the front yard. He made reference to a RV parked across the street from his home that is used two months out of the year. RVs in front yards are not normal driveway usage and should not be parked there. He said the majority of the residents of the City depend on the Council to do the right thing by restricting such vehicles. Mayor Richards read a letter from Alta Fossum, 6712 Cahill Road, stating she feels that RVs, boats and snowmobiles are unattractive and blight the City. She stores four boats off site and asked the Council to legislate so as to make it impossible for people to store these vehicles in their yards. Council Comment /Action Member Kelly commented that the Council has worked hard on this issue and that she was involved in this process five years ago when it was before Council. She felt the proposed ordinance would establish a process of regulation that will benefit all the residents of Edina. Member Paulus said she could not support the proposed ordinance because she does not feel a resident can be told where on his property to park and store vehicles but would support the existing ordinance. She added that she felt the variance process will be cumbersome in that affected residents will not agree on where such vehicles should be parked. Further, subsequent property owners may not realize that the previous owner's RV was grandfathered in. Member Paulus observed that while RV owners may be in the minority they do have a right to own and maintain something and the majority vote does not always rule. She felt she could not legislate what is appropriate for a resident to have in their front yard. Member Rice commented that he would support the proposed ordinance because he felt it was a step in the right direction. Property owners with existing RVs will be accommodated with the grandfather provision. Outside storage of large items does affect property values in the community. He concurred that there may be problems with the variance process but it is a start. Member Smith stated that passing the ordinance will put a process in place to regulate what is allowed in the front yard. Residents with existing RVs will be allowed to continue to have them. If it has not affected neighbors today, there should be no concern about getting a variance. Member Kelly then introduced Ordinance No. 1992 -1 - An Ordinance Amending the City Code by Adding a New Section 1046 and Repealing Section 1045 for First Reading as presented and on file in the office of the City Clerk. Motion was seconded by Member Smith. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Rice, Smith, Richards Nays: Paulus First Reading granted. FIRST READING GRANTED FOR ORDINANCE NO. 1992 -2 AMENDING CITY CODE BY ADDING NEW SECTION 716 (RECYCLING SERVICE CHARGES) Assistant Manager Hughes explained that the proposed ordinance provides for establishment of recycling service charges. The concept was discussed in detail during the City Council's budget hearings. At that time, the Council directed that the General Fund's contribution to the recycling program be deleted and that charges be made against those properties which benefit from the City's recycling service. The proposed ordinance provides for a quarterly charge against properties to which recycling services are made available by the City. At present, single - family dwellings, two - family dwellings, townhouses, and apartment buildings with eight or fewer units are served by the City's program. The quarterly charge would be itemized on the utility bill for each property. This service charge is estimated to be approximately $4.00 per quarter for a single - family dwelling, two - family dwelling, and approximately $2.00 per quarter for townhouse and . apartment units. If adopted, the ordinance would take effect January 1, 1993. Member Kelly introduced Ordinance No. 1992 -2 - An Ordinance Amending the City Code by Adding a New Section 716 - Recycling Service Charges for First Reading as presented and on file in the office of the City Clerk. Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards First Reading granted. *BIDS REJECTED FOR NORMANDALE GOLF COURSE DRIVEWAY PROJECT Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice to reject all bids for the Normandale Golf Course Driveway Project as recommended by staff because the bids were much higher than the Engineer's estimate. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *AWARD OF BID CONTINUED TO 11/2/92 FOR IRRIGATION FOR NEW NINE.HOLE GOLF COURSE AT BRAEMAR Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice to continue award of bid for irrigation for the new nine hole golf course at Braemar to November 2, 1992. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE PRO SHOP EXPANSION Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for Braemar pro - shop expansion to recommended low bidder, Hunerberg Construction, at $323,300.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR REPAIR OF STORM SEWER Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for repair of storm sewer at West 65th Street and West Shore Drive to recommended low bidder, G.L. Contracting, Inc., at $5,335.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR TWO REVERSIBLE SNOW PLOWS AND ONE PLOW WING Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for two reversible snow plows and one plow wing to recommended low bidder, J. Craft, at $13,339.91. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF 10/13192 APPROVED Engineer Hoffman briefly reviewed the discussion that occurred at the Traffic Safety Committee meeting October 13, 1992. Item (1) of Section A - request to discuss traffic safety concerns on Mirror Lakes Drive and Northwood Drive and item (2) - request to install "STOP" signs on Chantrey Road at Ayrshire Boulevard were considered jointly as they pertained to the same general neighborhood. Member Paulus made a motion to approve the following recommended action listed in Section A of the Traffic Safety Committee Minutes of October 13, 1992: 1) To install "YIELD" signs to control eastbound /westbound traffic at Ayrshire Boulevard and Chantrey Drive; 2) To install signage depicting the adult /child walking symbol along with a 25 MPH advisory southbound on Mirror Lakes Drive just north of Northwood Drive; 3) To undertake a speed survey analysis of Mirror Lakes Drive traffic in 60 days in order to assess the effect of the new signage; and to acknowledge Sections B and C of the Minutes. Motion was seconded by Member Kelly. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards Motion carried. Member Smith left the Council Meeting at this point on the agenda (8:25 P.M.) PUBLIC HEARING HELD: INCREASE IN BEER AND MINE LICENSE FEES FOR 1993 APPROVED Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file. Pursuant to due notice given, a public hearing was conducted to consider increasing the fees for beer and wine licenses in accordance with M.S. 340A.408, Subd. 3A. A copy of the notice was mailed to all licensees on September 18, 1992. The increase is proposed to recover increased cost for staff time in issuance of the licenses and for inspections by the Police Department. Mayor Richards then called for public comment on the proposed license fee increase. No comment or objection was heard and no written objections were received hereto. Member Kelly made a motion to approve the following beer and wine license fees, effective January 1, 1992: On -Sale Wine: Restaurants with 50 or fewer seats $660 51 - 100 seats, inclusive 715 101 - 150 seats, inclusive 770 Over 150 seats 825 On -Sale and Off -Sale 3.2. Beer: 200 (Renewal) 255 (New) Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards RESOLUTION ADOPTED IMPLEMENTING HONEYWELL MUNICIPAL SERVICES PROGRAM Manager Rosland advised that staff has met with Honeywell and would recommend that Honeywell be used to evaluate all City buildings for energy and cost savings. The program proposed by Honeywell is unique and new in that any capital improvement recommended would be paid for by Honeywell, whether it be a new roof, air conditioner or insulation. Honeywell would be paid back only through proven energy savings. As the first step, Honeywell would determine the feasibility of working with the City at no cost to the City. If the match is good, the City would enter into a further agreement to have them provide the upgraded facilities. At this stage, staff is asking Council to allow Honeywell to look at all City facilities in relationship to their energy efficiencies or deficiencies. Member Kelly moved adoption of the following resolution: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the State Legislature has recently enacted Minnesota Statute 471.345 to direct municipalities to develop agreements with businesses which will guarantee savings in energy and operations; and WHEREAS, this Statute allows the City to select a vendor based on experience, track record and ability to perform when the energy and operational contract is guaranteed to be self - funding. Under this provision, the City has selected Honeywell as the vendor of choice to negotiate a Municipal Services Contract. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council directs the City Manager to enter into a no -cost decision schedule with Honeywell to provide a means to determine the feasibility, scope, terms and time frame for entering into an agreement. On the basis that the Honeywell preliminary proposal will be self - funding with a written guarantee of savings and meeting the criteria set by the City, the City will enter into an agreement with Honeywell for the aforementioned Municipal Services Program. BE IT FURTBEB RESOLVED that the City agrees the preliminary evaluation and recommendations of energy conservation measures as well as the preliminary proposal shall remain the property of Honeywell and may not be used by the City for the purposes of competitive bidding or for the purposes of entering into a guaranteed energy savings contract with any other qualified provider. Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards Resolution adopted. MEMBER SOUGHT FOR THE EDINA FOUNDATION BOARD Mayor Richards reminded Council that one vacancy (Council appointment) exists on The Edina Foundation Board of Directors and asked that names of interested individuals be submitted to him. VACANCIES NOTED ON HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD Mayor Richards noted that two vacancies exist on the Heritage Preservation Board and asked that names of interested persons be submitted to him. Member Smith re- entered the meeting at this point on the agenda (8 :40 P.M.) *APPLICATION TO BE SUBMITTED FOR HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD TO BECOME CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERMENT Notion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice approving the submittal of an application for Local Government Certification for the Heritage Preservation Board. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *RESOLUTION ADOPTED AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT BETWEEN MN/DOT AND CITY REGARDING TECHNICIAN TRAINING Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice for adoption of the following resolution: RESOLUTION APPROVING TECHNICAL CERTIFICATION REIMBURSEMENT OF TUITION WHEREAS, the Edina City Council is aware that technical certification is required; WHEREAS, the State is authorized to administer the State Aid Administrative Account pursuant to MN Statute 162.06, subd. 2; WHEREAS, the Division of State Aid requires all personnel working on State Aid work be certified; WHEREAS, the certification of technicians will ensure consistent inspection and high quality roads and bridges; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Edina City Council authorizes the City Engineer and City Clerk to sign Agreement No. 70093 between the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the City of Edina on Technician Certification Reimbursement. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *PERMIT GRANTED TO DISCHARGE FIREARMS AT BRAEKAR PARR Notion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice authorizing the discharge of a firearm in the City of Edina for the removal of beavers. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. AMM 1993 PROPOSED POLICIES AND LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS PRESENTED Manager Rosland explained that the AMM has submitted policies and legislative proposals for 1993 to be considered and adopted by the AMM membership on October 5, 1992. Member cities are being asked to review these and list the five top priorities. It was the consensus of the Council that Manager Rosland prioritize the list for discussion by the Council on November 2, 1992. AMM TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (TAC) NOMINATIONS SOUGHT Manager Rosland informed the Council that AMM is soliciting nominations for appointment to the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). TAC is a metropolitan level transportation oriented advisory body which provides technical advice and input to the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB). To be eligible for appointment, staff officials must be at the department head level. He noted that Engineer Hoffman has served on TAC for about ten years and may be reappointed. JOINT COUNCIL /SCHOOL BOARD MEETING RESCHEDULED Manager Rosland explained that two School Board Members had conflicts with the scheduled date of October 26 for the joint Council /School Board meeting. Two alternative dates have been suggested: November 23 and December 14. The consensus of the Council was for November 23 at 5:00 P.M. in the School District Office conference room. THE EDINA FOUNDATION AUDIT PRESENTED Manager Rosland advised that audit of The Edina Foundation had been completed. After a brief discussion, Mayor Richards asked for an explanation of an expenditure of $7,485.00 entitled Management and General Expenses. Manager Rosland said he would get details of that expenditure and bring the information back on November 2, 1992. DEATH OF PAT LLONA NOTED Manager Rosland informed Council of the recent death of Pat Llona on October 18. She had served on the Edina Chemical Health Advisory and the Human Relations Commission for a number of years. The Council asked that condolences be sent to her family. MANAGER'S VACATION ANNOUNCED Manager Rosland notified the Council that he intended to be on vacation from November 23 to December 1 if there was no objection and that Assistant Manager Hughes would attend the Truth in Taxation Hearing on November 30, 1992, on his behalf. *CLAIMS PAID Motion was made by Member smith and was seconded by Member Rice to approve payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the check register dated October 19, 1992, and consisting of 23 pages; General Fund $152,840.40; CDBG $35.00; Cable $5,070.71; Working Capital Fund $7,588.83; Art Center $5,057.33; Pool $267.69; Golf Course $41,816.21; Arena $3,479.33; Gun Range $496.37; Edinborough /Centennial Lakes $12,063.79; Utilities $20,528.37; Storm Sewer $3,780.53; Liquor Dispensary $91,890.78; Construction Fund $298,595.14; TOTAL $643,510.48; and for confirmation of payment of the following claims as shorn in detail on the check register dated October 9, 1992, and consisting of 13 pages; General Find $110,581.64; Golf Course $688.23; Utilities $1,199.81; Liquor $236,291.14; TOTAL 348,760.82. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Richards declared the meeting adjourned at 8:50 P.M. City Clerk MINUTES OF THE REGUTAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL NOVEMBER 2, 1992 ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith and Mayor Richards. BOY SCOUT TROOP 62 WELCOMED Mayor Richards welcomed members of Boy Scout Troop 62 from Concord School who were working on citizenship merit badges. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Notion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly to approve and adopt the Council Consent Agenda items as presented. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. MINNESOTA CHEMICAL HEALTH WEEK IN EDINA PROCLAIMED Mayor Richards presented the following proclamation which was unanimously adopted: PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, alcohol and other drug abuse in the United States has reached epidemic stages, and the 15 -24 year old age group is dying at a faster rate than any other age group; and WHEREAS, red ribbons have been chosen as a symbol of individual and community efforts to reduce the demand for drugs. in our communities; and WHEREAS, November 13 -20, 1992, is Minnesota Chemical Health Week; and WHEREAS, business, government law enforcement, schools, religious Institutions, service organizations, communities, neighborhood, youth, senior citizens and individuals will demonstrate their commitment to help reduce and prevent alcohol and other drag abuse by displaying red ribbons during Minnesota Chemical Health Week. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that November 13 -20, 1992, be declared MINNESOTA CHEMICAL HEALTH WEEK throughout the City of Edina. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and Council Members of the City of Edina, in recognition of this event, support the activities sponsored by Minnesota Chemical Health Week and Edina Chemical Awareness and encourage community participation in drug awareness, education and prevention activities. Accepting the proclamation was Jay Jaffee, Edina Chemical Health Awareness Coordinator. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR TREE REMOVAL IMPROVEMENT 90. TR -92 (4231 OAKDALE AVENUE) CANCELED Notion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly to cancel the pending special assessment for Tree Removal Improvement TR -92 against the property at 4231 Oakdale Avenue per staff recommendation. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. ORDINANCE NO. 1992 -1 ADOPTED ON SECOND READING (AMENDING CITY CODE BY ADDING NEW SECTION 1046) Planner Larsen recalled that at its meeting of October 19, 1992, the Council had granted First Reading to Ordinance No. 1992 -1 regulating storage of vehicles. No changes have been made to the ordinance since First Reading. Public Comment Howard Walters, 420 John Street, said he objected to the changes proposed in the ordinance regarding parking of recreational vehicles. He said that he uses his RV for business, community services and leisure on a regular basis and the restrictions on parking would affect that use. Council Comment /Action Mayor Richards commented that.this issue has been talked about for a long time. He said the ordinance does not forbid RVs but regulates where they can be parked and stored so that the impact will be on the owner more than on affected neighbors. Member Smith moved Second Reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 1992 -1 as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 1992 -1 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE BY ADDING A NEU SECTION 1046 AND REPEALING SECTION 1045 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. The City Code is hereby amended to provide a new Section 1046 as follows: "Section 1046 - Parking and Storage of Vehicles and Equipment 1046.01. Definitions. Unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the following words and phrases have the meanings given in this Subsection: All Terrain Vehicle (ATV). A motorized flotation -tired vehicle of not less than three low pressure tires, but not more than six tires, that is limited in engine displacement of not less than 800 cubic centimeters and total dry weight less than 600 pounds. Boat. Any contrivance used or designed for navigation on water. Commercial Usage Vehicles. A. Vehicles and equipment designed or modified for use in any construction, demolition, or maintenance activity. B. Tractors. C. All trailers or towed equipment exceeding a gross vehicle weight of 1500 pounds but not including recreational vehicles or trailers used to transport boats, snowmobiles or ATVs. D. Snow removal vehicles and equipment and tree trimming vehicles and equipment. E. Earth moving vehicles and equipment. F. Trucks, vans and pickups with a manufacturer's nominal rated carrying capacity of more than three fourths ton. District. A zoning district established pursuant to Section 850 of this Code. Inoperable Vehicle. A vehicle including, but not limited to, any automobile, truck, trailer, marine craft, snowmobile, motorcycle, all terrain vehicle, mobile home, pickup camper, camping trailer, and other equipment for motorized transportation, that (i) has a missing or defective part that is necessary for the normal operation of the vehicle, or (ii) is stored on blocks, jacks, or other supports, or (iii) does not display a license, or displays a license that is 60 days or more past its required renewal date. Unmounted pickup campers or vehicles which are towed shall not be deemed inoperable vehicles if they otherwise possess all parts and are capable of normal operation and display a license that is not more than 60 days past its required renewal date if a license is required. Non- Conforming Parking Location. An outdoor location on the driveway of a lot in the R -1 or R -2 District which location is not within 15 feet of the street and not within five feet of a side lot line. Recreational Vehicle. A vehicle used or designed for use for temporary residential occupancy including but not limited to campers, motorhomes, mobile homes, pickup campers, camping trailers, tent trailers and travel trailers. Snowmobile. A self - propelled vehicle designed for travel on snow or ice steered by skis or runners. Special Purpose Trailer. 'A trailer having a gross vehicle weight of less than 1500 pounds. Special purpose trailers include utility trailers, and trailers used to transport boats, snowmobiles or .ATVs. 1046.2 Parking or Storage of Commercial Usage Vehicles, Inoperable Vehicles and Vehicle Parts. Commercial usage vehicles, inoperable vehicles, or any part or equipment appurtenant to any vehicle shall not be: A. Parked or stored outdoors on lots in residential district. B. Parked or stored outdoors on lots in non- residential districts for more than 48 hours. Provided, however, vehicles and equipment used for maintenance, repair, or construction on the premises may be parked on the premises during the period of work. 1046.03 Parking or Storage of Recreational Vehicles, Boats, ATVs, Snowmobiles, etc. Recreational vehicles, boats, ATVs, snowmobiles, special purpose trailers or other vehicles designed or used for off -road purposes may be parked or stored in a garage or lawfully erected building, or may be parked or stored outdoors as follows: Subd.l Lots in the R -1 District, R -2 District, PRD -1 and PRD -2 Subdistricts. A. No more than two such vehicles, not more than one of which is a recreational vehicle, shall be parked or stored outdoors on'each lot. For purposes hereof, a vehicle on a trailer shall be considered one vehicle. B. Any such vehicle parked or stored outdoors shall be owned or leased by the occupant of the premises where parked or stored. C. Any such vehicle shall not be parked or stored within five feet of an interior side lot line, within 25 feet of a rear lot line, or within .the required front street setback or side street setback as defined by Section 850 of this Code. D. Any such vehicle shall not be parked or stored closer to the buildable area for a principal building on an adjoining lot than to the principal building on the lot where parked or stored. E. Notwithstanding the requirements of. paragraphs A., B., C., and D. of this Subdivision, any such vehicle may be parked on a temporary basis on a driveway within the required front street setback or side street setback subject to the following requirements: 1. Such vehicle shall not be parked for a period of time exceeding seven days. 2. Such vehicle shall not be parked within 15 feet of the travelled portion of a street and not within "five feet of a side or rear lot line. It is the intent of this paragraph to permit the short term parking of such vehicles for loading or unloading purposes and to accommodate the visitors and guests of the residents of the premises. Subd. 2 Lots in All Other Residential Districts. A. Any such vehicle parked or stored outdoors shall be owned or leased by the occupant of the premises where parked or stored. B. Any such vehicle parked or stored outdoors shall be parked or stored only on hard surfaced areas. Subd. 3' Lots in Non - Residential Districts. A. Any such vehicle shall not be parked or stored outdoors for more than 48 hours. B. Any such vehicle shall be parked or stored only on areas improved as a parking area. 1046.04 ..Other Vehicles. Passenger automobiles and all other vehicles not regulated by Subsection 1046.02'and Subsection 1046.03 may be parked or stored in a garage or lawfully erected building, or may be parked or stored outdoors as follows: Subd. 1 Lots in the R -1, R -2, PRD -1, PRD -2 Districts. On the driveway but not within 15 feet of the travelled portion of the street or within five feet of a side or rear lot line. Subd. 2 Lots in All Other Residential Districts. On a parking area that is hard surfaced. Subd. 3 Lots in All Other Non - Residential Districts. On a parking area that is hard surfaced but not for periods exceeding 48 hours. Provided, however, vehicles may be stored for periods exceeding 48 hours on lots in the PCD -3 District as defined in Section 850 of this Code, which are used for the sale of new or used automobiles or boats. 1046.05 Variances for Recreational Vehicles,_ Boats, etc. Subd. 1 Variance System Established. The restrictions set out in Subsection 1045.03 are necessary for the peace, health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City. It is recognized that there are so many kinds of recreational vehicles, boats, etc. and so many shapes and sizes.of lots and land parcels within the City, that no matter what restrictions are placed upon their outdoor parking and storage, hardships will result to some owners of recreational vehicles, boats, etc. and nuisances will result to some non - owners. In an attempt to avoid such hardships and nuisances, this variance system is established. Subd. 2 Application. Any person desiring to locate a vehicle in a location not permitted by Subsection 1046.03 may file a petition for a variance with the Planner on forms provided by the Planner. The applicant shall pay a fee as set forth in Section 185 of this Code. No variances shall be given or allowed for more than the number of vehicles allowed by Subsection 1046.03. Subd. 3 Hearing and Decisions by the-Board; Notice. A. Within 30 days after the Planner determines that a variance petition is complete, and all required fees and information have been received,. the Zoning Board of Appeals as established-by Section 850 of this Code shall conduct a public hearing and after hearing the oral and written views of all interested persons, shall make its decision at the same meeting or at a specified future meeting. Any decision granting a variance may impose conditions which the Board deems necessary to ensure compliance, protect adjacent properties and promote the peace, health, safety and welfare of the citizens. B. Notice of variance hearings shall be mailed not less than ten days before the date of the hearing to the person who filed the petition for variance and to each owner of property situated wholly or partially within 200 feet of the property to which the variance relates insofar as the names and addresses of such owners can be reasonably determined by the Planner from records maintained by the Assessor. Subd. 4 Appeal. The applicant, any owners to whom notice of the hearing was given, or any member of the staff of the City, may appeal a decision of the Board to the Council, by filing a written notice of appeal with the Clerk within ten days after the date of the decision. Subd. 5 Hearing by Council. The Council, at its next regular meeting after the appeal is filed, shall set a date for hearing the appeal. Notice of the hearing shall be given in the same manner as the hearing before-the Board. At the hearing, all persons shall be heard who wish to be heard, in person or by a representative. At the hearing, or a specified future date, the Council shall make its decision. The Council's decision shall set forth its findings and reasons for granting or denying the variance, or the Council may adopt, as its own, the findings and reasons of the Board. On granting a variance, the Council may impose conditions to the same extent as the Board as set out in Subd. 3 of this Subsection. Subd. 6 Variance Order. Each variance order shall be retained on the property to which it relates and shall be displayed at the request of any City employee. Subd. 7 Variance Not Transferrable, Exception. Each variance shall be limited and restricted to the stated person, vehicle and property location and may not be transferred to any other person, or be used for any other vehicle or property location. Provided, however, a variance may be transferred to another vehicle provided such vehicle is not longer, wider, taller or older than the vehicle for which the variance was initially granted. Subd. 8 Revocation of Variance. Each variance granted may be revoked by the City for failure of the recipient to comply fully and continually with the stated conditions or for any violation of the provisions Subd 7 of this Subsection. 1046.06 Non- Conforming Parking and Storage. Any recreational vehicle, boat, snowmobile, all- terrain vehicle, or special purpose trailer which was parked or stored in a non - conforming parking location prior to the effective date of this Section may continue to be so parked or stored subject to the requirements of this Subsection. Subd. 1. Standards for Parking and Storage. A. An inoperable vehicle shall not be parked or stored in a non- conforming parking location. An inoperable vehicle may be parked or stored only in those locations required by Subsection 1046.02. B. No more than one recreational vehicle, boat, snowmobile, all - terrain vehicle, or special purpose trailer shall be parked in a non- conforming parking location. C. Any recreational vehicle, boat, snowmobile, all- terrain vehicle, or special purpose trailer parked or stored in a non- conforming parking location shall have been owned continuously since the enactment of this Section by the occupant of the premises where parked or stored. D. The lot upon which a recreational vehicle, boat, snowmobile, all- terrain vehicle, or special purpose trailer is parked or stored in a non - conforming parking location shall have been owned or rented continuously since the enactment of this Section by the owner of the vehicle so parked or stored. Subd. 2. Proof of Ownership. Upon the request of any City employee, the occupant of the premises where a recreational vehicle, boat, snowmobile, all- terrain vehicle, or special purpose trailer is parked or stored in a non - conforming parking location, shall provide proof of compliance with paragraph C. and paragraph D. of Subd. 1 of this Subsection." Section 2. Section 1045 of the City Code is repealed in its entirety. Section 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and publication. First Reading: October 19,1992 Second Reading: November 2, 1992 ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Member Rice. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Rice, Smith, Richards Nays: Paulus Ordinance adopted. FIRST READING GRANTED FOR ORDINANCE NO. 1992 -3 (AMENDING SECTION 815 OF CITY CODE ) Planner Larsen presented draft Ordinance 'No. 1992 -3 noting that it would amend Section 815 of the City Code (the antenna ordinance) in two respects: 1. Subsection 815.01 has been added which would include purposes and objectives for the Section. 2. Subdivision 2 of Subsection 815.05 has been amended to correct the formula with respect to the spacing between certain towers and antennas and nearby lots in the R -1 and R -2 Districts. The initial draft of Section 815 provided a height limit for antennas and towers in the R -1 and R -2 Districts of 50 feet. After receiving testimony of amateur radio operators, the Council increased the height limit to 65 feet. Based on this change, Subdivision 2 of Subsection 815.05 should have likewise been changed from 50 feet to 65 feet. The proposed ordinance would effect this change. Staff would recommend adoption of the ordinance with waiver of Second Reading. Member Smith moved adoption of Ordinance No. 1992 -3 with waiver of Second Reading as follows: ORDINANCE N0. 1992 -3 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 815 OF THE CITY CODE BY PROVIDING FOR A PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES AND BY CORRECTING THE FORMULA FOR THE MINIMUM DISTANCE FROM CERTAIN TOWERS AND ANTENNAS TO LOTS IN THE R -1 AND R -2 DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. Subsections 815.01, 815.02, 815.03, 815.04, 815.05, 815.06, 815.07, 815.08 815.10 and 815.11 of the City Code are hereby renumbered Subsections 815.02, 815.03, 815.04, 815.05, 815.06, 815.07, 815.08, 815.09, 815.10, 815.11 and 815.12, respectively. Section 2. There is hereby added to the City Code a new Subsection 815.01 as follows: "815.02 Purpose and Objectives. The purpose and objectives of this Section are to provide for the safe Installation of antennas, dish antennas and towers and to minimize the adverse aesthetic impact of antennas, dish antennas and towers on surrounding properties, while permitting reasonable reception and transmission of signals from antennas, dish antennas and towers without excessive costs on the owners of antenna, dish antennas and towers. To lessen the adverse aesthetic impact on surrounding properties because of the unsightly nature of antennas, dish antennas and towers, and preserve the high quality residential character of Edina, and to ensure that antennas, dish antennas, and towers are installed in a manner that can withstand high winds and other adverse weather conditions and do not constitute a nuisance or pose a safety concern, the Council has determined to impose size, height, location and installation restrictions and requirements on antennas, dish antennas and towers. The different size and shapes of antennas, dish antennas and towers results in different degrees of adverse aesthetic impact on surrounding properties and different safety concerns. Because of the different aesthetic impacts and safety concerns, this Section imposes different location, size, height and installation restrictions and requirements for antennas, dish antennas and towers. In particular, this Section imposes different restrictions and requirements for dish antennas. The size and shape of dish antennas make them more obtrusive and less likely to blend in with their surroundings which results in a greater adverse aesthetic impact on surrounding properties than antennas and towers, and the shape of dish antennas makes them subject to a high amount of wind force because the dish shape will trap wind, with the larger the dish or higher the supporting structure resulting in greater wind force on the base of the structure. In determining these differing restrictions and requirements the Council has considered what size and height is necessary for an antenna, dish antenna and tower to provide quality use and afford reasonable reception and transmittal of signals and believe that the location,-size, height and installation restrictions and requirements of this Section permit antennas, dish antennas and towers to reasonably receive and transmit their intended signals and do not impose excessive costs on owners of antennas, dish antennas and towers." Section 3. Subd. 2 of Subsection 815.05 is hereby amended to read as follows: "Subd. 2. Additional Restrictions for Towers and Antennas in Excess of 65 Feet in Height. In addition to the requirements of Subd. 1 of this Subsection, the following minimum distance shall be provided between (i) ground mounted towers, (ii) ground mounted antennas, or (iii) ground mounted towers with antennas, which are in excess of 65 feet in overall height, and the nearest lot line of a lot in the R -1 District or R -2 District used for residential purposes: Minimum Distance in Feet — 20 (h -50) + 50 h — overall height of tower and antenna in feet" Section 4. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage. First Reading: November 2. 1992 Second Reading: `Taived ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Member Kelly. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Ordinance adopted. PRELIMINARY PIAT APPROVAL FOR MARK DALOUIST ADDITION CONTINUED TO 11/16/92 Notion vas made by Member Smith and vas seconded by Member Kelly to continue the hearing on preliminary plat approval for the Mark Dalquist Addition (Lot 11, Auditor's Subdivision No. 325) to November 16, 1992. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. HEARING ON APPEAL OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS DECISION REGARDING VARIANCE TO INSTALL SATELLITE ANTENNA ON ROOF (5324 62ND STREET VEST) CONTINUED TO 11/16/92 Notion vas made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly to continue the hearing on the appeal of the Zoning Board of Appeals decision regarding a variance to install a satellite antenna on roof at 5324 62nd Street hest. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. CONCERN OF RESIDENT MARK DALOUIST RULED OUT OF ORDER Mark Dalquist, 5012 Schaefer Road, asked to present a concern as stated in his letter dated November 2, 1992, regarding Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS -303 authorized by the Village Council on March 6, 1972, which provided six service stubs on property then owned by Ruth Schaefer. Mayor Richards interjected that, if the request had anything to do with the proposed Mark Dalquist Addition subdivision, the Council would not hear it because it would not be fair to the residents who have participated in the process to this point. Mr. Dalquist then handed the following to the Council: 1) His letter dated November 2, 1992, 2) Copy of letter dated January 24, 1972, from Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 3) Notice of Public Hearing - Sanitary Sewer Project SS -303, dated February 25, 1972, and 4) Copy of Minutes of Edina Village Council of March 6, 1972. At this point it was the consensus of the Council that all discussion cease, based on point of order that the material did relate to the proposed Mark Dalquist Addition subdivision under consideration by the Council. BID AWARDED FOR IRRIGATION SYSTEM FOR NEW NINE HOLE GOLF COURSE AT BRAEMAR Notion was made by Member Smith and vas seconded by Member Kelly for award of bid for irrigation system for the new nine hole golf course at Braemar to recommended low bidder, Northern Irrigation Systems, Inc., at $173,150.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. BID AWARDED FOR OUTDOOR WARNING SIREN Notion vas made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly for award of bid one outdoor varning siren for the Centennial Lakes area to recommended low bidder, Federal Signal Corporation, at $10,825.75. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. PARK BOARD RECONWMATION REGARDING GAMBLINGMM RAISERS CONSIDERED: COUNCIL. POSITION UNCHANGED Park & Recreation Director Kojetin informed the Council that during the past year the Park Board has been studying the issue of gambling /fund raising. At its meeting of October 13, 1992, after discussing the issue with the various athletic associations, the Board recommended to the City Council that the Edina athletic associations be allowed to accept funds from charitable organizations that raise funds through legalized gambling pursuant to grant requests. Paul O'Connor said that as a School Board member he represented the School Board on the Park Board. The School Board's unanimous opinion was not to support the recommendation of the Park Board because it was contrary to the values the School Board is trying to integrate into the educational program. He mentioned that scholarships are available to those youths who cannot pay the athletic association fees. Member Smith noted that two years ago the Edina Basketball Association were billed $3,000 for gym costs and that last year the bill was increased to $9,000. Mr. O'Connor responded that prior to two years ago the schools absorbed part of the gym time costs, but that because their funding from the state is limited they now have to charge their real cost for use of their facilities. Steve Cook, 6820 Oaklawn Avenue, commented that felt the athletic associations should be able to accept charitable contributions that have been generated from lawful gambling operations outside the community. He asked the Council Members to accept the recommendation of the Park Board, noting that some of the charitable organizations generate so much money they are obliged to give some of it away to non - profit organizations. He pointed out that the Edina Hockey Association has acknowledged that some families can no longer afford the sport because the user fees have been steadily increasing. Trish Brown, representing EGAA, said she concurred and mentioned that the user fees for participation in the various athletic associations have been increasing to pay for gym time and janitorial services at the schools. Member Rice interjected that strong opinions have been expressed on this issue. He said he was confused as to the relationship of the athletic associations to the City and the Council's proper role and rights legally to set policy for them. Manager Rosland said the City probably cannot legally control the associations. However, the system has worked well with the City providing facilities /staff and the residents volunteering through the associations to provide athletic programs for the young people of the community. Attorney Gilligan opined that the associations are separate non- profit corporations which may set their own policies and the City Council has no legal control over them. Member Rice added that, personally, he felt it would be a mistake to accept funds generated from lawful gambling, that the athletic programs should be funded the way they have been in the past. However, he conceded that the associations should each decide how to fund their activities, i.e. selling pizzas or accepting gambling funds, with the City Council not involved. Member Smith reminded the Council Members that-the athletic programs exist because of partnership with the City and he felt the City could control the associations by saying the City will not provide facilities or staff support for those who accept funds generated from gambling. Further, some policy should be developed to make sure the young people are treated equally regardless of which program they participate in. He felt if gambling funds were used they should be limited to participation grants. Member Paulus commented that some of the athletic programs are becoming almost pre - professional with paid coaches, etc. which causes the costs of the programs to spiral. While not in favor of the associations accepting funds from gambling, she suggested that if these funds are used the amount be limited. Member Kelly said she concurred that the teams are getting more competitive with the grade level participation lowered each year. Also, the introduction of traveling teams have added to the expenses. The other side of the issue is if the charitable organizations have these monies to give away, it could defray some of the expenses. She felt the Council needed further information as to level of participation and costs of the various athletic programs. Mayor Richards commented that the issue is not funds from gambling, but how do you buy into the system. Years ago the young people took responsibility for earning the money to participate in the programs. By accepting funds generated by gambling the wrong message will be sent to the kids. He reminded the Council that last year it took action by motion that the City not participate or be in partnership with any youth athletic association which uses gambling proceeds to support the association's operation. Member Kelly made a motion to study further the level of participation and costs of the programs before making a decision. Motion failed for lack of second. Member Rice made a motion that the Edina athletic associations be allowed to accept fiords from charitable organizations that raise funds through any legal means. Motion was seconded by Member Kelly. Ayes: Kelly, Rice Nays: Paulus, Smith, Richards Motion failed. No further motion being offered, Mayor Richards concluded that the matter stands as before. CO)UMITY HEALTH SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION REGARDING ILLEGAL TOBACCO SALES CONSIDERED Matthew Peterson, Community Health Services Advisory Committee Chair, informed Council that the Committee has discussed the issues surrounding tobacco use and its harmful effect on people. The Committee believes that the best way to address this problem is by taking steps to prevent young people from starting tobacco use at an early age. This can be accomplished by making sure retailers do not sell tobacco to minors (under the age of 18). The Committee would recommend the following: 1) More aggressive enforcement activity on at least a quarterly basis to reduce the illegal sale of tobacco products to minors at the licensed tobacco sales points within the City of Edina. 2) That Council direct staff to pursue the revocation of tobacco sales licenses from licensees who are found to be repeat violators:. 3) That the annual fee for a license to sell tobacco products be increased to $1000. 4) That the reapplication for a tobacco sales license after revocation be double the original license fee. 5) That the individual tobacco license holders be notified of these provisions after adoption by the City Council. Discussion followed on the Committee's recommendation and the correlation between the proposed license fee and the City's costs for more enforcement activity. Mr. Peterson pointed out.that by state statute, tobacco sale licenses are not subject to relationship to cost. Member Kelly made a motion directing staff to: 1) Research the costs to the City for more aggressive enforcement activity, 2) Research the proposed annual license fee, and 3) Consider alternative mechanisms for preventing tobacco sales to minors. Motion was seconded by Member Smith. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried.. *RESOLUTION ADOPTED AUTHORIZING 1993 GRANT APPLICATION TO COUNTY FOR RECYCLING FUNDING Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly for adoption of the following resolution: RESOLUTION WHF.&F.AS, Pursuant to Minnesota Statute 115A.551, by December 31, 1993, each county in the metropolitan area will have as a goal to recycle a minimum of 35 percent (35 %) by weight of total solid waste generation, and each county must develop and implement or require political subdivisions within the county to develop and implement programs, practices, or methods designed to most its recycling goal; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to Minnesota 115A.552, counties shall ensure that residents have an opportunity to recycle; and WHEREAS, Hennepin County Ordinance 13 requires each city to implement a recycling program to enable the County to meet its recycling goals; and WHEREAS, in September, 1992, the County adopted a Hennepin County Residential Recycling Funding Policy effective January 1, 1993, through December 31, 1997, to distribute funds to cities for the development and implementation of waste reduction and recycling programs; and WHEREAS, to be eligible to receive these County funds, cities must meet the conditions set forth in the "Funding Policy;" and WHEREAS, the City of Edina desires to receive these County funds; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council authorizes the submittal of the 1993 Municipal Recycling Grant Application, Hennepin County Residential Recycling Program; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City will use such County funds only for the limited purpose of implementing the City's waste reduction and recycling program. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. *SOUTH HENNEPIN REGIONAL CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMISSION BYLAWS APPROVED Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly to approve the revised Bylaws of the South Hennepin Regional Citizens Advisory Commission as presented. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. *REPORT ACCEPTED ON COPPER AND LEAD TESTING PURSUANT TO EPA RULES Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly to aclmowledge and accept the report on copper and lead testing activities pursuant to Environmental Protection Agency guidelines. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. APPOINTMENT MADE TO EDINA FOUNDATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS Mayor Richards advised that he intended to appoint Kevin Ries to The Edina Foundation Board of Directors if the Council concurred. Member Smith made a motion for consent of the Mayor's appointment of Kevin Ries to The Edina Foundation Board of Directors to fill an unexpired term to June, 1993. Motion was seconded by Member Kelly. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. APPOINTMENT MADE TO HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD Mayor Richards advised that he intended to appoint John F. Cooney.to the - Heritage Preservation Board if the Council concurred. Member Smith made a motion for consent of the Mayor's appointment of John F. Cooney to the Heritage Preservation Board to fill an unexpired term to February 1, 1994. Motion was seconded by Member Kelly. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. APPOINTMENT MADE TO COMMUNITY EDUCATION SERVICES BOARD Mayor Richards informed Council that Member Smith has resigned as Council representative to the Community Education Services Board and that Member Kelly has agreed to serve on the Board. Member Paulus made a motion for consent of the Mayor's appointment of Member Kelly as Council representative to the Community Education Services Board to fill an unexpired term to June 30, 1993. Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. *RESOLUTION ADOPTED AMENDING YEAR %VII CDBG ALLOCATIONS' Member Smith's motion was seconded by Member Kelly for adoption of the following resolution: RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council does hereby request an amendment to the project description for the CDBG funds in Year %VII, Program #52042 - Removal of Architectural Barriers to include the following: Accessibility Survey - City Properties $9,525.00 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Properties Accessibility be added to the Removal of Architectural Barriers project in year'%VII of the Program. ADOPTED this 2nd day of November, 1992. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. LETTER DATED 10/15/92 REGARDING METERED RAMPS ON HIGHWAY 100 ACKNOWLEDGED Mayor Richards referred to a letter dated 10/15/92 regarding metered ramps on Highway 100 signed by 68 citizens. The letter stated that the meters have not accomplished what they originally were intended for which was to reduce traffic on Highway 100 and asked that the time between each light be shortened or that the meters be removed. It was the consensus of the Council that Manager Rosland be directed to respond by letter that because the metering of ramps are controlled by MNDOT, the City has no jurisdiction over the timing of the meters 1993 ANN LEGISLATIVE POLICY PROGRAM DISCUSSED As directed by Council, Manager Rosland reported that he had reviewed the 1993 Association of Metropolitan Municipalities (AMM) Legislative Policy Program and recommended the following for consideration by the Council: II -A General Legislation - Oppose Reduction of Authority or Local Control II -I General Legislation - Cooperation, Collaboration, and Consolidation (Shared Services) III -A.3 Housing and Economic Development and Land Use - Mandatory Land Use Standards IV -C -1 Metropolitan Agencies - Policy Planning - Policy Implementation VII -A -1 Metropolitan Governance Reorganization - Election of Metropolitan Council It was the consensus of the Council to support the position of AMM on these policies, with the exception that members of the Metropolitan Council should be appointed rather than elected. Mayor Richards said he would carry the message to the AMM Membership Meeting on November 5, 1992. THE EDINA FOUNDATION AUDIT DISCUSSED Manager Rosland recalled that at the last meeting the Council had questioned an expenditure of $7,485.00 in the audit report for The Edina Foundation identified as Management and General Expenses. James Van Valkenburg, Secretary /Treasurer, has provided the following explanation: Bond /Education $ 931.00 Pledge /Contribution Mailings 6.554.00 $7,485.00 The mailings brought in a total of $12,535.00 in pledges and contributions. There was no further discussion on the audit report. 1993 LAC CITY POLICIES AND PRIORITIES RECEIVED Manager Rosland said that the 1993 League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) 1993 City Policies and Priorities which will be acted upon at the November 19, 1992 membership meeting have just been received. These will be reviewed for recommendation to the Council at the November 16 meeting. CLAIMS PAID Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly to approve payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated 10/28/92, consisting of 20 pages: General Fund $147,012.48; Cable $8,803.65; Working Capital Fund $1,497.20; Art Center $1,784.54; Pool $20,879.61; Golf Course $52,364.64; Arena $17,698.05; Gun Range $13.46; Edinborough /Centennial Lakes $268,129.01; Storm Sewer $1,222.49; Liquor Dispensary $38,231.37; Construction Fund $498.40; IMP Bond Redemption #2 $159.75; TOTAL $577,260.55. Motion carried on rollcall vote; five ayes. There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Richards declared the meeting adjourned at 9 :22 P.M. City Clerk N O •'N� PeM O/ REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: KENNETH ROSLAND From: CRAIG LARSEN Date: NOVEMBER 16, 1992 Subject: PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL - MARK DALQUIST ADDITION, CDS PARTNERS Recommendation: Agenda Item # II. A . Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA To Council Action 0 Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion The Planning Commission voted to deny the Preliminary Plat as presented. Info /Background: See attached plans, staff report and planning commission meeting minutes, and attached correspondence. McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. 15050 23rd Avenue North. Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 Telephone Engineers 612/476 -6010 Planners 612/476 -8532 FAX Surveyors November 12, 1992 Mr. Craig Larsen City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 SUBJECT: CDS Partners MFRA #9893 Dear Mr. Larsen: Consistent with discussions during our recent meeting, I am forwarding copies of a two (2) lot subdivision for the Dalquist 10.5 -acre parcel. You will recall the necessity of this lot subdivision is to facilitate financial agreements established by the Owner and Partners. The outlot status will prohibit any use of the lot, pending further City review and approval. The applicant will continue to pursue subdivision of Outlot A. MGjmk cc.• on Clark Mark Dalquist I Kindest regards, McCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCIATES, INC. akj'lG k. - J. CZ'Lc Michael J. Gair An Equal Opportunity Employer DRAFT SUMMARY P.C. MEETING OCTOBER 28, 1992 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, G. Johnson, R. Hale, N. Faust, H. McClelland, D. Runyan, V. Shaw, G. Workinger, D. Byron 5 -92 -1 Preliminary Plat Approval Mark Dalquist Addition CDS Partners Mr. Larsen presented his staff report noting the City Council, at its October 5, 1992, meeting, referred the proposed subdivision back to the commission for its comments. Mr. Larsen reported the proponents have submitted a revised preliminary plat for commission review. The plat continues to show a five lot subdivision served by an extension of Harold Woods Lane. The size and dimensions of the lots remain the same as previous proposals. All of the lots continue to comply with the lot size and dimension standards of the subdivision ordinance. Mr. Larsen reported the only change to the proposed plat is the size of the conservation easement. The revised plan illustrates the required 100 foot easement on Lots 2, 4, and 5. The proposal does seek a variance from the 100 foot setback on Lot 3. The proposal suggests an 100 foot setback from what the property owner claims as historic shoreline of the pond. However, as the pond exists today the easement would come within about 30 feet from the ponds edge. Thus a 70 foot conservation easement variance is requested for Lot 3. Mr. Larsen concluded in his opinion the changes in the proposal result in a plat which is closer to full compliance with ordinance requirements. He added he is concerned that the changes may result in a less desirable development. The additional easement area severely restricts the buildable area on each lot. The result could be an undesirable spacing between the relatively large homes which are likely to be built on these lots. The proponents, Mr. and Mrs. Dalquist, Mr. Ron Clark were present. Mike Gair architect was present. Interested neighbors were present. Mr. Gair explained to commission members the changes in the revised plat. Referring to graphics Mr. Gair pointed out Lot 3 requests a 50 foot conservation easement from the existing shoreline, noting the proposed building pad for Lot 3 meets the 100 foot easement requirement from the historic shoreline. Continuing, Mr. Gair stated the revised plat now depicts Lots 4,5, and 2 meeting the 100 foot setback requirement from the ponds. Mr. Gair said all three building pads will be contained in building envelopes maintaining the 100 foot easement. Mr. Gair requested that the commission consider a 12 foot encroachment into the conservation easement for Lots 4,5, and 2, allowing the potential homeowners the option of constructing a deck, patio, or balcony. In summary Mr. Gair said Lots 214,5, will maintain the 100 foot conservation easement from the ponds with a request that the commission consider a 12 foot encroachment into the conservation easement. Lot 3 requests a 50 foot variance from the conservation easement. Mr. Gair concluded his presentation with the assistance of graphics pointing out all four lots can maintain the 100 foot setback from water bodies if a portion of the north pond were filled in. Mr. Gair said this pond does not come under DNR restrictions and a permit can'be obtained to allow a certain amount of fill . Chairman Johnson stated as he understands the Wetland Act, the 1991 Act requires a 1:1 compensation if an area of a pond is filled. Expanding on this Chairman Johnson pointed out if you fill one area where are you going to provide the comparable compensation. Mr. Gair with graphics pointed out an area east of the "finger" that could be filled as the area of compensation. Commissioner McClelland said she thought the Wetland Act required 2:1 compensation. Mr. Gair said at present the law requires 1:1 compensation. In the summer of 1993 the issue of requiring 2:1 compensation will be heard. Chairman Johnson said he has a concern with the distance between the proposed building pads on Lots 2 and 3 and asked Mr. Gair if he has calculated these distances. Mr. Gair said the closest building points on those lots is between the garages. That distance is approximately 30+ feet. Commissioner Hale said his concern centers around adequate spacing between houses. Mr. Hale pointed out that the high price of lots within the City of Edina almost guarantee very large expensive houses. He concluded he would like to see 30 foot sideyard setbacks required for this development. Chairman Johnson questioned how far the Dalquist home is from the proposed house on Lot 4. Mr. Gair calculated that spacing between the existing Dalquist house and the proposed house on Lot 4 is 40+ feet. Commissioner McClelland told commission members in her opinion she cannot find a hardship to support the request for a variance for Lot 3 from the conservation easement. She said filling in a portion of the north pond to obtain the required setback is a forced development. In addition Commissioner McClelland said the proponent has not really "moved" from his original submission. Commissioner McClelland concluded that she believes three lots in this area are adequate, four lots are too many. Commissioner McClelland stated she agrees that increased sideyard setbacks are needed for this development to ensure that the character and symmetry of the neighborhood is maintained. Chairman Johnson pointed out that by filling the "finger" of the north pond this site can legally be developed without variances. Commissioner McClelland said in her opinion that would be altering the site and she believes three lots work better on the north side of this site. Commissioner McClelland also noted the city should have the final say on alteration to the north pond. Mr. Gair interjected that he, along with the members of the development team have examined-over the past few month a number of different scenarios. Mr. Gair said there findings supported the present layout of the lots. A three lot subdivision may create lots that fall short of the city's lot width requirement. Commissioner Faust said in her opinion the residents of Edina would be very upset if we allowed any filling of the north pond, or any pond for that matter. -Commissioner Byron said he agrees with staff comments presented in the staff report that the size of the proposed houses, and the limited building pad area may result in inadequate spacing for the types of homes that will be constructed on this site. Continuing, Mr. Byron said in his opinion it is difficult for us to sit up here and try to redesign this development. Mr. Byron. concluded by the facts presented thus far there appears to be, in his opinion no hardship to support the request for a variance from the 100 foot conservation easement. Commissioner Byron noted that he believed he heard at the Council meeting that there was some discussion indicating that the developer has considered reducing the subdivision to 3 lots on the north, the council minutes do not reflect this. Continuing, Commissioner Byron said the council did indicate they could not support a plat that required a variance. Chairman Johnson reiterated if the developer obtains. a,permit to fill an area of the pond there would be no variance for this development. Commission Byron said in his opinion that would be an undesirable solution. Commissioner Shaw questioned if the city has some assurance that'the proposed location of the building pads will remain the same as depicted. Mr. Gair explained they can only construct a house within the city's setback guidelines, and the pads are usually depicted at maximum. Mr. Gair pointed out the building pads can change if a buyer desires a two story home or desires a ranch /rambler style home. Mr. Dalquist presented to commission members an aerial of the neighborhood depicting the proposed building pads. A lengthy discussion ensued regarding the square footage of the building pads, size of houses to be constructed, 'type of houses constructed, and house spacing. Much of the discussion centered around the spacing of the proposed houses on Lots 2,,and 3 with a majority of the commission in agreement that they want to ensure that adequate spacing is maintained between lots and within this development. Commissioner Runyan indicated he does not have a problem with this four lot proposal if it can be developed to meet the requirements of the city. Commissioner Hale excused himself from the meeting at 9:10 p.m. Mr. Glickman, 5217 Schaefer Road told the commission that he is puzzled by the presentation this evening. He stated in his opinion he has not heard anything new from the developers., He pointed out there are new twists, but it is the .same scenario. There is no hardship and the council directed the developers to develop the site without requiring variances. Mr. Ted Pier, 5021 Ridge Road stated in his opinion he agrees with Mr. Glickman that nothing has changed, and the proposal is essentially the same. Mr. Pier said in his opinion the filling of a portion of the north pond is unacceptable, and three lots on the ;north side make good planning sense, not four. Mr..,Pier said no variances should be granted to develop this site, because there is no hardship. Mrs. Dalquist stressed that she. believes that the northern portion of this site can be developed with four lots without variances. Commissioner Runyan said he understands Lots 4,5, and 2 can be developed without a variance, but a variance is still required on Lot 3 unless a smaller building pad is presented or the pond is filled. Mrs. Dalquist said.that is correct a smaller building pad could be presented, or a portion of the north pond could be filled allowing compliance with the 100 foot setback. Mr. Mantyh, 6413 Interlachen Boulevard told the commission nothing has changed. The council requested that the developers come back with a proposal that does not require variances and they did not comply. He stated he purchased his house because of the pond to the rear of his property. There is no hardship,. and any request for a variance on Lot 3 should not be granted. Mrs. Dalquist said she believes she should not have to support and maintain Mr. Mantyh's view. She pointed out she has lived in this area for many years, has maintained the property, and paid taxes on the property. She concluded she believes she does have the right to develop this property. Mr. Clark said that he does not agree with comments made this evening that the plat has not changed. He pointed out when the proposal was first presented variances of 50 feet were requested from the ponds. Since we first met we have brought the proposal into compliance with the 100 foot conservation easement from water for all lots except Lot 3. Mr. Clark said he believes adequate spacing will be achieved, and pointed out that the spacing between the proposed houses on Lot 4 and Lot 3, and between the proposed houses on Lot 5 and Lot 2 will be constructed with a minimum of 70 feet between them. The spacing between garages for Lots 2 and 3 will be 30+ feet, with the garages one story in height which should minimize impact. Continuing, Mr. Clark noted that the spacing between the existing Dalquist house and the proposed house on Lot 4 will be 40+ feet. The house located at 5016 Schaefer Road and proposed house on Lot 5 will be 100+ feet apart. Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Clark if he felt it was possible to develop this site with increased sideyard setbacks as requested by Commissioner Hale. Mr. Clark said he would be willing to look into that request. Continuing, Mr. Clark said they have studied many different development plans. The width of the land and the location of the utility lines are something they have had to work with to create a plat which meets the city's ordinance. Mr. Clark pointed out at present the plat only requires one variance and that is from the wetland conservation easement. Commissioner McClelland suggested that a poll vote be taken on our feelings on if this site should be developed with three lots instead of the proposed four lot plat. Faust, McClelland, Shaw, Workinger, Byron indicated support for three lots. Johnson, Runyan indicated support for four lots without variances. Commissioner McClelland suggested that a poll vote be taken on the feelings of commission members on if this site should be developed with four lots, one requiring a variance. Byron, Workinger, Shaw, Runyan, McClelland, Faust, Johnson all indicated they could not support a plat for four lots with variance. The commission was in agreement that the proposal should meet our standards. A question was raised by the commission on whether filling in the pond is an acceptable alternative to a variance. The commission felt since they do not have information from the Watershed District or Army Corp of Engineers it would be premature to discuss this at this time. Commissioner Shaw stated she believes as recommended by Commissioner Hale that increased sideyard setbacks are appropriate. If the Council were to approve a four lot subdivision for this site 30 foot sideyard setbacks should be required to maintain the character of the neighborhood. Commissioner Workinger agreed and indicated he would like the council to seriously consider increasing sideyard setbacks, at least up to 30 feet. Commissioner Runyan questioned if the commission can require such a restriction for setbacks. He pointed out our ordinance requires a 10 foot sideyard setback plus an increase of 6" for building height that exceeds 15 feet. Thirty foot sideyard setbacks may be hard to recommend unless we creatively word a motion. Mr. Larsen said one way to achieve the increased setbacks would be to require 30 foot utility easements. Commissioner Shaw stated the commission could request that the council carefully review the importance of maintaining adequate sideyard setbacks on this proposal. Commissioner Shaw noted the commission is in favor of recommending that the sideyard setbacks be up to 30 feet per lot. Concluding Commissioner Shaw stated any proposal should meet all our requirements. No variances should be required. Commissioner McClelland agreed that the subdivision meet all our setbacks Commissioner McClelland moved to recommend denial of the proposal as submitted. Commissioner Faust seconded the motion. Ayes; Faust, McClelland, Shaw, Byron, Johnson. Nay, Runyan. Commissioner Runyan clarified that he supports a four lot subdivision if all our recuirements are met. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 28, 1992 5 -92 -1 Preliminary Plat Approval Mark Dahlquist Addition CDS Partners The City Council, at its October 5, 1992, meeting, referred the proposed subdivision back to the commission for its comments. Minutes of the council action are attached. The proponents have submitted a revised preliminary plat for commission review. The plat continues to show a five lot subdivision served by an extension of Harold Woods Lane. The size and dimensions of the lots remain the same as previous proposals.. All of the lots continue to comply with the lot size and dimension standards of the subdivision ordinance. The only change to the proposed plat is the size of the conservation easement. The revised plan illustrates the required 100 foot easement on Lots 2, 4, and 5. The proposal does seek a variance from the 100 foot setback on Lot 3. The proposal suggests an 100 foot setback from what the property owner claims as historic shoreline of the pond. However, as the pond exists today the easement would come within about 30 feet from the pond edge. Thus a 70 foot conservation easement variance is requested for Lot 3. Recommendation: The changes in the proposal result in a plat which is close to full compliance with ordinance requirements. However, I am concerned that the changes may result in a less desirable development. The additional easement area severely restricts the buildable area on each lot. The result could be an undesirable spacing between the relatively large homes which are likely to be built on these lots. Edward W. Glickman 5217 Schaefer Road Edina, MN 55436 November 9, 1992 The Edina City Council c/o Mr. Craig Larson Edina City Council Offices 4801 50th Street West Edina, MN 55424 Re: Dahlquist Subdivision Dear City Council: This letter is written in response to Mr. Dahlquist's letter of November 2, 1992 which was hand delivered to the City Council and its attorney at the meeting on that date. First of all, objection is made to its submission because it was out of order. I, like all other concerned neighbors, was notified by your staff that the hearing on the Dahlquist matter was postponed at the developer's request until November 16, 1992; as such, no opponents were present to rebut Mr. Dahlquist. Furthermore, the council decided that the discussion was inappropriate and yet he continued to speak and deliver the letter. While it is difficult to understand the logic of the letter, Mr. Dahlquist is apparently constructing an argument that by implication the construction of a sewer line with six extra stubs is a grant in perpetuity for a six lot subdivision. It is not. He has raised this issue before and it has failed. I direct your attention to my letter of August 14, 1992, "Mr. Dahlquist purchased his home in 1961 [adjacent to the subject property]. In March, 1971 the City Council passed the Ordinance which requires the 100 foot Conservation easement. In August, 1972 Mrs. Schaefer gave the City a Utility easement for the sewer. In April, 1978 subject to this now problematic sewer and more than 7 years after the 100 foot requirement was adopted Mr. Dahlquist purchased the land in question. The deed states on its face, "Subject to Zoning laws and building and use restrictions..." (Exhibits attatched to original letter) Mr. Dahlquist did not object to or comment upon the 100 foot conservation easement when it was proposed by the City in 1971. He did not point out the easement to the City or Mrs. Schaefer in 1972 when she gave the city the sewer easement and cemented the supposed "six lot deal ". There was no protest to it in 1978 when he purchased the land subject to the sewer and easement. In fact, shortly therafter, he used the easement to his benefit by asking for and receiving from the City a property tax abatement based on the 100 foot easement which reduced his Edina City Council November 9, 1992 Page 2 property taxes for the last 14 years by arguing the the restrictive nature of the easement reduced the marketability of his property. ( see Property Tax Inf attatched ) To add insult to injury, Mr. Dahlquist is now not only planning to use the sewer bought and paid for entirely by Ridge Road residents for his own benefit "free of cost "; but, using its very existence as justification for his ill - conceived subdivision. Mr. Dahlquist cannot have it both ways. Mr. Dahlquist's arguments are flawed in several respects. First of all, while he self servingly speaks of an "implicit agreement" with the city for a six lot subdivision based on six sewer stubs he offers absolutely no legal authority or evidence by documentation for this position. He speaks in vague terms of second hand hearsay about events which occured more than twenty years ago between participants who are now all deceased. He talks of a City Council meeting but offers no minutes to support his position. Next, one simply cannot leap to the conclusion that six unused sewer stubs are tantamount to approval of a six lot subdivision more than two decades later. There are many other plausible explanations for this. Not the least of which is Mr. Dahlquist's own suggestion that the extra stubs were added by the City in an effort to save the residents of Ridge Road money. Even if he is correct, why did Mr. Dahlquist fail to memorialize that important "agreement" in the legal papers for the purchase of the property when all these transactions were fresh in everyones minds and merely accept the property subject to zoning and building and use restrictions? Next, Mrs. June Kegan of the City Assessors Office told me that the special assessment for the sewer on the subject property was deferred. Mr. Dahlquist said, "He added that six lots are defered and the connection charge would be paid IF AND WHEN the property is subdivided ." This means that neither Mr. Dahlquist nor Mrs. Schaefer paid any money to the City at all for the improvements. As such, there is a total failure of consideration both in the legal and moral sense to support any "obligation" from the City as Mr. Dahlquist suggests. Finally, Mr. Dahlquist hints at economic hardship by the City reducing his requested lots. Based on traditionally conservative property tax reports, we find that Mr. Dahlquist's real estate investment is quite profitable. Mr. Dahlquist paid $160,000 for the land in 1978. He sold the land in 1991 for $600,000. This is a respectible 375% return on investment overall and in excess of 31% per year. ( see Proprty Tax Info. card attatched ) I do agree with Mr. Dahlquist on one matter. The planned subdivision has been under consideration far too long. This matter has been heard at great length three times at the Planning Commision level and two times at the Council level. Each time it was virtually unanimously denied. The problem lies not with the City nor the opponents as Mr. Dahlquist suggests; however, it is with the developers who in spite of blistering opposition insist for some unknown reason to refuse to compromise by reducing the number of proposed lots and persist in proposing what is essentially the same plan for the same reasons every time. Unfortunately, both my wife and I will be unable to attend the meeting on the 16th. We send this letter as a sign of our continued concern and objection to the proposed development. We hope that the Council will respect the advise of its distinguised Planning Commision which has soundly rejected the plan three times Edina City Council November 9,1992 Page 3 already and finally put this much discussed issue to rest and devote its valuable time to more productive matters. Re ctfull submitted, Edward W. Glickman ......................... ............................... PROPERTY DATA SYSTEM ..... ............................... _ . .G 3 TAXPAYER INQUIRY 3CURR 319 3 3 PROPERTY ID 3NEXT 3 . .............. 3 30- 117 -21 -42 -0014 AAAAAAA 3. Pt.Con: Mt.Adr: 3 HOUSE# FRACTION STREET NAME UNIT ZIP +4 Front: Back: 3 3 5152 1/ SCHAEFER RD 00000+ Right: Left: 3 3 Ownerl: CDS PARTNERS Owner3: 3 3 Owner2: Owner4: 3 3 Zoning: Prim /sec: S Yr.blt: 0000 Area: Acres: 3 3 Sch.Dst: 270 Wshd: 01 GrZOsJEx: Subrecs: 01 Width: Depth: 3 3 3 3 Mkt -Land Mkt -Bldg Mkt -Mach Mkt -Tot Tx Capacity Hd PT %Own 3 3 1992: 600000 600000 12000 H LR 100 3 3 1991: 325000 325000 15438 L 0 3 3 1990: 3 3 Legal Description: LOT 11 BLOCK 3 3 AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 325 3 3 THAT PART OF LOT 11 LYING S OF 3 3 HAROLD WOODS AND S AND W OF 3 3 HAROLD WOODS 2ND AND 3RD ADDNS 3 3 3 Type PID or ADDRESS: press ENTER; or F1, F2, F8 MAIN Clear CN GoTo GoTo EXIT °'.- '8EE'�DMCRIPTION DER PICTUR9 ' i ,, r I �•JESiDEN�AL PROPERT� RECQRD AID APPIAlSAL R sl►.ja�f� iaR•�e ; IAE ADDRESS r '- ASSESSMENT DIST. ' SCHOOL DIST. NO. 1 J ,I,ryl,t�tt�l, t.-LOT BLOCK r W ADD,. • AUDITORS SUBDIVISION f 325 BUILDING PERMIT RECORD Da w Number Amount Purpose IWC nwi Gene n -ra mu y ral pesirobil ty: Folr Poor .rt .. OPQ'•I'gA�.�NO1LA7e1 BADE •Ada LEVEL fs.rM Se-"AEoE QOA D LAND VALUE COMPUTATIONS Frontage, Average- Unit Unit Front. Ft. Top. Intl. - 'Floored Dept b Prlce Percent Prica Parcels covered by same homestead. List parcel numbers. 2620 `iPLAT'NO. 13977 PARCEL NO. -26 it' • That part of Lot 11 lying S. of Harold Woods Addition and S. and W. of Harold Woods Second & 3rd Addition. CIO-56 Ac) �r.�; kp do�Q 1 -82 (AC-11) �� -per -4 c as Pa�rivELes Cc�v ►� '. 511 y & Lvw► -:,M in'LYl xI ASSESSMENT SUMMARY Valuation changes to be entered on nett line. Indicate year and authority — Assessor, Final Equalized, Abatement, etc. TOTAL VALUE HOME- ASSESSED VALUE MARKET MAR KET TOTAL FULL VALUE FULL VALUE OF LAND STEAD YEAR VALUE OF VALUE OF MARKET OF HOMESTEAD REMAINDER LAND STRUCTURES VALUE OF LAND STRUCTURES STRUCTURES AND Yes No 1 25% () 40% TOTAL J� .I INFOR MATI N I ra on Klnd of Inst. Remarks I F� ' o Der'. 21S pit& 9I/Sr. IfIft. 03 ;...tf#tw4 1'l:•J:'Y. �:t' J' .I, ..ryh�` N: f6n�1[vict for Deed held by: r.y+ 7' O n A : . n� 'r/►jAO•.dl�•af..,e.w7r��wsBlea FF o� ; d' /oLy = �o s6 /54- 00c l5HSoo G' I Lle"Ao. -4i c d0Al l' /. ;(I LY92;_ A. o e:� Cn _. ° A iaeB REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: KENNETH ROSLAND Agenda Item # II. B. From: CRAIG LARSEN Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Date: NOVEMBER 16, 1992 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA Subject: B- 92 -42, VRIA CE E To Council APPEAL - WEST Action 0 Motion 62ND STREET. AUFDERHEIDE.� El Resolution 53Z ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Recommendation: Info /Background: See attached materials. ,11/13/92 13:40 FAX 612 340 2868 DORSEY & WHITNEY IN THE MATTER OF VARIANCE.. FINDINGS OF FACT, FROM CODE SECTION 815 - CONCLUSIONS AND JAMES ERNEST AND REGINA DECISION AUFDERHEIDE, 5325 62nd Avenue West FINDINGS OF FACT I. On March 4, 1991 the City Council directed City staff to conduct studies of the applicable plans and ordinances of the City, and to give information to, and make recommendations to, the City Council relative to the need and desirability, if any, for adopting new or amending existing plans and ordinances of the City relating to restricting, regulating or controlling the erection, location and size of towers, antennas and dish antennas within the City. To allow such studies to go on and to protect the planning process and the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City, the City Council found it necessary and desirable to adopt, and did adopt, on March 4, 1991, an ordinance imposing a moratorium on the issuance of any permits for the construction, erection and relocation in the City of any tower, antenna or dish antenna as defined in Ordinance No. 812 of the City as then in effect (the "Moratorium "). 2. While the Moratorium was in effect studies were undertaken by City staff and information was given to, and recommendations were made to the City Council relating to restricturing, regulating or controlling of towers, antennas and dish antennas within the City. 3. The City Council considered such information and recommendations at meetings held on February 18, 1992, March 16, 1992 and April 6, 1992. 4. On April 6, 1992 the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 812 -A3, which ordinance has been codified in the Edina City Code as Section 815 (such ordinance as so codified is herein called "Section 815 "). Ordinance No. 812 -A became effective on April 7, 1992 and on such date the Moratorium was lifted. [a 007 5. In enacting Section 815 the City Council considered the various height, size, locations and other requirements necessary for the receipt and transmission of signals from towers, antennas and dish antennas. The City Council also considered safety concerns and the aesthetic impact of such towers, antennas and dish antennas on surrounding property. 6. Section 815 was enacted to regulate the installation, size, location and height of towers, antennas and dish antennas in a manner which in the view of the Council at the time of adoption of Ordinance No. 812 -A3 did not impose unreasonable limitations on, or prevent, the transmission and receipt of signals by 11/13/92 13:41 FAX 612 340 2868 DORSEY & WHITNEY 0 008 towers, antennas and dish antennas or impose costs on the users of such towers, antennas and dish antennas that are excessive in light of the purchase and installation of the cost of the equipment, while at the same time having the least adverse aesthetic impact on surrounding property and ensuring towers, antennas and dish antennas are installed in a safe and proper manner and are able to withstand high winds and other adverse weather conditions. 7. Section 815 imposes differing requirements on various towers, antennas and satellite dishes. The reason for such differentiation was to permit transmission and receipt of intended. signals with the least adverse impact on surrounding property and to ensure that installations were undertaken in a safe and proper manner and that installed towers, dish antennas and antennas are not hazardous, and was based upon information supplied to the City Council and public testimony which indicated that such restrictions do not unreasonably limit or prevent the transmission or receipt of the intended signal from such tower, antennas or dish antennas. Section 815 imposes different restrictions and requirements for dish antennas. The size and shape of dish antennas make them more obtrusive and less likely to blend in with their surroundings, which results in a greater adverse impact on surrounding properties than antennas and towers, and the shape of dish antennas makes them subject to a higher amount of wind force because the dish shape will trap wind, with the larger the dish or higher the supporting structure resulting in greater wind force on the base of the structure. 8. The City has received a request for a variance from the requirements of Section 815 from James Ernest and Regina Aufderheide (the "Applicants ") to permit the location of a roof mounted satellite dish antenna on the Applicants' home at 5325 62nd Street West. Such request was heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals on October 1, 1992 and the Zoning Board of Appeals denied such variance request. The Applicants have appealed the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals to the City Council. The City Council heard such appeal on October 19, 1992 and at such time heard testimony concerning the variance request. 9. Prior to applying for the requested variance the Applicants had located a roof mounted satellite dish antenna on the Applicants' home in violation of Section 815 and without the required permit. After being notified by the City of such violation the Applicants removed the satellite dish antenna from the roof and applied for the variance. 10. Mr- James Aufderheide, one of the Applicants, is in the business of selling and installing satellite dish antennas. Mr. Aufderheide attended the hearing held on March 16, 1992 on proposed Section 815 and did not object to the prohibition on roof mounted satellite dish antennas in Section 815. -2- 11/13/92 13:42 FAX 612 340 2868 DORSEY & WHITNEY 11. The Applicants' purchased their home in Spring 1992 and were knowledgeable with the requirements of Section 815 at the time of purchase. 12. At the City Council meeting on October 19, 1992, residents of neighboring properties testified in opposition to the granting of the variance and as to the adverse impact of a satellite dish antenna mounted on the Applicants` roof on their properties. 13. The Applicants have located the satellite dish antenna in a nonconforming location and have made no attempt to place such antenna in a conforming location or in a different nonconforming location which would have a lesser adverse impact on neighboring properties. CONCLUSTONS 1. No undue hardship exists since the Applicants' were fully aware of the requirements of Section 815 at the time of purchase of their home and therefore any hardship to the Applicants is self created, and the variance if granted will have a detrimental effect on neighboring properties. DECISIQN Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions: The City Council of the City of Edina determines to uphold the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals denying the requested variance. -3- [a 009 ?aul R. Heinerscheid President and CEO November 12, 1992 Mr. Craig Larsen City Planner City of Edina Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 -1394 Dear Mr. Larsen: 2375 University Avenue West St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 -1603 (612) 644.2200 Fax (612) 644 -8025 Please find enclosed the report of Satellite Network Systems regarding the site survey of the property of Mr. James Aufderheide which our firm performed on Tuesday, November 10th. I trust you will find this report satisfactory. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to get in touch with me. Sincerely yours, Paul R. Heinerscheid Site Survey Property of Mr. James Aufderheide located at: 5325 West 62nd Street Edina, Minnesota Report prepared for: The City of Edina, Minnesota Office of the City Planner by: Satellite Network Systems, Inc. St. Paul, Minnesota November 12, 1992 Overview • Objective of the Site Survey • Satellite Network Systems • Orbital Arc, Available Satellite Programming • Site Survey: Layout of the property - Four possible antenna locations: a) Southeast corner of house, back yard b) Southwest corner of house, back yard c) Roof location, Western end of house d) Front yard location • Conclusion • Attachments: 1) Layout sketch (not to scale) of property 2) Photographic illustration of surveyed sites 3) Obstruction pattern diagram for site #2 4) Compass reading chart for selected satellites 5) WESTSAT Satellite Channel Chart 10 -28 -92 Site Survey Satellite Reception Feasibility, James Aufderheide Property: 5325 West 62nd Street, Edina, Minnesota Objective of the Site Survey Satellite Network Systems was retained by the City of Edina through the City Attorney, Mr. Gerry Gilligan, and the City Planner, Mr. Craig Larsen to provide an independent assessment with regard to satellite signal reception feasibility on the property of Mr. James Aufderheide, and to determine an optimum location for the placement of the satellite receive antenna within said property. This report will confine itself to "line -of- site" considerations, that is to say, examine physical obstructions to a direct satellite reception, since satellite signals cannot pass through trees, leaves, fences, or other physical barriers. Essentially, the signal must reach the antenna unobstructed to be viewable. Not included in this report, are considerations regarding terrestrial interference (TI) which, in addition to line -of -site considerations, could impair proper reception. Terrestrial ' interference is caused by terrestrial (as opposed to satellite) transmissions in the same frequency band (in this case C -band receive frequency band) and used for such purposes as telephone relays, television signal distribution, etc., through point -to -point terrestrial microwave connections. The role of Satellite Network Systems is solely, in our understanding, to provide an opinion as to suitable locations for a satellite receive antenna, and to determine which satellites (spacecraft) can be received from each of these locations. A complete chart of existing satellites, currently in use, with the programs they are currently carrying (as of November 11, 1992) will be attached to this report. Satellite Network Systems, Background and Capability Satellite Network Systems (SNS) is a systems integrator for professional and commercial video networks, and its primary activity is to service the market of business television. Business television is the use of the television medium by corporations and other organizations for internal and external communications purposes, and in almost all cases for professional, as opposed to entertainment, reasons. The company was founded in the spring of 1988 as a unit of Hubbard Broadcasting, and became independent March 1, 1990, following a management buyout. It is today recognized as one of the top four national providers of business television services, and services clients nationwide and overseas, particularly in Europe. Satellite Network Systems is not involved in the home satellite entertainment industry servicing individual home owners who wish to receive entertainment and educational programming via satellite. We customarily refer such customers to local vendors in the Twin Cities. Mr. James Aufderheide's firm, Aufderworld, is one such vendor in the Twin Cities, but Satellite Network Systems has not yet had a commercial relationship with that firm to date. For this reason, no conflict of interest exists with regard to SNS' involvement in this case. Even though the home satellite market represents a different market segment of the industry, the technology is essentially the same as in the commercial and professional satellite delivery, and the techniques to determine suitable locations for the placement of receive antennas are identical. Satellite Network Systems • Aufderheide Site Survey • Page 1 Satellite Network Systems, as a systems integrator, has overall responsibility for the installation of satellite receive terminals at its customers' premises (mostly commercial buildings). Because these premises are all over the United States, SNS works with a large number of local installers throughout the country to conduct site surveys and perform the actual installation according to a strict set of criteria set forth by Satellite Network Systems. In some particularly difficult cases, or on premises within the vicinity of the Twin Cities, SNS' engineers might perform site surveys themselves to get a better appreciation of the situation. In all cases, site surveys performed by subcontractors will be reviewed by SNS' Engineer, Mr. Matt Barrett, and by SNS' Manager of Network Systems, Mrs. Susan Broadribb. It is fair to say that SNS enjoys a nationwide reputation for quality services and for attention to detail, particularly in the installation and customer service area. Satellite Network Systems is therefore qualified to perform the site survey specific to this case. Satellite Network Systems' two founding principals, Paul R. Heinerscheid, President and CEO, and Edwin S. Van Hamm, Executive Vice President, have a combined total of close to 35 years of experience in the satellite industry. Both are founding directors of the Satellite Broadcasting and Communications Association (SBCA), the principal trade association for the home satellite entertainment industry which includes satellite systems providers, satellite program providers, satellite equipment manufacturers, and satellite retailers and installers among its membership. Both Mr. Heinerscheid and Mr. Van Hamm have held and still hold leadership roles in the industry, aside from their recognized contribution to the SBCA. Mr. Heinerscheid currently serves on the Board of Directors of the Society of Satellite Professionals International (SSPI) and was the President of its Midwest chapter from 1989 - 1991. Orbital Arc, Available Satellite Programming Geo-stationary satellites, i.e., satellites that appear to be in the same spot in the sky as viewed from the earth, are parked on an arc called "geosynchronous arc" located in the plain of the equator at a distance of 22,400 miles from the earth. All the satellites subject to video reception for commercial or home - entertainment use are parked on this geosynchronous arc. As viewed from the northern hemisphere (remembering that the Twin Cities are at 45 degrees latitude), this arc stretches from east to west with its highest elevation due south at approximately 38 degrees elevation. The further east or the further west away from the center of the arc, the lower the elevation angle until the arc disappears behind the horizon. It is generally assumed that elevation angles below 20 degrees are not practical by general satellite reception standards. There are today close to 40 spacecraft positioned over the U.S. sky, covering part or all of the U.S. territory with video programming. These satellites operate in two distinct frequency bands, C -band (4-6 GHz) and Ku -band (11 -13 GHz). Each of these satellites carries between 10 and 48 separate channels, each of which can transmit at least one video program per channel. However not all channels are used on a 24 -hour basis, nor are they all used for video use. Nevertheless, given the abundance of available channels, it is easily understandable that there is a very large number of video programming sources available to any home satellite receive system with a motorized antenna and the necessary .electronics. Most home receive systems are equipped with motorized antennas, as not all programming are available on a single satellite. This is the main distinguishing factor with commercial systems, which are usually locked in onto a single spacecraft. Most home users have a primary interest in viewing programs which were originally meant to be distributed to cable head ends for further distribution inside of local cable distribution systems. The majority of these programs are transmitted in scrambled form and are viewable only with the use of a commercially - available decoder that has to be properly authorized for reception by the originating programmer. There are today over three million home satellite receive systems in use Satellite Network Systems - Aufderheide Site Survey - Page 2 throughout the United States, which receive cable -type programming (CNN, ESPN, HBO, etc.) through a home satellite receive system. In addition to these news and entertainment -type programs, there are now a wide variety of other, more specialized programs available to the home viewing public. Such programs include for - credit and not - for - credit educational programs, ethnic and culturally- focused programs, as well as general information programs to specific trades and industries. Attached to this report is a copy of the Westsat satellite listing, which is updated several times a year, and is the authoritative satellite registry in the industry. There are more elaborate program listings for entertainment programming, but the Westsat is clearly the reference publication. The attached listing is dated October 28th, and is therefore very much up -to -date. It should be noted that reproduction of this chart, to which Satellite Network Systems is a subscriber, has occurred without permission of their publishers and is intended only for documentation of this site survey. Finally, it is important to state that satellite channel assignments to certain programmers are never permanent, and that lately a very significant amount of channel shifting, both within one orbital location and among satellites has occurred as the result of the realignment of the satellite fleet. This causes many satellite receive system owners to repoint their antenna to different satellites to continue receiving the same programming. For example, a large number of cable programming channels moved from Galaxy 1 to Galaxy 5, and another group moved from Galaxy 3 to Satcom C5. For this reason, establishing line -of -site feasibility to a single satellite in the sky does not guarantee continued reception of the same programming over time. Site Survey of the Aufderheide Property: Introduction The site survey was conducted on Tuesday, November 10, between 9:30 a.m. and 10:45 a.m. by Paul R. Heinerscheid, assisted by Randy Johnson, an independent engineer working frequently for Satellite Network Systems on a freelance basis. Mr. Johnson stepped in at the last moment when it became apparent that Mr. Matt Barrett, staff engineer at SNS, would be out of town at a technical convention on the date requested for the survey. The surveying team was received at the property by Mr. James Aufderheide, treated courteously in every respect, and given full access to the premises. Specific Locations Surveyed on the Property The property, the front entrance of which faces north and back yard faces south, borders other properties on three sides, including an other yard, larger than the Aufderheide yard, on its south side. There is a large number of trees, bushes, and hedges surrounding the perimeter of the property, with at least one large, and beautifully shaped oak tree in the southeast corner of the back yard. The adjacent property on the south side contains a very large, and obviously still growing, maple tree. The west side of the property is bordered by a succession of hedges and trees, some of which have been trimmed by the power company to avoid interference with the power lines. Surveying Technique Selected The survey consisted primarily of visually identifying suitable spots for satellite reception, with regard to line -of -site to an arc extending from the southeast to the southwest. At the four sites selected, line -of -site measurements were taken with the help of a compass (to determine the direction and location of particular satellites, allowing for six degrees bias from the magnetic pull) and an inclinometer to measure elevation angles to the orbital arc, for each azimuth pointing. If Satellite Network Systems - Aufderheide Site Survey - Page 3 physical obstructions, primarily trees, fell within line -of -site, they were noted at the elevation angle to the top of the physical obstruction was recorded. The attached graph illustrates the obstruction pattern, and the attached photographs are meant to provide a visual illustration of the actual setting. Potential Receive Site #1: Southeast Corner of the House, Pointing Toward Back Yard This site was selected because it is the highest point on the property and free of immediate surrounding obstruction. However, as Picture number two illustrates, line -of -site towards the south, southeast, and southwest is obstructed virtually for the entire orbital arc by the large oak tree on the Aufderheide property (dark tree in the foreground, see picture) as well as by the large maple tree on the neighboring property slightly to the west in the background. The reader must remember that these pictures were taken in late fall after all leaves had fallen down, and that during the spring and summer, the view would be completely obstructed and no signal reception would be possible at all. Conclusion: This site is entirely unsuitable for satellite reception. Potential Receive Site #2: Southwest Corner of the House This site was chosen because it provided some clear spots to the orbital arc between trees at first glance. As for Site number one, it is assumed that the antenna would be ground- mounted on a pole, with the center of the antenna at least six feet off the ground, to allow for a two -foot snow cover, which is the absolute minimum, and probably insufficient, in northern climates such as Minnesota. Its location is, incidentally, in direct alignment with the current roof - mounted site originally chosen by Mr. Aufderheide, except that it is ground- mounted. As the attached pictures and diagram illustrate, there are three major line -of -site obstructions apparent from this site: a large oak tree on the Aufderheide property to the east, the maple tree on the neighboring property straight south, and a partially trimmed tree on the property's edge (probably already on the neighboring property) to the west. The resulting "windows" between these obstructions are fairly narrow and extremely limited as far as satellite reception is concerned. The satellites that can be received from these "windows" are: K2, K1, Spacenet 3 to the East, Anik C3 (Canadian), Spacenet 1, SBS 5 to the West. None of these satellites are "mainstream" program carriers, and they should be considered as very limited in their usefulness for this application. Conclusion: Unless the homeowner is specifically interested in programming available now and in the future on satellites visible within the fairly narrow windows of this spot, this site is unsuitable for satellite reception by any motorized satellite receive system. Potential Receive Site #3: Existing Rooftop Mount Selected by Mr. Aufderheide As mentioned earlier, this site is at the western edge of the house on the same parallel line as Site number two, but on the roof itself, approximately 14 feet higher relative to ground level than potential site number two. While no pictures were taken from that site, Picture number one illustrates the location of that site. This site is the only one of the four sites surveyed providing a full arc reception without obstruction of any kind. Conclusion: This site is fully suitable, from a technical point of view, for satellite reception. Satellite Network Systems - Aufderheide Site Survey - Page 4 s Potential Receive Site #4: Front Yard Location, 10 feet Inward from Street Curb, Approximately 12 feet East from the Edge of the Driveway This site is on the north side of the house. Aside from any esthetic considerations, this site is better suited than any of the two backyard sites surveyed. The attached picture illustrates the exact location by the position of the SNS technician (x). This particular site, which is sufficiently recessed from the house to allow line -of -site over the house, and sufficiently to the west to avoid another oak tree clearly visible in the front yard, provides a quasi - complete view of the orbital arc, with the exception of the western edge of the arc. (Galaxy 5 to Aurora/C2 not visible.) Conclusion: Unless specific programming available only on the satellites that are excluded on the western edge of the arc is desired, this site would also be suitable, at least technically, for satellite reception. It should be noted that the antenna would be facing toward the house with its back to the street, and should be mounted on a pole at least six feet high from ground level. Conclusion We have surveyed the Aufderheide property carefully, using all available tools and techniques required to make an accurate assessment. We have come to the conclusion that the only two sites suitable for full arc, or quasi -full arc satellite reception on this property are either a roof - mounted location, as originally selected by the owner, or a front yard location with the antenna facing away from the street toward the house. With the exception with two very narrow windows visible from one spot in the back yard, bearing in mind that tree and vegetation growth will narrow these windows even further, we find that the back yard of the Aufderheide property provides no suitable location for a ground- mounted satellite reception system. Report approved by: Paul R. Heinerscheid, President &CEO Date: November 12, 1992 Satellite Network Systems - Aufderheide Site Survey - Page 5 <D +.G'r+ 0-1 - (g) 2 PokcH i i ME ©4 I v/t4'Vt N/A/ O 0 Site Survey, Aufderheide roperty, November 10, 1992 TO 4;4; GE VA :4y sr. OP. vp NO: /_ "" ;ice �w f X eK_i► i If �I ,�'� y •` ,.S ,' ' NS.. :y'i tet - _ i ^ � �� � � Y �, is ��: °•S� L.ie�` - �� tt__ ��_ �r4._•- mac; ,., �,. -WP/— , jr ' / a 4A Nil � _: ate- � /� � � lu, •�� = r 'On-P =. ; I i JIM II` � • Pappe rov, . I n Jr 0--, o &Z tVA os VYIW #IYIMV,4 P-01-V 020" W,,Ulfa/ lyaWa "o Olt3 y / L / Eb n 0 J Oki 'IS Identification for the Most Common Satellites from the Twin Cities Magnetic Compass Satellite Longitude Elevation _g - Aurora 21CS 137° 22.6 227.5 Satcom C4 1350 23.8 225.6 Galaxy 1 1330 25.0 223.6 ASC 1 1280 27.7 218.4 Galaxy 5 125° 29.3 215.2 GStar 4 1250 29.3 215.2 SBS 5 1230 30.3 212.9 Spacenet 1 12(F 31.6 209.5 Anik C3 1150 33.7 203.4 Anik C2 110° 35.4 197.1 Anik F2 1070 36.2 193.1 GS tar 2 1050 36.7 190.4 GS tar 1 1030 37.1 187.7 SBS 6 99° 37.7 182.1 SBS 2 970 37.9 179.3 SBS 3 950 38.0 176.5 GS tar 3 930 38.0 173.7 SBS 4 910 38.0 170.9 Spacenet 3 870 37.7 165.3 K1 850 37.4 162.5 K2 810 36.6 157.0 Spacenet 2 69° 32.7 141.6 Site Survey, Aufderheide Property, November 10, 1992 :i Ross Rifkin 5320 W. 62nd Street 925 -2520 November 7, 1992 Regina and Jim Ausderheide 5325 W. 62nd Street Edina, MN 55436 Dear Regina and Jim, Doug Lambert 6205 Hansen 922 -7809 Edina Minnesota 55436 - L'O P�-Y - This is a letter from many of your neighbors. For most of us, this is a difficult subject and we hope you understand that we wanted to express our concerns to you directly and hopefully without having to continue this discussion at a City Planner's meeting. We are writing to you about something which deeply concerns many of us and our families, something which we feel is a very important neighborhood issue - about your request to the city to place a satellite antenna dish on your rooftop. We have spoken with most every adult neighbor surrounding your home. This letter is from all of us to you. Regina and Jim, we want to appeal .to your greater sense of conscience, as a good neighbor, to reconsider your request to the city and to withdraw it for the sake of the neighborhood. In case you do not realize it, and to be quite candid, not a single one of us wants to see such a large dish placed in plain site on your roof top. In fact, some of us arc beyond discouraged that such a request has been made. This letter is to explain how we feel. All of us pass by your home regularly. Many of our homes look directly onto your house and property. It is part of the moment -to- moment view we and our children see as we look out of our windows and into our neighborhood. Currently, those views are very pleasing - the warmth of wood and brick of yours and other homes amidst trees, lawns and shrubbery. Not only do we enjoy this setting, we prize it. For us, a large roof top satellite dish detracts both from the beauty and economic value of each of our own homes and the neighborhood. A rooftop satellite dish also changes the feel of our neighborhood. A large rooftop metal structure for us signals to your child and ours, and to all that visit our neighborhood, that a little less warmth, a little less beauty and a little less caring exists here. For us, it subtlety tells all who see it, that commerce and the "TV gods" matters more than the beauty of the natural environment and people of this neighborhood. We are asking you to please re- consider the impact of your request. Please try to see beyond the commercial success you might envision if Edina opened itself up rooftop antenna dishes. Please try to picture the wonderful quality of life and spirit we all can expect from our neighborhood if each of us does the best we can to keep up or improve our neighborhood's charming, visually peaceful appearance. Regina and Jim, please consider other alternatives. We would encourage a ground level installation with appropriate shrubbery to help keep the satellite dish out of view. w We'would be glad to get together to discuss alternatives that might work our for everyone affected. We will call you in a day or two to see if you would be interested in talking about this. We know that your view of this may differ, but we thank you for thinking about our concerns. Sincerely, k 4�k z Ross RifIdn Doug Zbert Additional signatures of those also concerned about having a rooftop antenna in their neighborhood: Signature: Address: Repo -k 53 0 7 MADDO X I - 153 % l Gc 4 1) S _ REQUEST FOR PURCHASE TO: Edina City Council FROM: David A. Velde VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager SUBJECT. REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5.000 DATE: November 16, 1992 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Company 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Aagard Environmental Services RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Agenda Item IV. A. Amount of Quote or &d 1.$5.83 per cu. yd. 2. 3. 4. 5. GENERAL INFORMATION: Aagard has agreed to.extend the 1992 Refuse Contract with no increase in cost for 1993. Aagards first contract with Edina j was 1991. They were low bid again for 1992. This company has provided the City with superior service during this period of time and our overall cost has decreased by about $3,000.00 per year. Signature Department The Recommended bid is — x within budget not withirp butt / _ John r Vlallin Kenneth Rosland City Manager I MINUTES TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 10, 1992 9:00 A.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Fran Hoffman, Chairman Cordon Hughes Craig Swanson Alison Fuhr MEMBERS ABSENT: Robert Sherman OTHERS PRESENT: Ms. Ms. Ms. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. V (A) . Faith Magnuson, 4909 Browndale Avenue Kathy Colwell, 5517 Knoll Drive Donita Bunke, 5520 Knoll Drive Tom Ceske, 5220 Eden Avenue Thomas Oestrich, 5220 Eden Avenue Jim Bunke, 5520 Knoll Drive Ron Cornwell, 4905 Browndale Avenue STAFF PRESENT: Deputy Chief Leonard Kleven, Edina P.D. Mr. Stephen Marston, Edina P.D. Mr. Eric Felton, Edina P.D. SECTION A: Requests on which the Committee recommends approval as requested or modified, and the Council's authorization of recommended action. (1) Discuss traffic safety concerns in the Parkwood Knolls area. Continued from September meeting. ACTION TAKEN: This item had been continued from September, pending completion of the Blake Road construction project. Mr. Hoffman opened the discussion by summarizing results of recent Police Department speed surveys, which did suggest higher- than -usual speeds in the area: TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES November 10, 1992 Page 2 STAEB'1 HOURS, t1I? SURyEF VOTUME . 85 South Knoll Drive 3 103 35.0* Schaefer Road 3 179 35.5 *High eastbound MPH vs. average MPH for westbound Ms. Donita Bunke, a resident of Knoll Drive, expressed her concern that the speed charting was completed after recent snowstorms, resulting in speeds lower than they might have been. Sergeant Marston stated at the time of the surveys, the roads were generally dry and free of snow. Mr. Hoffman defined Parkwood Knolls as the area generally south of Interlachen Boulevard, north of Vernon Avenue and Nine Mile Creek, and east of Dundee Road. He stated that the Police Department had completed a license plate /origination plate survey, and summarized it as follows: Total Count . . . . . . . . . 282 Edina ( Parkwood Knolls area) 146 (51.7% Edina (NW Edina) . . . . . . 25 (8.9 %) Edina (other Edina) . . . . . 27 (9.6 %) Other areas . . . . . . . . . 82 (29.0 %) Rental /lease . . . . . . . . 2 (0.7 %) Mr. Hoffman presented new traffic count data for the area, which compared 1992 counts with previous surveys conducted in 1972, 1974, and 1977. While the recent survey suggests a decrease in daily traffic volume along some streets, Mr. Hoffman said the numbers are likely lower due to the recently - completed Blake Road construction project, and the fact that motorists have not yet returned to their old routes. Counts were highest on Schaefer Road north of Parkwood Road (751 vehicles in 1992, not previously surveyed), Parkwood Road west of Blake Road (505 vehicles, compared with 210 in 1977), and South Knoll Drive west of Blake Road (406 vehicles, compared with 650 in 1977). Mr. Hoffman reminded the Committee of the action taken in September: trim trees to improve visibility and Schaefer Road and Knoll Drive, and install 25- mile - per -hour advisory signage along the median area on Knoll Drive. He noted that recent surveys suggest fairly high speeds in the area, but not high volumes. Mr. Hughes thought the volume increase on Parkwood Road was notable, and Mr. Hoffman said that it went up at the time Dovre Drive opened (volume on Dovre is approximately 1,000 vehicles per day). Mr. Jim Bunke expressed his appreciation to the Committee for its prompt action on the pedestrian and 25- mile - per -hour advisories. Mr. Bunke said his present concern was for the five -way intersection of South Knoll Drive, Knoll Drive, and Schaefer Road. TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES November 10, 1992 Page 3 He noted that 22 children reside in the area, and that the majority of them have to cross two streets to get to their bus stops. He requested that advisory pedestrian signage and painted crosswalks be installed at all five points of the intersection. Mr. Hoffman asked if that particular intersection was unique to the Parkwood Knolls area, and Mr. Bunke agreed that it was, suggesting that it is a major gateway off both Blake Road and Schaefer Road. Ms. Kathy Colwell, of 5517 Knoll Drive, agreed with the need for crosswalks, and requested additional signage to control speed and volume. Mr. Bunke suggested installing a pedestrian /25- mile - per -hour advisory on eastbound Knoll Drive approaching Schaefer Road as well. Ms. Bunke thought the Committee should consider upgrading the current 2 -way "STOP" sign at Parkwood Road and Schaefer Road to a 4 -way "STOP" to slow down youthful speeders. Ms. Colwell would like to encourage traffic to use Blake Road, not Schaefer Road, and thought additional "STOP" signs might accomplish that. Mr. Hughes moved to recommend the installation of five crosswalks at the intersection of South Knoll Drive/Knoll Drive /Schaefer Road, and a pedestrian /25- mile -per -hour advisory signage on eastbound Knoll Drive at Schaefer Road. Mrs. Fuhr seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Mr. Swanson questioned whether sidewalks could be painted this late in the season. Mr. Hoffman said it depends on the weather; crosswalks could not be painted if it is raining or too cold. Mr. Swanson advised the residents present that sidewalks would change the aesthetics of the neighborhood. Mr. Hoffman agreed, and reminded those present that their intersection will stand out and look different from any other within Parkwood Knolls. The residents viewed that as a positive change. Mr. Hoffman asked those present if motorists were traveling through the existing 4 -way "STOP' at Knoll Drive and Schaefer Road. Ms. Bunke stated there are blatant violations of the "STOP ", especially by area residents. Ms. Colwell asked why the request for a 4 -way "STOP" at Parkwood Road and Schaefer Road had not been included in Mr. Hughes' motion, and Mr. Hoffman stated that the Police Department would attempt to correct the problem there with more active enforcement of the site. Mr. Hoffman called for a vote on the motion, and it carried 4 -0. SECTION B: Requests on which the Committee recommends denial of request. (1) Discuss traffic safety concerns on Browndale Avenue. Continued from August meeting. TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES November 10, 1992 Page 4 ACTION TAKEN: This item had been held over from August pending completion of additional speed surveys by the Police Department. Mr. Hoffman began the discussion by summarizing the status of the proposed Browndale Bridge construction project. At the present time, options being considered by the Engineering Department are: A. Restore existing structure B. Restore existing structure with one -way use C. Restore existing structure with one -way bridge and one -way thru park D. Maintain existing lower portion with new deck to allow two -way traffic E. Close bridge; cul -de -sac Browndale Avenue at Bridge Street F. Replace existing structure and dam G. Do nothing All of the above require coordination with the following agencies: State Historical Society, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, U.S. Corps of Engineers, Minnesota Department of Transportation (only if State bridge bonding funds are involved). Mr. Hoffman reported that the project has a 1994 or 1995 time line. In preliminary talks with the State Historical Society, its representatives have indicated that option "E" (close bridge) is not viable, as the historical nature of the neighborhood requires some access from Browndale Avenue. Mr. Hoffman reviewed the 24 -hour traffic count totals for the Country Club District which had previously been presented at the August meeting. The count showed 1799 vehicles daily on the north end of Browndale near Sunnyside Road and 2228 vehicles on the south end of Browndale near Edgebrook. An average of 4011 vehicles travel over the Browndale bridge and 2676 turn onto Country Club Road. Using data obtained during recent speed surveys, Mr. Hoffman offered the following comparison of 85% speed for the area: $TRLEg HOURS OF SURVEY VOLIIME' $5$ Wooddale Avenue 5 1053 31.5 Browndale Avenue 6 595 30.5 Edina Boulevard 5 366 33.0 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES November 10, 1992 Page 5 Mr. Hoffman presented a graphic summarizing the peak -hour license plate /origination survey originally conducted in August. Of the 672 vehicles counted, 29.5% were from the area bounded by Highway 100 to the west, the Edina border to the north, Wooddale to the east, and West 50th Street to the south. Other areas of Edina constituted 13.1 %, southwest Minneapolis 16.5 %, suburbs 29.9 %, other areas of Minneapolis 2.88, other suburbs 29.9% and unidentifiable regions 8.28. Mr. Tom Geske and Mr. Thomas Oestrich were present, representing the Edina school district bus garage. They relayed that four school buses regularly stop in the Browndale area: one to /from Edina High School, one to /from South View Middle School, one to /from Concord School, and one to /from Our Lady of Grace. All busses stop at Browndale Avenue and Edgebrook Place, while three of the busses also make stops at Bridge Street and Moorland Avenue. Mr. Geske noted that children living on the west side of Browndale Avenue never have to cross the street to catch a bus, while those on the east side do. Sergeant Marston addressed the Police Department's enforcement efforts, reporting that 17.25 hours of enforcement over a 33 -day period had resulted in 14 citations (speed and violations of the "STOP" sign on southbound Browndale Avenue at Bridge Street). The fastest vehicle was clocked at 40 miles per hour, with most of the other speed violations falling in the 38 -39 mile - per -hour range. Deputy Chief Kleven summarized the area's accident history, noting three reportable accidents within the past three years; failure to yield accounted for two of the accidents, and the third resulted from a vehicle crossing over the centerline. Mr. Ron Cornwell, resident at 4905 Browndale Avenue, thought that many accidents go unreported, especially along the curve. Ms. Faith Magnuson, also of Browndale Avenue, expressed her concern for children walking on the bridge. She believed that there is not room for pedestrians and two vehicles on the bridge at the same time. She suggested "NO TURN" signage from West 50th Street onto Browndale Avenue as one solution. Mr. Cornwell said the volume of traffic is a primary concern, and that a great deal of it is from outside the neighborhood. That traffic, he said, uses the Country Club streets as a shortcut to south Minneapolis and points beyond. He stated that the neighborhood deserves protection, and stressed the need to discourage outside traffic. At the same time, however, he noted that moving traffic off Browndale Avenue will only push it onto another street. Mrs. Fuhr asked if, during the bridge construction project, the orientation would be to improve the current pedestrian /traffic situation. It was Mr. Hoffman's belief that a final recommendation would be to maintain the bridge superstructure, while constructing a safer top. Improvements could include TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES November 10, 1992 Page 6 walkways for pedestrians and /or a wider bridge surface. Mr. Hoffman summarized the concerns of neighbors into.one of traffic volume and how to reduce it. Mr. Hughes asked Mr. Cornwell if restricting in -bound Browndale Avenue traffic (by prohibiting turns from West 50th Street) would end up diverting traffic onto Wooddale Avenue. Mr. Cornwell didn't know, and offered that if every car diverted from Browndale Avenue ended up on Wooddale Avenue, little would have been accomplished. He did think a 4 -6 P.M. turn restriction would help, however. Mr. Hoffman wondered about implementing a peak -hour turn ban on a demonstration basis. Mr. Swanson made'a corollary between the Browndale Avenue and Tracy Avenue issues, and stated that experience has shown that traffic can't be restricted on Browndale Avenue without dramatically affecting volume on another street. He noted that the Committee has been questioned in the past for not soliciting .enough public input, and suggested that there has not been enough input to make a recommendation at this time. Mr. Hoffman said it appears that local residents want to move faster than the bridge construction plan would dictate. He said he was able to separate the bridge issue from other traffic concerns, and wondered if the City Council should invite residents in to discuss the issue and conduct a neighborhood traffic study. He felt there would be backlash if action was taken without getting the neighborhood involved. Mrs. Fuhr moved to recommend the installation of temporary "NO TURNS. 4 -6 P.M.. Monday- Friday" signs on West 50th Street at Browndale Avenue, and to recommend the Council consider studying the neighborhood through a traffic analysis involving area residents. Mr. Hughes seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Mr. Hughes questioned the effect of a one -way bridge on traffic volume. He also noted that an identifiable issue of ,traffic safety exists with the bridge and the turn, unlike the Tracy Avenue situation where no clear -cut safety issue existed. Mr. Swanson separated the concerns of the neighborhood into two issues: (1) concerns for safety at the end of the bridge (which he noted would hopefully be addressed during the bridge construction project), and (2) traffic volume. He stressed that the Committee cannot restrict volume, and suggested that a consultant would be better suited to address that issue. Mr. Hoffman called for a vote on the motion, and it failed 2 -2. (2) Discuss traffic safety concerns at Heritage Drive and Xerxes Avenue. Request received from James Prosser, Richfield City Manager, on behalf of a concerned Richfield resident. TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES November 10, 1992 Page 7 ACTION TAKEN: This issue had originally been brought to the attention of Mr. James Prosser, Richfield City Manager, by Mr. Dick Ziemer of 6229 Xerxes Avenue. Mr. Ziemer is in the process of selling his home and has been frustrated by the reaction of potential homebuyers to the traffic situation on Xerxes Avenue. He outlined his concerns in a letter to Mr. Prosser, who in turn forwarded the letter to Mr. Dennis Hansen, Hennepin County Transportation Planning Engineer. Mr. Ziemer had four basic concerns: (1) increase in traffic volume; (2) Crosstown metering at Xerxes Avenue has caused backups south of the interchange in the northbound lanes; (3) substantial amount of traffic exiting Heritage Drive onto Xerxes Avenue; and (4) speeding. Chief among Mr. Ziemer's suggestions was to prohibit left turns from Heritage Drive onto Xerxes Avenue, and divert eastbound Heritage Drive traffic south on York Avenue and east on West 64th Street. Mr. Hansen addressed those concerns, point by point, in a letter to Mr. Ziemer. Those concerns were passed on to Mr. Hoffman, as any modifications to Heritage would need to be approved by Edina. Mr. Hoffman asked for accident statistics for the intersection. Deputy Chief Kleven reported that a total of four accidents had been reported during the past four years; two in 1989 (one was gone upon police arrival, while the other did not result in a written report) and two in 1992. Of the two recent accidents, one was caused by failure to yield, the other by one vehicle following another too closely. Mr. Hoffman noted that it is difficult to cross two lanes when exiting Heritage Drive onto northbound Xerxes Avenue, but felt a left -turn ban would serve little purpose. Mrs. Fuhr moved to reply to the City of Richfield that the City of Edina has studied the issue and concluded there are no safety concerns warranting action by this Committee. Mrs. Fuhr seconded the motion. Motion carried 3 -0. (Mr. Hughes had been called from the meeting earlier, thus the discrepancy in the vote total). SECTION C: Requests which are deferred to a later date or referred to others. None. Edina Traffic Safety Committee I/ 4 e O CA C. REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: KEN ROSLAND, MANAGER Agenda Item # V•B- From: RALPH JOHNSON, ASSESSOR Consent [] Information Only ❑ Date: NOVEMBER 12, 1992 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA Subject: SET HEARING DATE - I—x I To Council 1993 BOARD OF REVIEW Action ]x Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance e Recommendation: Set hearing date of Monday, April 12, 1993, for 1993 Board of Review. Info /Background: i A. 0�e� Cl) 0 �NCbReP %p; e' • REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: KEN ROSLAND, MANAGER From: MARCELLA DAEHN, CLERK Date: NOVEMBER 12, 1992 Subject: 1993 COUNCIL MEETING DATE Recommendation: Agenda Item # "• c Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA EE To Council Action ❑ Motion ❑ Resolution I Ordinance ❑ Discussion Approval of the Council Meeting Schedule for 1993 as presented. Info /Background . In determining Council meeting dates for 1993, the regular Council meeting dates in the months of January, February, July and September fall on a holiday. The following schedule is recommended which follows past practice except for the second meeting date in January. Mayor Richards has asked that the date be moved to Wednesday, January 20. January - Monday, January 4 and Wednesday, January 20 February - Monday, February 1 and Tuesday, February 16 July - Tuesday, July 6 and Monday, July 19 September - Tuesday, September 7 and Monday, September 20 (January 18 is Martin Luther King Day, February 15 is Presidents Day, July 5 is the employee holiday for Independence Day, and September 6 is Labor Day.) January 1993 S M T W T F S 02 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 May 1993 S 1993 S M T W T F S S 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 3031 30 30 29 30 31 September 1993 S M T W T F S S S 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 30 29 1993 CALENDAR February 1993 1993 S M T W T F S S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 27 28 29 30 29 30 June 1993 1993 1993 S M T W T F S 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 29 30 31 October 1993 1993 S M T W T F S S 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Proposed Council Meeting Dates Holidays March 1993 S 1993 S M T W T F S 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 July 1993 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 November 1993 S M T W T F S S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 30 31 April 1993 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 August 1993 1993 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 30 31 December 1993 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 O REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: KENNETH ROSLAND Date: NOVEMBER 16, 1992 Subject: MINNESOTA CHEMICAL HEALTH WEEK - NOVEMBER 13 - 20 Recommendation: Info/ Background: Agenda Item # V. D. Consent ❑ Information Only 0 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA 0 To Council Action ❑ Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion For the second year, Edina Chemical Awareness, Edina's community - based drug and alcohol abuse prevention program will participate in Chemical Health Week, November 13 -20. Minnesota Chemical Health Week focusses on issues associated with illegal drug use, abuse of legal drugs and related topics with events and discussions held throughout the state. Last Friday, November 13, MADD held its annual Red Ribbon Kickoff event urging people to tie red ribbons on their vehicles and to wear the ribbons to show their concern about dangers and costs of drunk driving. This Wednesday, November 18,.is Wear Red Day on which people will wear red to show their commitment to fight drug abuse. The next day, Thursday, November 19, is the American Lung Associations's 19th-Annual Minnesota D -Day on which smokers are encouraged to stop smoking for a day. (overt Report /Recommendation - Minnesota Chemical Health Week November 16, 1992 Page 2 Throughout the week people are encouraged to wear red ribbons. 1 -1/2 million ribbons will be distributed statewide. ECA has made available thousands to Edina students and residents. To show the city's commitment, gigantic red ribbons grace the Southdale water tower and the tower on the Crosstown near Gleason Road. On Sunday, November 29, ECA will sponsor a responsible hosting demonstration featuring non - alcoholic holiday beverages before a performance of the John Philip Sousa Memorial Band at Edinborough Park. The Minnesota Department of Education's 1992 Minnesota Student Survey shows since 1991, an 11 percent drop in alcohol use among Edina 9th - graders and 22 percent drop among Edina High seniors. Agenda Item V.E TO: FROM: DATE: Council Members Fred Richards November 10, 1992 I�:kl 1V SUBJECT: Open House - City Services Lisa Finsness, 922 -4246, from the League of Women Voters, called to inquire whether or not the Council would he interested in participating in an open house type of function to give the mayor, council members, city staff, department heads, etc. an opportunity to talk about themselves, city services and the function that each plays in local government. The purpose of the meeting is to invite interested citizens to come to this open house type forum to hear who does what at the local level. The intent of the meeting would be to educate interested citizens in knowing what services are available from the local government and who performs those services. Ms. Finsness requested that I get back to her to determine whether there is any interest in the City participating with the League in providing this type of forum, probably sometime in the late winter or early spring. 4q1� -�f L o e )E1 REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council From: Francis Hoffma Director of Public Works Date: 16 November, 1992 Subject Attached Communication on Ramp Metering Recommendation: Agenda Item # Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA 0 To Council Action Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance Authorize letter to be sent to Minnesota Department of Transportation requesting review of the West 77th /TH 100 interchange ramp metering /signal operations. Info /Background: Attached are two petitions concerning traffic delay and back- up of motorists attempting to leave the Edina Industrial Park at peak hours. Staff observes that it appears to be much easier for Pentagon park motorists than the Edina Industrial Park motorists to exit during afternoon rush hour. The reason appears to be a matter of road geometrics (i.e., free right turns versus signal controlled left turns) and ramp metering controls. We suspect that the road geometrics and signal operations are more difficult to adjust than the ramp meters. The petitioners may not totally understand the purpose of ramp meters but certainly are having substantial delays on the west side of TH 100. We suspect the long term fallout could be future problems of re- leasing industrial park properties. October 15, 1992 Edina City Council M.N. Dept. of Transportation Edina Police Dept. We are writing in regards to the meters on the entrance ramps going north /south on Hwy 100 from 77th St /Industrial Blvd. The traffic has increased substantially and we don't feel the meters have accomplished what they originally were intended for which we believe was to reduce the traffic on Hwy 100, We ask that you shorten the time between each light or remove them all together. If you agree, please sign below. 9W l ! / d/L � na I us 'al Blvd r7/r (� G d /i� c -✓ C /air l�r � l l/i� �1' October 15, 1992 Edina City Council Dept. of Transportation Edina Police Dept. We are writing in regards to the meters on the entrance ramps going north /south on Hwy 100 from 77th St /Industrial Blvd. The traffic has increased substantially and we don't feel the meters have accomplished what they.originally were intended for which we believe was to reduce the traffic on Hwy 100. We ask that you shorten the time between each light or remove them all together. `-� If you agree, please sign below. V 10 r aos 4 f - v i <! I lu !1'r I- \-f` L- J "N'-- (over) I " I�t v k 'A a-t,r 1 0 C) V c� 0 a� 0 AGENDA ITEM # VII.A. Proposed. 1993 City Policies and Priorities for legislative and administrative action. 3490 Lexington Avenue North St. Paul, MN 55126 -2977 (612) 490 -5600 FAX (612) 490 -0072 r• -• a 4 ,o 4 � 41992 League of Minnesota Cities All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America i Legislative Policy Committee Members Development Strategies Craig Waldron, Economic Development Director, Roseville- -Chair Robert Haarman, Administrator, Sauk Rapids —Vice Chair Duane D. Aden, City Administrator, Marshall Cynthia Albright, Councilmember, Duluth David R. Arvig, Mayor, Twin Valley Thomas Burman, Councilmember, Aitkin Charmayne J. Cochran, Councilmember, Spring Valley Romeo Cyr, Mayor, Red Wing Chuck Dillerud, Community Development Dir., Plymouth Brian Fritsinger, Community Development Dir., Perham Lary D. Hansen, Administrator, Stewartville Terri Heaton, Dep. Dir. of Admin Serv., Bloomington Jon Hohenstein, Asst, to Administrator, Eagan Susan Hoyt, Administrator, Falcon Heights Liz Jensen, Councilmember, Mound Ronald S. Johnson, Administrator, Zumbrota Steven Jones, Administrator, Mora Andrea Hart Kajer, Legislative Liaison, Minneapolis Tom Kedrowski, Councilmember, Prior Lake Mark D. Larson, Administrator, Glencoe Scott Larson, Administrator, Cambridge Joan Lynch, Councilmember, Shakopee Paula Maccabee, Councilmember, St. Paul John Moravec, Councilmember, Crystal Bruce Peterson, Community Development Dir, Willmar Harold A. Rainey, Executive Dir. EDA, Mountain Lake Ron Rogstad, Admin. Serv. Dir., Oakdale Mary Saeger, Councilmember, Olivia Lary Siegler, Councilmember, Fairmont Ronald A. Stenstrom, Councilmember, Blaine Carol Tiedeman Zupetz, Mayor, Mountain Iron Judy Tschumper, Economic Development Dir, Burnsville Alf Wikstrom, Adminstrator, Young America Election and Ethics Dianne Krogh, Assistant Manager /Clerk, West St. Paul—Chair Fran Clark, City Clerk, Mound —Vice Chair Lucille E. Aurelius, Clerk, Maplewood James Cosgrove, Admin. Serv. Dir., So. St. Paul Judith Cox, City Clerk, Shakopee Patricia Crawford, Clerk(Treas., Motley Thomas P. Ferber, Clerk, Richfield Darlene George, City Clerk, Crystal Carole Grimm, Clerk, Rochester Barbara Heppelmann, Clerk(Treas., Bellechester Christine Koch, Councilmember, Mendota Heights Barbara Lanum, Councilmember, Bass Brook Scott Luse, Councilmember, Long Lake Myrna Maikkula, City Clerk, Brooklyn Park Harry Mares, Mayor, White Bear Lake Joyce Mercil, Director of Elections, Minneapolis Mary Mueller, City Clerk, Apple Valley Doris Nivala, Adm./Clerklfreas., Ham Lake Molly O'Rourke, City Clerk, St. Paul Susan Olesen, City Clerk, Burnsville Joan Russell, Councilmember, Golden Valley JoAnne Student, Deputy Clerk, Columbia Heights Maria Vasiliou, Councilmember, Plymouth Sue Walsh, City Clerk, Rosemount 1993 City Policies and Priorities Liz Witt, Dep. Clerk, Eagan Evelyn Woulfe, City Clerk, Bloomington General Legislation and Personnel William Thompson, Mayor, Coon Rapids —Chair Michael McCauley, City Manager, Waseca—Vice Chair Richard Abraham, Administrator, Lake City Gary Bastian, Mayor, Maplewood Lynn Boland, Personnel Director, Apple Valley Patrick Boley, Mayor's Office, St. Paul Lorraine Browne, Mayor, Atwater Thomas Burt, City Manager, St. Anthony Mike Crnobrna, Personnel Director, Burnsville Steven Devich, Assistant Manager, Richfield Holly Duffy, Asst. to Administrator, Fagan Dick Engebretson, Mayor, Deephaven Bob Fragnito, Mayor, Nashwauk Kelly P. Frawley, Asst to Admin./Personnel OfYcr., Cottage Grove Glenn Gabriel, Director Public Safety, Mankato Don Gadow, Councilmember, Annandale Karl Glade, Councilmember, Alexandria Todd Hagedorn, Councilmember, Orobeco Ken Hartung, Administrator, Bayport Paul Hicks, Councilmember, Hastings Brian Holzer, Fire Chief, Burnsville Jeffrey Jacobs, Councilmember, St. Louis Park Andrea Hart Kajer, Legislative Liaison, Minneapolis John Kelley, Chief of Police, New Brighton Stephen King, Manager, Montevideo Audrey Krebs, Councilmember, Breckenridge Tom Krueger, Councilmember, Crystal Anthony Mayer, General Mgr.-- Crosslake Telephone Co., Crosslake Kathleen McBride, Finance Director, So. St. Paul Jean McConnell, Councilmember, Rochester Kent Michaelson, Dir., PersonneVUbor Relations, Bloomington Mancel Mitchell, Police Chief, St. Louis Park Mark Nagel, City Manager, Anoka James Norman, Administrator, Renville Samantha Orduno, Administrator, Mounds View Desyl Peterson, City Attorney, Minnetonka Marty Pinkney, Councilmember, Moorhead Miriam Porter, Administrator, Victoria Bryan Read, City Administrator, Kenyon Michael Reardon, President, MACTA, Eagan Thomas Reber, Administrator, Fairmont Robert Roesler, Councilmember, Sherbum Howard Rowland, Personnel Director, Brooklyn Park Mark Sather, City Manager, White Bear Lake Susan Schumacher, Assistant to Administrator, Maple Grove Dan Scott, Police Chief, Buffalo Jeanette Sobania, Personnel Coordinator, Plymouth Jan Tubandt, Councilmember, Wadena Joyce Twistol, Clerk, Blaine David Unmacht, Manager, Prior Lake Betty Zachmann, Clerk(Treas., Winsted Land Use, Energy, Environment, and Transportation Chuck Siggetud, Public Works Director, Burnsville- -Chair Curtis Jacobsen, City Administrator, Howard Lake —Vice Chair Bill Barnhart, State Liaison, Minneapolis Lynn Becklin, Councilmember, Cambridge Robert Benke, Mayor, New Brighton Jerome Bohnsack, Clerk Administrator, New Prague Lavonne Bowman, Councilmember, Fairmont Frank Boyles, Assistant City Manager; Plymouth Gerald Brever, City Administrator, Staples Gary Brown, Engineer, Brooklyn Park Bruce Bullert, Engineer, Savage Don Christianson, Public Works Superintendent, Perham Scott Clark, Planning Director, Brooklyn Park Bonnie Cumberland, Mayor, Brainerd Bob Derus, Administrator, Corcoran Jerry Dulgar, City Manager, Crystal Julian Empson, Public Works Dept., St. Paul L. A. Ewert, City Clerk, Waldorf Gloria Johnson, Councilmember, Golden Valley Vemon.A. Johnson, Councilmember, Roseville Marvin Johnson, Mayor, Independence Laurence Jung, Planning Commission Chair, Mendota Mark Karnowski, Administrator, Lindstrom Bill Klein, Councilmember, Inver Grove Heights Tony Knapp, Councilmember, Mankato Haney A. Lyon, Jr., Councilmember, North St. Paul Dean Massett, Council Administrator, Red Wing R. David Miller, Economic Development Director, Dodge Center Robert F. Morgan, Administrator, Branch Larry Nicholson, Councilmember, Moorhead Bill Ottensmann Director Public Works, Coon Rapids Mary Petersson, Councilmember, Rochester Stanley Rensberger, Councilmember, Ortonville Pat Rickaby, Councilmember, Mounds View Terry Schneider, Councilmember, Minnetonka Ryan Schroeder, Administrator, Ramsey Betty Sindt, Councilmember, Lakeville Marsha Soucheray, Councilmember, Shoreview Glenda Spiotta, City Administrator, Sunfish Lake Dean Swanson, Councilmember, Crosslake Gen White, Councilmember, Prior Lake Revenue Sources John Feda, Mayor, Marshall—Chair Karen Anderson, Councilmember, Minnetonka —Vice Chair Duke Addicks, State Legislative Liaison, Minneapolis Kurt E. Anderson; Mayor, Crosslake Les Anderson, Finance Director, Burnsville Ronald L. Anderson, Mayor, Blooming Prairie James W. Antonen, City Manager, Moorhead William Bassett, City Manager, Mankato Michael Bisanz, Mayor, West St. Paul Douglas Bunkers, City Administrator, Madison Edward Burrell, Finance Director, Roseville Dave Callister, Administrator, Tonka Bay Paul Ciernia, Councilmember, Falcon Heights Willard Clark, Council President, Two Harbors Ruth Crawford, Councilmember, Rochester Terry Dussault, Asst. to City Manager, Blaine Dan Elwood, Administrator, Spring Valley Dan Faust, Finance Director, Maplewood Kathleen Gaylord, Councilmember, So. St. Paul Alvin J.Gruis, Councilmember, Rushmore Francis D. Hagen, Manager, Robbinsdale Lyle Hanks, Mayor, St. Louis Park Joel Hanson, Administrator, Little Canada Blain C. Hill, Cletk/rreas., Breckenridge Greg Isaackson, Clerk- Administrator, Cottonwood John Jensvold, Asst. to Administrator, Faribault, Robert W. Johnson, City Administrator, Montgomery Darrell Johnson, Treasurer/Fin. Officer, Winona Femer "Skip' Johnson, Councilmember, Mound Jeffrey E. Karison, Clerk/Treas., Annandale David J. Kennedy, City Attorney, Crystal Duane Knutson, Mayor, Fertile Lynn Lander, Administrator, Hermantown Bob Long, Councilmember, St. Paul Steven Mielke, City Manager, Hopkins Kathleen Miller, Administrator, Lauderdale Ron Moorse, Administrator, Orono Doug Nakari, Admr /Clerk/Treas., Cook Dennis Nelson, Clerk/Treas., Windom Lanelle Olsen, Councilmember, Northfield Lyle R. Olson, Director of Admin. Serv., Bloomington Steven Perkins, City Administrator, Luverne, Dave Pokorny, Administrator, Chaska Craig Rapp, City Manager, Brooklyn Park Jon E. Raw, Councilmember, Rothsay Al Ringsmuth, Mayor, Waite Park John Sandquist, Councilmember, Red Wing Mark Sievert, City Administrator, St. lames Greg Sparks, City Administrator, Worthington Virginia Sterling, Councilmember, Apple Valley Bradley Swenson, Administrator, Wadena Kurt Ulrich, Administrator, Champlin Gen Vanoverbeke, Finance Dir /Clerk, Eagan Daniel J. Vogt, Admr /Clerk /rreas., Brainerd James Willis, City Manager, Plymouth John Young Jr., Councilmember, Hawley Paul Zimny, Councilmember, Royalton Federal Legislative Yvonne Prettner, Councilmember, Duluth—Chair Karen Anderson, Councilmember, Minnetonka Larry Bakken, Mayor, Golden Valley Janel Bush, Federal Liaison, Minneapolis David Childs, City Manager, New Brighton Stan T. Christ, Mayor, Mankato Steve Cramer, Councilmember, Minneapolis Erick Engh, Councilmember, Brooklyn Park Kevin Frazell, City Administrator, Cottage Grove Sue Hess, Councilmember, St. Cloud James Hurm, Administrator, Shorewood Greg Konat, Manager, Burnsville Gail Lippert, Administ ator /Clerk/freas.,Greentield Bob Long, Councilmember, St. Paul Millie MacLeod; Councilmember, Moorhead Elizabeth Martinson, Councilmember, Cook Bruce Nawrocki, Council President, Columbia Heights Lanelle Olsen, Councilmember, Northfield Doug Pearson, Councilmember, Brooklyn Park Steven Perkins, City Administrator, Luveme Neil Peterson, Mayor, Bloomington Mary Petersson, Councilmember, Rochester Clarence Ranallo, Mayor, St. Anthony David E. Runkel, Councilmember, Harmony Tony Scallon, Councilmember, Minneapolis Peter Stolley, City Administrator, Northfield Terence Stone, Mayor, Madelia Brenda Thomas, Councilmember, Roseville John Young Jr., Councilmember, Hawley League of Minnesota Cities General Policy Statement One of the most important purposes of the League of Minnesota Cities is to serve as a vehicle for cities to define common problems and develop policies and proposals to solve those problems. The League of Minnesota Cities represents 804 of Minnesota's 855 cities as well as 10 urban towns and 21 special districts. All sizes of communities are represented among the League's members (the largest non - member city has a population of 223) and each region of the state is represented. The policies that follow are directed at specific city issues. Two principles guide the development of all League policies: 1. Minnesota cities' need for a governmental system which allows flexibility and authority for cities to meet challenges for governing our cities and providing our citizens with services while at the same time protecting cities from unfunded or underfunded mandates, liability or other financial risk, and restrictions on local control; and 2. That the financial and technical requirements for governing and providing services necessitate a continuing and strengthened partnership with federal state, and local governments. This partnership particularly in the areas of finance, development, housing, environment, and transportation is critical for the successful operation of Minnesota's cities and the well -being of city residents. PRIORITY SETTING "A" priority indicates a major issue area to which the League would devote a large amount of time and resources, working actively with legislators and other groups to seek new laws or regulations, and when appropriate introduce legislation. "B" priority indicates issue areas that are important to cities but on which the League would probably spend less time unless the legislature or other groups mount a major effort to which the League would respond. "C" priority indicates issue areas to which the League would respond only when other groups raise the issue and to which the League would not commit a significant amount of staff time. 1993 City Policies and Priorities 3 Contents , LegislativePolicy Committee Members .............................................................................................................. ............................... 1 GeneralPolicy Statement .................................................................................................................................... ............................... 3 MandatesPolicy .................................................................................................................................................. ............................... 6 Development Strategies DS -1. Development of Polluted Lands A ................................................................................................ ............................... 7 DS -2. Tax Increment Financing A ........................................................................................................... ............................... 7 DS -3. Building Pernpit Surcharge Fees B ................................................................................................ ............................... 8 DS-4. Development Financing B ............................................................................................................. ............................... 8 DS -5. Housing B ..................................................................................................................................... ............................... 8 DS-6. Municipal.Service Districts B ....................................................................................................... ............................... 9 DS -7. Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Programs B .................................................. ............................... 9 DS -8. State and Local Development Policy B ......................................................................................... ............................... 9 DS-9. Economic Development Authorities C .......................................................................................... ............................... 10 DS -10. Tax - Exempt Status of Land Cities Hold for Development C ......................................................... ............................... 10 Elections and Ethics EE -1. Absentee Balloting A .................................................................................................................... ............................... 11 EE -2. All Mail -in Ballot Elections A ...................................................................................................... ............................... I 1 EE -3. Authority to Fill Vacancies by Appointment B .............................................................................. ............................... 11 EE4. Automatic Recounts B .................................................................................................................. ............................... 12 EE -5. Lobbyist Reporting Requirements B ............................................................................................. ............................... 12 EE -6. Precinct Boundaries B ................................................................................................................... ............................... 12 EE -7. Reimbursement for State Elections B ............................................................................................ ............................... 13 EE -8. Reporting Votes for Write -In Candidates B ................................................................................... ............................... 13 EE -9. Structure of City Government B .................................................................................................... ............................... 13 EE -10. Absentee Ballots for Hospitalized Voters C .................................................................................. ............................... 13 EE -11. Limiting Local Campaign Contributions C .................................................................................... ............................... 13 EE -12. Local Elections C ............................................................................................................................ .............................14 23 EE -13. Optional Poll Hours C ................................................................................................................... ............................... 14 EE -14. Presidential Primary C .................................................................................................................. ............................... 14 EE -15. Removal of Candidate Name from Ballot C .................................................................................. ............................... 15 .EE -16. Schedule for Redistricting C ......................................................................................................... ............................... 15 EE -17. Voter Fraud C ............................................................................................................................... ............................... 16 General Legislation and Personnel GLP -1. Comparable Worth A .................................................................................................................... ............................... 17 GLP -2. Minnesota Public Employment Labor Relations Act (PELRA) A .................................................. ............................... 18 GLP -3. Tort Liability and Insurance A ...................................................................................................... ............................... 18 GLP4. Veterans' Preference B ................................................................................................................. ............................... 19 GLP -5. Employee Benefits B ...................................................................................................................... .............................19 GLP -6. Employee Training and Education Requirements B ....................................................................... ............................... 20 GLP -7. Local Police and Paid Fire Relief Associations B .......................................................................... ............................... 20 GLP -8. Open Meetings and Data Practices B ............................................................................................ ............................... 21 GLP -9. Prevailing Wage B ........................................................................................................................ ............................... 22 GLP -10. Public Contracting B ..................................................................................................................... ............................... 22 GLP -11. Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) Benefits, Financing, and Administration B .... ............................... 22 GLP -12. Recovery of State Program Administration Costs B ...................................................................... ............................... 23 GLP -13. Stalking and Other Harassing Behavior B ..................................................................................... ............................... 23 GLP -14. Utility Service Territories B ......................................................................................................... ............................... 23 GLP -15. Volunteer Firefighters B ............................................................................................................... ............................... 23 GLP -16. Cable Communications C ............................................................................................................. ............................... 23 GLP -17. Gopher State One -Call C .............................................................................................................. ............................... 24 GLP -18. Liquor Issues C ............................................................................................................................. ............................... 24 GLP -19. Military Leaves C ......................................................................................................................... ............................... 24 GLP -20. Presumptions for Workers' Compensation Benefits C ................................................................... ............................... 25 4 League of Minnesota Cities Land Use, Energy, Environment, and Transportation LUEET -1. Solid and Hazardous Waste Management A .................................................................................. ............................... 26 LUEET -2. Transportation Systems Funding A ............................................................................................... ............................... 27 LUEET -3. Transportation Utility Fee A ......................................................................................................... ............................... 28 LUEET4. Wetlands Conservation A ...............................................................................:..........................:.. ............................... 28 LUEET -5. Annexation A ................................................................................................................................ ............................... 29 LUEET -6. ...................... ............................... Municipal State Aid System B .......:....................................... ............................... .. 29 LUEET -7. Railroad Right -of -Way Preservation B .......................................................................................... ............................... 30 LUEET -8. Transportation Services Fund B .................................................................................................... ............................... 30 . LUEET -9. Wastewater Treatment B ............................................................................................:.................. ............................... 30 LUEET -10. Water Conservation and Preservation B ........................................................................................ ............................... 31 LUEET -11. Zoning, Subdivision, and Planning Statutes B ............................................................................... ............................... 32 LUEET -12. Energy Conservation C ................................................................................................................. ............................... 32 LUEET -13. Environmental Trust Fund C ......................................................................................................... ............................... 32 LUEET -14. Road and Highway Jurisdiction and Funding C ............................................................................. ............................... 33 Federal Legislative FL,-1. Revenue Sources ' 41 RS -1. Property Tax Reform and State Aid to Cities A ............................................................................. ............................... 35 RS -2. City Fund Balances A ................................................................................................................... .........:..................... 36 RS -3. Service Duplication Taxation Exclusion B .................................................................................... ............................... 37 RS4. City Financial Reporting Requirements B ..................................................................................... ............................... 37 RS -5. Cooperation, Collaboration, and Consolidation B .......................................................................... ............................... 37 RS-6. Penalties and Interest on Delinquent Property Taxes B ................................................................. ............................... 37 RS-7. Service Fees for Government -Owned Property B .......................................................................... ............................... 38 RS -8. State Administrative Costs B ........................................................................................................ ............................... 38 RS -9. License Fees C .............................................................................................................................. ............................... 38 RS -10. Local Property Tax Authority C .................................................................................................... ............................... 39 RS -11. Referendum Levies C ................................................................................................................... ............................... 39 RS-12. Sales Ratios C ............................................................................................................................... ............................... 39 RS-13. Taxation Hearing and Notification Law C ..................................................................................... ............................... 39 Federal Legislative FL,-1. Single Family Mortgage Bonds ...............:..................................................................................... ............................... 41 FL,-2. Homelessness/Housing Issues ..................................................................................:.................... ............................... 41 FL-3. HOME Investment Partnership ..................................................................................................... ............................... 42 FL-4. HOPE - Home Ownership and Opportunity for People Everywhere .............................................. ............................... 42 FL-5. Incentives to Preserve Affordable Rental Housing ........................................................................ ............................... 42 FL-6. Removal of Regulatory Barriers .................................................................................................... ............................... 42 FL -7. Comprehensive Housing Assistance Strategy (CHAS) .................................................................. ............................... 43 FL -8. FHA Insurance Changes ................................................................................................................ ............................... 43 FL-9. Portability of Section 8 Housing Certificates and Vouchers .......................................................... ............................... 43 FL, 10. Siting of group Home Residential Facilities .................................................................................. ............................... 44 FL, 11. Mixed Populations ........................................................................................................................ ............................... 44 FL,-12. Anti-Drug Abuse: Prevention and Assistance ................................................................................ ............................... 44 FL-13. Federal/Local Fiscal Relations ...................................................................................................... ............................... 45 FL -14. Federal Mandates ............................................................................................................................ .............................46 FL-15. Solid Waste Management ............................................................................................................. ............................... 47 FL-16. Airport Noise Control ................................................................................................................... ............................... 48 FL-17. Cable Television Regulation ......................................................................................................... ............................... 48 FL -18. Economic Development ................................................................................................................ .................. .............. 49 FL; 19. Rural Development Issues ............................................................................................................. ............................... 50 FL-20. Groundwater Protection ................................................................................................................ ............................... 52 FL-21. Clean Water Act ........................................................................................................................... ............................... 52 FL,-22. Lead Contaminat ion ...................................................................................................................... ............................... 53 FL -23. Transportation .............................................................................................................................. ............................... 53 FL.-24. Passenger Facility Charges and Airport Trust Fund Expenditures .................................................. ............................... 54 FL-25. Refugee Assistance ....................................................................................................................... ............................... 55 FL-26. Social Security Deductions for Election Judges ............................................................................. ............................... 56 FLr27. Government Accounting Reporting Requirements ......................................................................... ............................... 56 1993 City Policies and Priorities 5 Mandates The League opposes any additional unfunded state mandates and urges the governor, Legislature, and state agencies to adopt a policy of deliberate restraint against new mandates, through statute and rule, and the costs which are passed on to local governments. The League supports legislation which would allow local governments to not comply with unfunded mandates The League also urges the Legislature to review, repeal, or revise current mandates. One of the most serious problems facing cities is the growth in the number and cost of federal and state - mandated programs which substitute the judgments of Congress and the Legislature for local budget priori- ties. Recent examples of costly mandates include: comparable worth, binding arbitration, prevailing wage, legal compliance audits, newspaper publications, and election requirements. The League, therefore, supports legislation which allows noncompliance with new unfunded mandates. The League recommends that only under specific conditions should this noncompliance option not be available. 6 Except under the following conditions, the noncompli- ance option for state mandates should be available to local governments: t The state pays for the full local costs of the man- date from a source other than the Local Govern- ment Trust Fund (LGTF); O A new non - property tax source of local revenue is authorized to pay for the mandate; • The mandate law is approved by a 2/3 vote of both the House and the Senate and the costs do not exceed the fiscal impacts which have been esti- mated through an improved state -local fiscal note process; or O The mandate and the associated expenses are federal, not state, requirements. The League believes that a statement of compelling statewide interest and need for a new mandate should be required both for new laws and for state agency rules. League of Minnesota Cities Development Strategies DS -1. Development of Polluted Property (A) The League supports legislation that would. A. Eliminate state aid penalties for tax increment financing for hazardous substance subdistricts, B. Provide a source of funding for a statewide revolving loan fund for.the clean -up of contaminated sites which have potential for development; C. Make "no action letters" available to the private sector as well as the public sector, with a requirement for certainty of closure; and D. Create and enforce Pollution Control Agency development action response timelines. Across the state, Minnesota cities are faced with tremendous obstacles to the development of polluted properties. The Legislature has taken encouraging action to address the liability exposure for development of polluted property. The extensive costs of clean-up still present an obstacle to development of polluted land. Clean -up costs often exceed the value of the land so there is no incentive for private sector intervention. Public sector subsidies are therefore critical. In 1990, legislative changes to the tax increment law made hazardous substance subdistricts useless in providing assistance with clean-up costs, and Super - fund dollars are not sufficient to address this need. In addition, there is some question whether designation as a Superfund site may have negative ramifications for later development. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) is often unable to meet the necessary timelines'for issuing "no action letters." In collaboration with city officials, the MPCA should immediately develop reasonable response timelines to improve their ability to facilitate clean -up of polluted properties. Development opportu- nities can be lost as a result of such delays. In addi- tion, while "no action letters" are readily available for public entities, they are not available to the private sector. In addition, some certainty concerning "clo- sure" is needed after a property has been cleaned up according to directions by the MPCA. Polluted sites will continue to have a blighting influ- ence on our communities and pose a potential health threat to our state's citizens unless this problem is addressed. DS -2. Tax Increment Financing (A) The League supports changes to the tax increment financing (TIF) laws which will make this economic development, redevelopment, and housing tool more usable, including general authority for pollution districts and elimination of the city aid penalty. The changes to TIF made during the 1988, 1989, and 1990 legislative sessions have restricted TIF, and, as a result, have reduced the ability of cities to engage in needed development and redevelopment. TIF should be modified to allow cities to address blight or pollu- tion, or for economic development and redevelopment which can be addressed in a relatively short period of time. Considering these priorities, cities should have authority to create the redevelopment, renewal/renova- tion, manufacturing, housing, underground space, and soils condition districts. Statewide authority should also be granted for all cities to create pollution districts. TIF authorities should be strongly encouraged to cleanup contaminated proper- ties. Redevelopment and renewal/renovation districts should be able to be redesignated as pollution districts if pollution requiring significant clean-up costs are discovered in the district. Durational limits on districts could be reduced, pro- vided the TIF authority is statutorily permitted to determine the appropriate date on which to receive the first full increment. "Full increment" is the increment collected from the market value of the improvements which are determined by the assessor to approximate the market value that is identified in the plan or development agreement. This process is current practice for the administration of TIF in most counties. Qualified districts should not be subject to the aid penalty provisions contained in current law. A district whose tax capacity has a growth rate for the previous five years that is less than that of the school district in which it is located would be "qualified. ". In addition, 1993 City Policies and Priorities 7 because of the job creation and positive economic impacts, all manufacturing districts should be exempt from the aid penalty. In order to address certain blight, pollution, and urban problems, the League also urges the Legislature to remove the pooling and five year restrictions on renewal and renovation districts, redevelopment districts, pollution districts, and urban revitalization action program (URAP) areas. Limited use of tax abatements, in coordination with county officials, offers a new mechanism to address problems which does not require the corrective actions of a tax increment district. Abatements, however, do not serve as an adequate replacement for TIF; tempo- rarily shifting tax burdens to other properties can provide only limited solutions for specific problems or properties. DS -3. Building Permit Surcharge Fees (B) The Legislature should reinstate the law which returns the amount of locally generated building permit surcharge fees which exceed the costs of the state building code division to local units of govern- ment Local units of government levy a one -half percent surcharge on building permits which is paid to the state to operate the State Building Codes and Standards Division. Until the 1991 Legislature changed the law at the request of the governor, any excess fees over actual operating costs were proportionately rebated to local units to help pay for training and continuing education costs for building officials who enforce the state's building code. Local units of government are facing tough financial times and need every available resource, especially one which is locally generated and is not needed to fund the enforcing state agency. DS4. Development Financing (B) The League supports the continued use of industrial development bonds (IDBs) and other tax - exempt instruments as development tools. Tax- exempt financing allows cities to undertake a diverse range of activities to prevent economic deterio- ration, to attract new businesses and jobs, to retain existing businesses and jobs, and to maintain and strengthen the local tax base. Federal tax legislation has substantially changed the, applicability of tax- exempt development financing. As a result, the League recommends the following prin- ciples: A Municipal retention of maximum of Minnesota tax- exempt development allocation authority; ® Maintenance of local discretion and flexibility in development decisions; and ® Minimizing state control of local development decisions. The League asks that the governor and the Legislature continue to involve the League in developing a method of allocating the authority to issue tax- exempt bonds. DS-5. Housing (B) The League urges the Legislature to continue support for measures which enable cities to preserve afford- able housing stock and to finance new construction of single and multi family housing that meets local needs. The League recommends these specific ac- dons. A. The state aid penalties should be repealed for tax increment financing (TIF) housing districtL The tax increments available from low- and moderate - income housing projects and scattered site projects are fre- quently too low to create viable projects, and the needs for such housing are not being fully met. The city aid penalty adopted in 1990 makes this situation worse, and it should be repealed. B. The share of market value in the TIF housing project that can be used for purposes other than low - and moderate - income housing should be increased from 20 percent to 35 percent The opportunity for a project to include a greater share of higher - income housing, commercial, or other properties in a TIF housing district can frequently make possible the . construction of low- and moderate- income housing which would otherwise not occur. C. The differences in property tax class rates between owner- occupied property and rental property should be reduced The first $72,000 of homestead property has a class rate of 1.0 percent of market value, com- pared to 2.5 percent of market value (one -three units), and 3.4 percent for rental housing with four or more units. These large class rate differences discourage the construction and ownership of multifamily rental 8 League of Minnesota Cities housing, as well as the availability and upkeep of single - family housing on a rental basis. D. Property tax relief for low- income rental housing should be tied to agreements by developers and property owners to maintain affordable rates to assure long -term availability of such units. E. The procedure for allocating low - income housing tax credits enacted by the 1990 Legislature should be continued F. The housing impact and replacement mandates enacted by the 1989 Legislature should not be tight -. ened or extended to all cities Cities and their devel- opment organizations follow extensive due process procedures, and are required to provide relocation benefits and assistance. Measures that also require cities to replace low- income housing on a one - for -one basis are unreasonably hindering public improvements and efforts to improve the local economy and standard of living. The state's compliance requirements which apply to Duluth, Minneapolis, and St. Paul should be changed to match the federal relocation guidelines. DS -6. Municipal Service Districts (B) The League supports legislation allowing cities to create municipal service districts. Cities should have authority to finance the types of improvements listed in Minn. Stat. 429.021 (relating to the construction, replacement, and maintenance of such things as streets, sidewalks, gutters, storm and sanitary sewers, waterworks systems, street lights and public lights, and public malls, parks, or courtyards) without having to obtain specific authorizing legislation. Current law already includes the necessary, safe- guards to ensure the local participation and support of affected taxpayers. Both service charges and ad valorem property taxes should be available to finance services or capital improvements in the district. Court decisions concerning special assessments have made it even more difficult for cities to use special assessments to finance public services and improve- ments. The Minnesota Supreme Court has interpreted the Minnesota Constitution to require not only that a special assessment project "specially benefit" affected parcels or property, but also that the city be able to prove that the market value of a property will increase in direct relation to the amount of the special assess- ment applied to that property. This interpretation has made it more difficult to assess all (or even part) of a capital improvement project to repair or replace, as opposed to newly built improve- ments. In addition, cities' abilities to finance annual operating and maintenance costs of some services to property through the use of special service charges is unclear . under current law. The only current financing alternative to special assessments or services charges, the general property tax, is not appropriate to finance some capital or operating expenses. DS-7. Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Programs (B) The League supports state administration of the small cities portion of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. The League also supports the continuation of the set -aside of federal funds for economic development grants and aug- mented state appropriations to supplement the federal funds set aside. The small cities CDBG program should continue as a source of funding which encourages cities to develop viable communities by providing decent housing and suitable living environments and expanding economic opportunities, principally for low- and moderate - income people. The state should maintain the CDBG program balance between cities' economic develop- ment needs and the needs of low- and moderate - income people. Cities should retain maximum flexibil- ity in determining how to carry out CDBG program objectives. The League suggests that an expanded program, including a formula for matching, require state funds to be used to match local funds. The program should be designed to encourage cities to recycle state funds and the local match, and to leverage public funds and to fill in financing gaps. These funds should not be used to provide financial incentives to new start-up or relocat- ing businesses within the state. DS-8. State and Local Development Policy (B) The League urges the Legislature to create a state development policy that specifies the state's goals and work plan for economic development and redevelop- 1993 City Policies and Priorities 9 ment, acknowledges that cities are the primary agents to facilitate and coordinate development, and autho- rizes the appropriate tools and revenue sources in a timely manner for cities to achieve those goals. Many communities throughout the state are threatened by physical deterioration and a lack of economic opportunity. As neighborhoods deteriorate, so does a city's ability to combat the problems of crime, homelessness, and unemployment that so often accom- pany community decay. As tax bases dwindle, a city's ability to generate dollars to rehabilitate distressed areas decreases. Revitalization of Minnesota's cities is necessary for continued efficient use of existing local and state investments in infrastructure. Across the state, economic development programs and expenditures are occurring without established policies and goals. Although cities support efforts by the Department of Trade and Economic Development to create an "Economic Blueprint for Minnesota," it provides no recognition of the primary role cities play in improving the economic health of the state and promoting development and redevelopment. The Legislature should also acknowledge this role. The League continues to support state policies which acknowledge the partnership between the state, cities, and community residents, and to allocate the necessary resources and revenue options to cities. Cities urge approval of new workable state enterprise zone or manufacturing job opportunity zone incentive pro- grams. The League also encourages the Legislature to enact a new version of the urban revitalization action program (URAP) to address specific characteristics and demo- graphics which contribute to blight and decay in the central cities, suburban cities, regional outstate centers, and small cities. DS -9. Economic Development Authorities (C) The League supports legislation which would provide city economic development authorities with the same power and authority as those given for port authori- ties. The League believes that it is unfair and unreasonable to grant greater authority and power to some cities in the economic development field and requests the following changes. 10 • Authorize all cities to designate economic develop-' ment areas anywhere within their jurisdiction, or in joint powers agreements with other cities to designate area development authorities. Present law seriously restricts the use of these authorities by requiring that economic development areas be contiguous and meet the tax increment finance (TIF) redevelopment/blighted area test. • Authorize debt to be issued for project activities within economic development districts without a referendum. 9 Authorize the economic development authority to build buildings or structures on land owned by the authority. DS -10. Tax - Exempt Status of Land Cities Hold for Development (C) The League supports granting unlimited tax - exempt status to property cities hold for later resale to pro- mote economic development including removing the time limitation and the provisions which penalize partial improvements or leases to the private sector. Until recently, almost all property a political subdivi- sion owned was granted tax- exempt status. Now, tax exempt status is allowed only for a period of eight years in most situations, or for an unlimited period of years if the property is held for housing programs or is classified as "blighted land" under state law. The policy is intended to create an incentive for political subdivisions to engage in economic develop- ment activities, as well as to promote returning prop- erty to the tax rolls. Unfortunately, it does not fully recognize that the process of developing industrial and economic growth, rehabilitating, or building housing may extend over a long period of time. Provisions penalizing improvements and provisions affecting leasing of the property discourage cities from being active in establishing and maintaining local development corporations, controlling their economic development and planning processes, and from being selective about the type of development which occurs in the city. The state needs to understand that cities have every incentive, and make concerted efforts, to get property back on the tax rolls as soon as possible. League of Minnesota Cities Elections and Ethics EE -1. Absentee Balloting (A) The League urges the Legislature to evaluate the results of the increased availability of absentee balloting on voter participation, the incidence of spoiled ballots, and, local election costs. The secretary of state should have authority to organize a task-force comprised of local election officials; representatives of voter rights, minority, civic, and public interest organizations, and legislators to exam- ine issues such as ballot secrecy; voter identification; use of absentee ballots by political campaigns; aherna- tive procedures for receiving, securing, and counting ballots; and the impact on voter participation (includ- ing increased incidence of voters requesting to vote at the polls after having voted by absentee prior to election day). The Legislature should refrain from making additional changes in absentee election requirements during the next two years if such changes will increase local administrative costs. Task force recommendations should be formally presented to the Legislature for consideration prior to the adoption of proposals to change current statutes on absentee balloting. New statutes making it possible for registered voters to use absentee ballots rather than to vote at the polls needs to be evaluated over the next two years to determine whether such measures have helped increase voter participation. Before counties adopt policies permitting voters to apply for absentee ballots without restriction, cities should be queried about their views, and efforts should be made to coordinate implementation'ofthe expansion of this method of conducting elections. EE -2. All Mail -In Ballot Elections (A) The League recognizes mail -in balloting as a alterna- tive method of election that should be available to all cities, at their option. The Legislature should care- fully evaluate all procedures and state requirements for conducting this method of election to alleviate difficulties with conducting elections by mail. The League also maintains that it is not necessary for the county auditor to approve the city's decision to conduct a local election by mail. The Legislature should authorize the secretary of state to organize ,a special task force comprised of election administrators, local officials,,citizens, representatives of public interest organizations, and lawmakers to examine current rules and procedures for conducting elections by mail. Task force recommendations should propose changes needed in state rules and procedures to make it possible for cities to administer such elec- tions efficiently while protecting the security of returned ballots and assure, voter confidence in the results. Conducting elections by mail does not reduce local costs to taxpayers when cities are required to spend more for postage, pri nting, personnel, and election judge compensation to carry out requirements for administering this form of election. For that reason, the League strongly opposes legisla- tion that would create an unfunded mandate to require cities to conduct elections by mail. The League supports retaining city authority to determine the method of balloting for elections conducted at the local level. EE -3. Authority to Fill Vacancies by Appointment (B) The League supports retaining authority for cities to fill vacancies in local elective offices by appointment. Legislation to prohibit cities from filling vacancies in local elective offices is ill- advised, costly, and creates. obstacles to local self - governance. Further, the League objects to measures that would pre -empt local deci- sion- making for any home rule charter city in which the charter may provide authority to fill such vacancies by appointment. Such restrictions undermine cities' authority to conduct regular governmental activities and to carry out statu- tory responsibilities. Vacancies in the offices of mayor, city council, and/or elected city clerk must be filled promptly to assure that a quorum is maintained to permit the city to conduct official business. 1993 City Policies and Priorities 11 There are more than 130 standard -plan cities in which the position of city clerk is elective. It would be irresponsible and unworkable to require such cities to wait until the date of the next regular city election to fill vacancies in that office. In addition, for the nearly 700 cities that hold regular city elections in November of even - numbered years, such a requirement could force the city to hold an extra election in the odd - numbered year, thereby substantially increasing local election costs. Statutory cities have authority to hold special elections to fill vacancies for the portion of the team remaining to permit the rest of the term to be carried out until the next city election. If the vacancy'occurs during the first two years of a four -year term, the appointee serves until the next city election when a special election is held to fill the remaining two years of a term, the appointee serves for the remainder of the term. EE -4. Automatic Recounts (B) The League supports returning to 100 votes as the threshold which will determine whether a recount must be conducted following an election. The Legislature should reinstitute the requirement for automatic recounts to be conducted in contests in which the difference of votes cast for candidates is 100 votes or less. Currently, the law requires that recounts be conducted when the difference in votes cast is 200 or less. That has resulted in increased local costs and delay in determining the final outcome of election contests. It is now well documented that such recounts have not revealed errors in counting and have not resulted in a reversal of the outcome of the election in question. Other election requirements sufficiently protect the rights of voters and candidates and assure that balloting will be conducted in a fair and responsible manner. Difficulties which previously prevented mismarked ballots from being counted have been overcome. Automatic recount requirements now are time- consum- ing and unproductive since examination of returns only serves to demonstrate that the initial election results were correct. EE -5. Lobbyist Reporting Requirements (B) The League urges the Legislature to simplify lobbyist reporting requirements for cities and clarify that 12 reporting of city expenses not directly related to lobbying activities is not required The League also urges elimination of requirements for cities to submit separate annual reports to both the state auditor and the State Ethical Practices Board Since the Legislature has enacted comprehensive lobbying reporting requirements for lobbyists and local units of government, it is clearly unnecessary to retain this additional report. Current lobbyist reporting and registration requirements took effect in 1991. It is therefore reasonable for the Legislature to eliminate the additional reporting of estimated lobbying expendi- tures to the state auditor, which was instituted in 1989. EE -6. Precinct Boundaries (B) The League urges the Legislature to support changes in the design of the national census in 2000 to require that the U.S. Census Bureau follow election precinct boundaries or clearly recognizable physical features to establish census blocks and tracts. In addition, cities in rural areas and cities with exten- sive areas of undeveloped land have additional con- cerns. In such circumstances it is important for census blocks to be split along physical features or precinct boundaries in order to make it less difficult for cities to redraw precinct and ward boundaries when implement- ing local redistricting plans. Cities must continue to have full authority to determine precinct and ward boundaries which reflect neighbor- hood, community, and geographic factors that impact Voters and representation at the local level. Neighbor- hoods are particularly important in the building of community and participation in government. The Legislature should not interfere with or weaken city authority to determine how such political and election boundaries should be established. In 1992, inconsistency in designating physical features for census block units resulted in difficulty at the local level in conforming new precinct and/or ward bound- aries to such federal population units. In some circum- stances, cities were precluded from changing local election boundaries to correspond to census blocks since state law requires that precinct and ward bound- aries follow physical, definable features. League of Minnesota Cities Recent interest in authorizing cities to set precinct boundaries along census blocks lines presents opportu- nities for some cities, but it is also important for changes to be made in the method of designating official census block units to assure that in the future, features such as streets, shorelines, railroad rights -of- way, or other boundaries and lines clearly visible from the ground are used to establish units within which population counts will be taken. Such changes in the method of assigning census blocks will also facilitate the ability to assign geographic information to voter registration information and make it possible to reassign election district and polling place identification automatically by computer when redis- tricting has been accomplished. EE -7. Reimbursement for State Elections (B) The League urges the Legislature to fund the full cost of conducting state primary, special and general elections at the local level. The legislative reimbursement of expenses associated with conducting the 1992 presidential primary demon- strates that cities can easily document and account for such costs to the state. It is no longer adequate for the Legislature to provide only a minor portion of the funds to cover the actual cost of administering such elections. It is reasonable for the state to pay a portion of the costs associated with state election contests held in conjunction with local elections. Such costs also include expenses incurred for printing and supplying of posters, manuals, advertising, legal publications, and any other materials associated with conducting state elections. EE -8. Reporting Votes for Write -In Candidates (B) The League urges the Legislature not to require cities to compile a list of the names of write -in candidates prior to the offu;ial canvass of election results if the number of votes for any such candidate is less than 10 percent of the total votes cast for that office. The Legislature should also allow cities over 2,500 population not to list the name of a candidate who does not submit notice of intent to be a write -in candidate prior to the election. Such persons should be allowed to file notice of intent until 12 noon the day before the election. In smaller cities in which local residents traditionally run as write -in candidates, election officials should continue to count votes cast for write - in candidates who receive at least 10 percent of total votes cast in that election. EE -9. Structure of City Government (B) The League supports city authority to adopt a single - member ward system for city council elections as an option for organizing local representation. The League also supports city authority to determine local government structure, including the form and method of election of city offices. The statutory city code permits cities to select one of several methods of organizing and allows voters to request or the council to make changes. If a statutory city encounters problems that cannot be solved locally, officials can request the Legislature to adopt special authority or determine to adopt a home rule form of government. When voters in a home rule charter city have authority to determine the form of government at the local level, the Legislature should not pre -empt the capacity to make such decisions at the local level. EE -10. Absentee Ballots for Hospitalized Voters (C) LMC supports authority for cities to provide absentee ballots for hospitalized eligible voters, on a limited basis, for people admitted to the hospital after 7 p.m. the night before an election. Such authority should be granted on an experimental basis to determine whether the use of facsimile trans- mission of ballots or other methods devised to aid such voters are workable and can assure that the integrity of the balloting process can be maintained. EE -11. Limiting Local Campaign Contribution (C) The League supports city regulation of contributions to local candidates for election. Attempts by the Legislature to establish uniform limits for local campaign contributions are not necessary or desir- able. 1993 City Policies and Priorities 13 Attempts by the Legislature to establish contribution limits for local candidates is neither necessary or desirable. Cities should continue to maintain full authority to regulate in this area. Decisions about how to limit contributions and total campaign spending should be a local matter. Current state law already requires local candidates to disclose contributions and campaign expenses of more than $750 in any year. EE -12. Local Elections (C) The League seeks to maintain city authority to conduct local elections, particularly when other local units ofgovernment also conduct elections on the same date as regular city elections. The League also supports measures to encourage greater voter participation and to strengthen voter confidence in the election process. Continued legislative interest in limiting the number of local elections must be tempered with a realistic concern for difficulties presented as well as for the added city expense for conducting multiple elections. The Legislature must refrain from intruding on city authority to set the date for city elections. Legislative proposals to consolidate all local elections on a single date and year raise serious concerns for cities. Problems associated with overlapping election districts, multiple election issues, voter confusion, ballot secrecy, and the need to establish cost - sharing responsibilities must be overcome before such a plan would benefit voters. City officials support measures to reduce the conflict between incongruent school and county election districts and the corporate city limits and precinct lines Lack of conformity of school district boundaries with those of cities is a serious deficiency in conducting combined local elections. Cities must retain authority to schedule special elec- tions on ballot questions, bond referenda, and home rile charter amendments and to fill vacancies in city elective offices. 14 Cities resist proposals to designate a single local government election day because of the potential for voter confusion and the need to maintain a public perception of fairness in the election process. Legislators should consult cities when considering requirements to alter school district boundaries. At a minimum, school districts should designate official boundaries along recognizable, physical features. In growing communities, new school district lines should, wherever possible, relate to corporate city boundaries. Changes in school district lines should be done in cooperation with local officials from the cities affected by such changes. EE -13. Optional Poll Hours (C) The League supports modifying state election laws to permit cities with populations of less than 500 outside the metropolitan area to fix hours of polling to begin no later than 10 a.m. for state primary, special, and general elections. Allowing smaller cities to shorten hours of polling corresponds with authority for townships with popula- tions of less than 500 to set a later time for voting to begin for such elections. There are nearly 400 cities with populations of less than 500, according to the 1990 census. Flexibility in hours of polling would permit local election officials to adjust hours in which polling places are open to suit the needs of local voters. Smaller townships are now authorized to set a time for opening the polls no later than 10 a.m. for state elec- tions. Cities would be required to post the change in hours and notify the county auditor 30 days prior to the election. This would provide sufficient notice to voters prior to election day. EE -14. Presidential Primary (C) The League urges the Legislature to continue state reimbursement for costs of conducting the presiden- tial primary. The League supports cost - saving measures for conduct- ing the primary at the local level, and urges the Legis- League of Minnesota Cities lature to modify state election law to authorize changes in requirements for conducting the presidential pri- mary, including: • Placement of all political party presidential candi- dates on a single ballot; • Nonrotation of candidate names; • Consolidation of precinct polling place locations; • Reduction in hours of polling; • State payment of costs of publishing the sample ballot. State revenues should be, used to pay for local govern- ment expenses, including: • Preparation of ballots and election equipment; • Supplies and personnel (including election judge compensation and election administrative and technical staff pay), including overtime; • Advertising, newspaper notices, and postage; • Polling place rentals and transportation related to election activities; and • Costs for maintenance of political party preference identification on voter records and updating of the voter file. If the Legislature does not provide funds from state revenues to cover such costs, the League supports repeal of the law establishing the presidential primary. In the event that the Legislature adopts a statewide mail ballot for the primary, the state should administer and fully fund all local costs of conducting balloting, recording results, and adjusting voter files. EE -15. Removal of Candidate Name From Ballot (C) LMC supports measures that would allow city offi- cials to remove the name of a candidate from the ballot if it can be demonstrated that the individual is ineligible for election to office because of conviction for a felony without restoration of civil rights, or because he/she is under guardianship or has been found to be incompetent. Cities should be granted such authority up until ballots are printed. 1993 City Policies and Priorities Under present circumstances, cities must seek court . intervention while facing the approaching deadline for printing ballots. Since it has been clearly established by statute and state constitutional provisions that such circumstances prevent such individuals from holding elective office, cities must be in a position to expedite the decision to keep the name of such ineligible candidates from appearing on the ballot. Failure of the court to act in a timely manner results in the appearance on the ballot of an ineligible candidate, a matter which would then require costly reprinting of ballots prior to election. Reliance on a certified copy of official court records, final orders or judgments should be sufficient to provide the local filing officer with the authority to determine that a person who has filed an affidavit of candidacy or nomination petition is an ineligible voter and therefore his/her name should not to appear on the ballot. EE -16. Schedule for Redistricting (C) The League urges the Legislature to adopt a schedule for congressional, legislative, and local redistricting that permits cities sufficient time to update voter records, supply absentee ballots to voters and make it possible to conduct other elections held during and after the time in which redistricting must be imple- mented In the event the court becomes involved in legislative redistricting, the League urges the court to suspend the timeline for local redistricting until the dispute has been resolved. Counties, cities, townships, and school districts must also hold elections during the period of redistricting, necessitating additional voter registration and adminis- trative changes that must be accomplished simulta- neously with the redrawing of precinct and ward boundaries. Intervening election schedules underscore the need to complete redistricting at the state level as soon as possible following the receipt of official census results. 15 Decisions on legislative redistricting must be made in a more timely manner because such changes have a substantial impact on other levels of government. Local governments are responsible for accurately recording and correcting voter registration records and the informing of voters and candidates of changes that have taken place. The state anticipates receiving census data the year prior to the deadline for redistricting. Cities have 60 days to redraw precinct and ward boundaries following adoption of a legislative redistricting plan. The state should provide cities with prompt notice of the effect and duration of the court order affecting the deadline for local redistricting. In addition, cities need to have access to census data to redraw local precincts and wards. Incorrect legal descriptions and/or inaccurate assignment of population counts cause serious prob- lems. It should be clear which state agency or level of government is responsible for determining the census data and descriptions of newly redistricted jurisdic- tions. 16 EE -17. Voter Fraud (G) The League-urges the Legislature to make it more likely that violators of voter registration and election laws will be prosecuted O Make those who fraudulently vouch for persons registering at the polls subject to the same penalties that apply to those found guilty of fraudulent voter registration. • Modify penalties for violation of state voter registration requirements to increase the likelihood of prosecution of offenders, particularly for viola- tions of election day registration provisions. • Make clear that prosecution will result if candi- dates interfere with voters on election day. League of Minnesota Cities General Legislation and Personnel GLP -1. Comparable Worth (A) The League supports efforts to eliminate any sex - based differences in compensation of public employ- ees but asks the Legislature to'revise the pay equity statute to allow local governments sufficient time to comply with newly proposed (adopted) administrative rules regarding compliance determinations. Addi- tionally, the League urges the Legislature to amend the statute to limit the law's applicability to only full - time employees and to clarify that separately estab- lished governmental entities must file separate compliance reports. To be considered separately established, the governmental entities may have separate personnel systems, separate facilities, separate bookkeeping and payroll systems, and no interrelationships other than budget approval and/or financial assistance. In addition, these existing governmental entities must be separately established prior to 1984. The local government pay equity act, first adopted in 1984, has been frequently amended by the Legislature. Significant amendments were adopted in 1990, and in 1991 the Legislature authorized the Department of Employee Relations to promulgate rules to assist the department in determining local government compli- ance with the statute. These rules, which include several new tests, necessi- tate many changes to local government compliance efforts, will take effect almost a full year after cities and other public employers were required by the statute to submit compliance reports. Cities must be granted additional time to comply with these new standards prior to facing imposition of state sanctions which include five percent reductions in financial assistance and $100 per day penalties. Though the rules and the current statute contemplate an automatic extension, the League supports legislative action to delay the imple- mentation deadline to December 1994. At the very least, the Legislature should act to delay imposition of new statistical tests of health insurance contributions, salary range differences, and exceptional service pay programs until December 1994. The rules address other significant issues not previ- ously dealt with by the legislation, including the 1993 City Policies and Priorities definitions of employees and employers covered by the act. For the definition of employees, the rules propose using the same definition as in the public employees labor relations act (PELRA). Use of this definition causes two significant problems. First, because local governments use a great number of part-time and seasonal employees in order to effectively and effi- ciently provide important services, many more jobs will have to be included in compensation systems than is the current practice. This will require much more administrative work in establishing job descriptions and ranking jobs which by their very nature are often impossible to accurately describe or value. Second, because benefits, including health insurance programs, are often limited to full -time employees, cities run the risk of being found out of compliance with the pay equity act not because of gender -based discrimination, but rather because of valid distinctions between full - time and part-time employment. The League proposes adopting a definition of employee which would not include any employee working less than 20 hours per week on average or who is employed in a position which is filled less than six months in any year. For the definition of employers covered by the act, the . problem is slightly different. The law clearly requires all cities and other political subdivisions of the state to comply. The problem- is determining who is the employing agency for a particular group of employees. Historically, employees of certain enterprises such as public utilities, hospitals, nursing homes, and libraries have been considered as separate and distinct from employees of the city. Often, the only connection is that the city council acts somewhat pro forma to ratify the annual budget proposed by the separate entity prior to certification of theux levy. Unfortunately, it is this feature of formal budget adoption on which the rules focus, regardless of separate payroll systems, personnel rules, salary and benefit systems, etc. The League supports statutory clarification that other aspects of the government structure be considered when making a determination of which governing body is the em- ployer of a group of employees. Finally,, because the tests proposed for initial compli- ance determinations do not take into account factors which the statute specifies as justifying compensation 17 difference, it is improper for public statements of noncompliance to be released by the Department of Employee Relations prior to final compliance determi- nations. The statute should be amended to allow local governments to present all information justifying departures from the mathematically prescribed standard prior to public statements from a state agency that a jurisdiction is "not in compliance" with the law. GLP -2. Minnesota Public Employment Labor Relations Act (PELRA) (A) _ A. The League supports legislation which modifies the existing interest arbitration process to require arbitrators to give primary consideration to internal equity comparisons and the impact that any arbitra- tion award might have on the personnel compensa- tion systems of the city involved in the arbitration. Further, the League opposes considering any addi- tional employee groups as essential employees. City and other governmental experience with the arbitration process has shown that arbitrated awards generally exceed negotiated settlements. Unlike the state, local governments do not have the authority to reject these arbitrated awards. The Legislature should re- examine binding arbitration as a means of determin- ing pay and benefit issues. The.goal of any modifica- tion to the process should be to ensure that arbitrations do not interfere with other state programs such as pay equity. There should not be any additional employee groups placed in the category of "essential employees" B. The League recommends that the Legislature reinstate the previous definition of employees covered by PELRA to people employed for more than 100 working days in a calendar year. The 1983 Legislature reduced the time period that part - time employees must be employed before they are considered employees covered by PELRA. This has resulted in higher wages for some part-time employees, and more significantly, has resulted in cities hiring fewer part -time employees. Legislative action in 1991 caused further. confusion, which may also result in a lessening of job opportunities, particularly for students and the disadvantaged. Additionally, many employees who view their work as temporary or transitory in nature, have been asked to pay their fair share of union dues, even though they receive no benefit from union membership. Recent legislative interest in cost - saving initiatives at the local level could be substantially promoted by a statutory amendment to enable local governments to effectively use seasonal employees. GLP -3. Tort Liability and Insurance (A) The League supports legislation reducing the expo- sure of cities to civil lawsuits without unduly restrict- ing an injured party from recovering compensation from negligent individuals. The League also sup- ports actions ensuring the availability and affordability of insurance coverage for cities. The growth of tort litigation over the past several years has resulted in increasing liability for governmental entities, private businesses, and individual citizens. Additionally, business practices of insurance compa- nies have played a significant role in insurance pricing. The League supports reasonable reforms addressing both sides of the liability /insurance issue. The municipal tort liability act was enacted in 1963 to protect the public treasury, while giving citizens relief from the arbitrary, confusing, and administratively expensive prior doctrine of sovereign immunity. The act has served that purpose well in the past. However, courts frequently forget or ignore the positive benefits secured to citizens as a result of the act, which includes liability exceptions and limitations. The special vulnerability of far -flung government operations to debilitating tort suits continues to require the existence of a tort claims act, applicable to local governments as well as the state. The League recom- mends the following. • Our system of clearly defining and limiting the scope of public liability should continue. The League strongly supports retention of the dollar limitations on governmental liability. The,current limits of $200,0005600,000 seem sufficient at this time but should be reviewed periodically to ensure that those injured are not unfairly compensated and that the limits remain constitutional. The limits should be set at an amount that allows all levels of government to economically procure coverage, and provide sufficient lead time to avoid to the extent possible budgetary problems. Additionally, the limits should conform to the extent possible with coverage limits available from insurers. 18 , League of Minnesota Cities 0 Liability for particular city operations, such as firefighting and park and recreation facilities, should only arise if there is a showing of gross misconduct or gross negligence. • The League favors eliminating joint and several liability except in limited circumstances. The fault - based system of damage awards has apparently eroded. In order to facilitate the return to a fault - based system, joint liability should be abolished in cases where defendants have not acted in concert, and a modified comparative fault system should be used to evaluate the actions of other individuals involved with the injury and assess damages only in proportion to the amount of each person's fault. At the very least, the Legislature should modify recent amendments to the comparative fault statute and eliminate joint liability for governmental and private defendants when they are less than 30 percent at fault. • Recent court cases have indicated potential em- ployer liability exposure to defamation claims arising out of providing references on past employ- ees to prospective employers. The result is that many employers have stopped providing informa- tion on a past employee except information specifi- cally classified as public under the law which must be disseminated upon request. Employers which give information about the job performance of former employees should be presumed to be acting in good faith and, unless lack of good faith is shown by clear and convincing evidence, there should be no liability for making the disclosure. This provision would not protect knowingly false or deliberately misleading information, but would promote more effective hiring practices and could potentially limit the public's exposure to negligent hiring cases or less than high - quality public employees. GLP4. Veterans' Preference (B) A. The League supports amending the veterans' preference act to provide that a veteran must select one and only one hearing procedure rather than be able to request both a veterans' preference hearing and a grievance procedure under a collective bar- gaining agreement Current statutes entitle a veteran to at least two differ- ent hearing procedures to challenge any disciplinary action. This is inefficient and may be unworkable, since the standards for court review of the decisions of veterans' preference boards and grievance arbitrators vary significantly. The Minnesota Supreme Court, has indicated that these statutes need to be amended. The law should provide for a selection of a single hearing procedure and eliminate any requirement for salary payment pending the hearing when the veteran does not request a hearing within 10 days or when an impaitial hearing body determines that the dismissal was for just cause. B. The League supports legislation providing specific time lines to be followed by employers and employees in the veterans' preference discipline or dismissal process, so that an employee must provide notice of their intent to appeal within 10 days and the hearing process must be completed no later than 90 days following a proposed disciplinary or dismissal action. Currently an employee has 60 days from the date of the employer's notice of discipline or dismissal to request a hearing. If a hearing is requested, there are no time lines for holding hearings or rendering decisions. Under this system, a termination decision can, and has, taken more than a year, during which the employee receives full pay and benefits. The result is extremely costly to cities, particularly small cities, which often must hire replacement workers for this period. The League's proposal to provide a more expedited process would not infringe on the employee's right to a hear- ing, but would ensure a more efficient and cost - effective procedure. Additionally, a public employer which has its termination or discipline decision upheld should not be responsible for paying any of the employee's costs of challenging the action and should be reimbursed for any salary paid to the employee pending the hearing. GLP -5. Employee Benefits (B) The League supports legislation promoting the efficient and economical provision of employee benefits including life, health, and dental care for city officers and employees and specifically opposes legislation which authorizes employees or groups of 1993 City Policies and Priorities 19 employees to unilaterally select particular care providers. The League further asks the Legislature to not mandate or grant additional benefits to public employees. The Legislature has frequently granted or mandated additional benefits and workplace regulations appli- cable to public and private employers. While many of these actions have worthwhile purposes, they have a significant impact on local finances and on the collec- tive bargaining process. The Legislature must bear in mind that to the extent that certain benefits are given away unilaterally there is no need to bargain for them, thus allowing public employees to demand other benefits through negotiation. Additionally, while some benefit increases seem to have a minor impact when first considered, they may inflate rapidly in the future or combine with other provisions of law to cause significant expense. While it is unrealistic perhaps for the Legislature to refrain totally from mandating certain benefits, they should consider the ramifications of their actions and understand their substantial role in increasing the personnel costs of local governments. Cities, like all employers, are alarmed at the rapidly rising cost of health care in Minnesota. Further, health care availability is a critical issue in many parts of the state. The League supports efforts to ensure the availability of quality health care at affordable costs. Employers who currently provide healthcare benefits for their employees, however, should not have to pay twice. Some past legislative actions have limited cities flexibility in selecting health care providers. Specifi- cally, as an element of the creation of a statewide health plan for public employees the Legislature provided that exclusive representatives may unilater- ally determine whether their employees will participate in the state plan, leaving only the proportion of pre- mium paid by the public employer subject to bargain- ing. The result may be additional administrative or personnel costs to the public employer. The Legisla- ture should eliminate the unilateral selection authority it has granted exclusive representatives. GLP -6. Employee Training and Education Requirements (B) The League opposes any additional state - imposed employee training, education, or certification pro- 20 grams, but supports the availability of technical and, financial assistance from the state for local or regional training and education programs. The Legislature has recently considered proposals to require state certification for firefighters and dispatch- ers, and four -year college degrees for police officers. There have been other related proposals, all which seem to ignore the significant impact on local recruit- ment and retention and cost containment efforts. Rather than respond with additional state requirements, the League supports efforts by the state to make training programs more readily available for local employees as well as financial assistance by the state to encourage local governments to provide additional training and educational opportunities for their employ- ees. Further, alternative methods should be provided for entry into these positions. GLP -7. Local Police and Paid Fire Relief Associations (B) Local police and fire relief associations, with city consent, should be encouraged to merge into the PERA police and fire funds under the uniform policy enacted during the 1987 legislative session. Any amendments to the policy should lower city consolidation costs while fully protecting the solvency of the PERA police and fire fund. If the Legislature determines that "escalation' (pen- sions adjusted by the percentage increase of wages of active members) presently in effect does not offer adequate inflation protection, that mechanism should be adjusted or abolished. However, no new mecha- nism such as that authorized for Minneapolis police or firefighters in Laws 1988, Chapter 319, should be authorized while "escalation' remains in effect. The League supports changes in actuarial assumptions relating to salaries and investment return to more truly reflect experiences. The LMC opposes payment of any type of bonus to active or retired members (13th check) as a part of actuarial assumption changes. The League opposes legislation that provides for reductions of state amortization aid to local police and fire relief associations. League of Minnesota Cities t If, despite city. objections, the Legislature authorizes another benefit increase for local police and paid fire members, all costs of the benefit increase should be borne by the state. The establishment of multiple mechanisms to make post retirement adjustments to protect retirees in local police and paid firefighter pension plans is illogical, confusing, unnecessary, disruptive, and expensive. GLP -S. Open Meetings and Data Practices (B) The League supports legislation creating a procedure for local governments to obtain from the state fast and reliable review of dissemination requests and receive protection from any claim brought following release or nonrelease based on the state review. Further, the League supports additional amendments to clarify the procedures cities should follow when the open meeting law conflicts with the data practices act. The Legislature should modify the data practices act in two areas. First, the Legislature should create a process at the state which would allow cities to forward dissemina- tion requests from the public to an individual or board at the state for an opinion on the proper response. The League would support this process only if any local government receiving the opinion would also receive protection from any claims brought as a result of actions taken in reliance on the opinion. Second; the Legislature should either preclude the private, commercial use of governmental data or allow local units of government to charge the actual costs of compiling data or separating public from private data when the dissemination request necessitates significant staff work. The Legislature also needs to reexamine the interrela- tionship between the open meeting law and the data practices act in light of statutory amendments made in 1991. The intent of the open meeting law is to ensure, within practical limits, the access of persons to the actions and motivations of government. The data practices act is intended to ensure, within practical limits, the privacy of persons who willingly or unwill- ingly become involved with their government. When private or other classified information must be dis- cussed by a public body subject to the open meeting law, as inevitably it must in many situations, the government is forced to attempt to meet two conflict- ing statutes. The Legislature has attempted to identify likely areas of conflict and to provide clear rules for local govern- ments to follow. Unfortunately, not all circumstances can be anticipated nor remaining ambiguities ad- dressed. The League supports amendments addressing the following issues: O Do veterans preference hearings and civil service proceedings qualify as arbitrations which extend the period during which supporting documentation remains private or confidential? • If these proceedings also qualify as arbitration, how do local governments deal with the different appeal periods and processes; is the data private until all administrative appeal periods lapse? Do individuals have to be notified of their right to have an open hearing, thus in effect waiving their right to privacy? • What reasonable efforts must a local government make to keep private data which must be discussed publicly? • What are the rules when data or meetings involve both private and public data? City officials are making good faith efforts to comply with both laws. Without additional clarification, however, the Legislature must realize that city officials owe it to their constituents to limit the city's exposure to liability. Consequently, cities will continue to be conservative in releasing data where there might be potential liability. Further, it seems absurd to continue data classification as private if governing bodies must discuss it publicly. The logic of the Annandale deci- sion is sound and the League urges the Legislature to return to the rule that if private data is discussed it must be discussed privately or alternatively that the current data classification system should be replaced by a more flexible system dealing with government information practices. 1993 City Policies and Priorities 21 GLP -9. Prevailing Wage (B) The League believes that wages paid on public contracts should be consistent with wages earned by people working at similar jobs in the community. The League urges the. Legislature and the Depart- ment of Labor and Industry to work together to modify the prevailing wage system to make it more equitable and to help control the costs to local governments. The League supports reasonable administration of prevailing wages for projects that receive assistance from local govemments or from the state, including grants, loans, tax- exempt bonds, and all other forms of assistance provided by the government agencies. This control should not unduly limit truly local revenues. The present administration of determining wages uses the "mode" calculation. It designates the wage earned by the greatest number of people in a job class as the prevailing wage. This calculation is flawed, and can either under estimate or over estimate representative wages in a community. A "weighted average" of the wages paid for the job class during the year is a more accurate reflection of wages paid. Requiring prevailing wages, calculated under the existing method, often overpays for public projects. This results in more costly public projects, higher local taxes or limits on other city services, and limits the size of projects or makes them too costly to do. Current administration of the prevailing wage system imports wages from neighboring counties, resulting in metro -area wages being paid across the state. If a particular job class does not have sample wage to determine subsequent wages for that job class, the current system may force the local govemment to use the wage rates paid for the closest area wage for the category--often the higher wage rates which are paid in the metro area. The League commends the analysis of these problems, and the recommendations for modifications and corrections to the prevailing wage system which was prepared by the Department of Administration (April 1991). 22 GLP -10. Public Contracting (B) The League'supports legislative action to clarify and modernize state laws regulating city contracting for improvements, services, and materials. Any change should maintain cities',Jlexibility in contracting. As governmental bodies, cities have an obligation to engage in fair public contracting practices. State laws have attempted to provide guidance to local govern- ments in their contracting. practices. The League supports legislation updating these statutes to reflect inflation and to modify provisions to meet current I eeds. The League supports amending Minn. Stat. 574.26 to allow the use of letters of credit or other securities acceptable to cities as alternatives to expensive to obtain and difficult to collect on performance bonds. Cities are in the best position to determine which form of security best protects public funds. GLP -11. Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) Benefits, Financing, and Administration (B) The following principles should govern any changes the Legislature makes in the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) and the other state- wide pension plans. A. The League opposes any change in the PERA rule of 90 or the current early-retirement reduction factor for current employees, especially vested employees. Members have provided substantial service in reliance on these beneficial and supposed permanent fund features. B. The League opposes modification of the "high five "formula. The adoption in 1973 of the "high five year" benefit formula for PERA has provided very adequate pension benefits for career municipal employ- ees. Further shortening of the averaging period would create windfalls for some PERA members and multiply opportunities for man- ipulation of service and salaries to maximize pension benefits without proportional contributions to the fund. League of Minnesota Cities C. The 1989 Legislature made major benefit improve- ments, and changed statutory assumptions and the time table for full funding. Substantial experience with the new law should be gained before any signifi- cant changes are authorized by the Legislature. Any reductions permitted by excess reserves or excessive current contributions or combinations of the two should be of such amounts as to benefit the employer and employee equally as a percentage of overall employee salary or in the case of police and fire, in the same percentages as contributions are made. GLP -12. Recovery of State Program Administration Costs (B) The League supports removing limitations on the ability of local governments to charge fees or other- wise raise revenues to pay for state programs. Addi- tionally, the Legislature should adopt statewide processes which further local administration of state programs. All levels of government are finding it difficult to finance governmental programs and law enforcement activities. The League supports continuing efforts to internalize program costs and to provide financing for law enforcement activities through forfeiture statutes and other means. Specifically, the prohibition on collecting local handgun permit fees should be re- pealed; license renewals and/or motor vehicle registra- tions should be used as a means of collecting unpaid fines, penalties, or other governmental fees; and forfeiture assets should be left as a resource primarily for local enforcement activities. GLP -13. Stalking and Other Harassing Behavior (B) The League supports legislation addressing the issue of stalking and other forms of harassment. Existing state law is inadequate to prevent harassing behavior such as regularly following or shadowing an individual. This type of conduct has often been a precursor of violent conduct and should be addressed by state legislation since local boundaries make effective regulations difficult to adopt and enforce. Legitimate monitoring or tracking operations of employers should not be impacted by state law in this area 1993 City Policies and Priorities GLP -14. Utility Service Territories (B) The League supports legislation confirming the power of Minnesota cities: 1) to require franchises of all non - municipal electric, gas, telecommunication, steam, and hot water utilities as a precondition to service within municipal boundaries, and 2) if a city has or starts a municipal utility, to serve all territory within city boundaries upon payment of two times the current annual gross revenues plus the depreciated value of physical property in the service territory acquired In order to plan in the most effective and economical way for city economic development and infrastructure needs, including those not directly related to gas and electric or other services, cities need substantial controls over the type, location, cost, and layout of electric, gas, and other utilities. They must also be able to cause relocation of the same without great public expense. Recent decisions of the Public Service Commission have called into question city powers to franchise in or serve new areas of the city. Rigid service territory boundaries established by the commis- sion must be subject to practical modification to best serve the needs of city residents and the state as a whole. GLP -15. Volunteer Firefighters (B) The League of Minnesota Cities supports legislation that would increase the maximum lump sum volun- teer firefighters pension over several years; would validate present pension payments in excess of statutory limits; would clarify that limits set out in statute are absolute maximums; and create a longev- ity award system to encourage participation in volunteer public ambulance systems. GLP -16. Cable Communications (C) The League supports strengthening the existing Minnesota cable act. Minn. Stat. Chapter 238, in its present form, is very important to local governments because it protects cities' rights to enforce local standards and cable operator commitments for technical, construction, and programming performance. 23 Any changes should strengthen the authority of local governments to franchise and regulate cable communi- cation systems in their communities. Additionally, the state should reinstitute active moni- toring, administration, and enforcement of cable with specific reference to the proper filing of initial and modified franchise ordinances, franchise renewals, and transfers of ownership. Relationships between local franchising authorities and cable operators are defined at the federal level by the cable communications policy act of 1984, as well as the recently enacted 1992 cable television consumer protection and cooperation act, at the state level by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 238, and at the local level by local cable franchise ordinances. In 1985, the Legislature abolished the Minnesota Cable Communications Board, an appointed body of the Department of Administration which promulgated and enforced cable legislation and accompanying rules. This legislation codified some previously existing board rules into statutory form and reassigned respon- sibility for telecommunications from the board to the commissioner of commerce. However, in 1987 the Legislature discontinued any state enforcement for cable. GLP -17. Gopher State One -Call (C) The League supports exempting cities and other local units of government from the Gopher State One -Call excavation system. The 1987 Legislature enacted a one -call excavation notice system. Among other requirements, the law requires local governments that issue permits for an activity involving excavation to continuously display a state prescribed excavator's and operator's notice, and to provide all permit applicants a copy of the state law (Minn. Stat. 216D.02). All excavators are then re- quired to contact the state notification center at least 48 hours prior to excavation (except in emergencies). The center is then to contact all operators of underground facilities (cable television, phone, electrical, heat, gas, oil, petroleum products, water including storm water, steam, sewage, and other similar substances) in the area which in turn are required to mark their facilities within 48 hours. 24 Although labeled as a one -call notification center, the, system has resulted in multiple contacts. For instance, an excavator will apply to a city with an excavation permit system. The city will notify the excavator of the state law requirements. The excavator then con- tacts the state notification center which in turn will contact the city, among the operators, of an excavation the city already knows about and will charge them for the notification. This aspect of the system is absurd and should be modified to exclude notice to cities when they have an excavation permit system which triggers the system. The Legislature should conduct a review of the one - call system to determine if it is being operated effi- ciently and to determine if its billing practices should be changed. GLP -18. Liquor Issues (C) The League opposes the establishment of one class of beer and the off -sale of wine in other than liquor stores. The establishment of one class of beer in Minnesota would cause substantial problems in controlling the sale of beer in filling stations, grocery stores, drug stores, and elsewhere where 3.2 beer is sold. Also, with regard to a proposal for only one class of beer in Minnesota, current 3.2 on -sale establishments could be selling strong beer without the supervision and controls imposed upon on -sale liquor establishments and municipal liquor stores, or would be forced to meet most, if not all the restrictions on intoxicating liquor establishments. Cities should be fully authorized to establish hours of sale and be expressly authorized to establish differing license fees for establishments having different hours of operation. GLP -19. Military Leaves (C) The League recommends that the statutes be amended to provide that when an employee is tempo- rarily absent because of short -term military service, the employer pay only the difference between military pay and the public pay, rather than the full public salary. League of Minnesota Cities Under current law, a city employee, as well as any other public employee, is entitled to leave with full pay and accrual of seniority status and other benefits for all the time the employee is engaged in short-term (15 days or less) military service while receiving full military pay. Cities, particularly those which must hire part-time replacement employees when others take military, leave, suffer a significant financial hardship not shared by private sector employers who are not required to provide short-term paid military leaves. Public - employees should only have to pay the differ- ence between the employee's military pay and their regular wage for this 15-day period. Any longer leave period should be without pay and the accrual of seniority and other benefits should be suspended for military leaves beyond 30 days. Finally the law should-. - be amended to limit its applicability only to annual leaves with the 15 days being taken consecutively, which would eliminate the current ability of some public employees to arrange their 15 days of paid leave to be taken one or two days at a time throughout the year. GLP -20. Presumptions for Workers' Compensa- tion Benefits (C) The League supports modifications to the workers' compensation statutes (Minn. Stat 176.011, subd. 1 S) which would restrict presumptions of occupational diseases to apply only after an employee can establish an absence of personal risk factors that could have caused the disease or illness. 1993 City Policies and Priorities The law allows for the legal presumption that police officers, firefighters, paramedics, emergency medical technicians, and nurses contract certain diseases or illnesses due to their employment. Employers must then rebut the presumption by introduction of evi dence. This burden is difficult and increases the chance that employees receive compensation for non - work caused illnesses and diseases. Currently, the law provides the following presumptions for the following personnel: • Police and fire— myocarditis, coronary sclerosis, pneumonia or its sequel; • Police, fire, paramedic, emergency medical techni- cian, nurse — infectious or communicable disease .( exposures outside -of a hospital); • Fire -- cancer. All of the listed diseases or illnesses are common to the entire population and an equal or greater correlation may exist between the specific illness and the individual's personal risk factors such as smoking, diet, exercise, heredity, and lifestyle than the correla- tion between the job and the illness. For this reason, the League supports legislation limit- ing the presumption to cases where the employee can demonstrate limited personal risk factors, or alternately the Legislature should clarify the right of a local government employer to prohibit smoking on or off - duty and to require other measures to limit non -work causes of these illnesses and diseases. 25 Land Use, Energy, Environment, and Transportation LUEET -1. Solid and Hazardous Waste should be used to encourage environmentally Management (A) acceptable product generation and handling. The League supports state programs designed to minimize or eliminate the need for land fldling solid and hazardous waste. The problem of regulating, controlling, and disposing of solid and hazardous waste will continue to be a major environmental issue both nationally and in Minnesota Major state legislation addressing this issue has been enacted annually since 1980. These acts responded to the concerns and issues raised by the League, other local governments, and citizens and we commend the Legislature for its actions. The existing waste management and control system for handling and disposing of hazardous materials central- izes responsibility at the state level, but requires the cooperation and support of all levels of government. The system established for solid waste is more diffuse, relying on cities to control and regulate collection, counties to regulate or operate existing resource recovery or disposal facilities, and the state to coordi- nate responsibilities and plan for future disposal needs. Both systems should foster and encourage abatement, recycling, and resource recovery for as much of the waste stream as possible and then to assure environ- mentally sound disposal for the remaining waste. • The League supports the prohibition of disposal of unprocessed solid waste in landfills, as cost - efficient and environmentally safe alternatives are developed and funding is provided to cities to implement their responsibilities. Ash from waste to energy facilities should continue to be regulated as a special waste. i The system appears to be working, and therefore the League does not perceive a need for major changes to existing legislation at the present time. But any future legislation that may be considered should enhance and • not diminish the emphasis on these concerns. • The League supports efforts aimed at avoiding or reducing the creation of solid and hazardous waste. These efforts should include disincentives for creating hard to dispose of items and notifying consumers of the ease or difficulty of disposing of materials priorlo purchase. The League supports efforts at the state and federal levels to institute financial incentives to avoid single -use packaging materials. The state should not preempt local regulatory authority in the absence of an effective, statewide regulatory framework or program which is at least as strong as regulations already adopted by cities. Further, financial or other incentives Funding for recycling, reduction, and abatement efforts. The League supports alternatives to general taxes as sources of financing conservation efforts. These alternatives can include specific taxes, additional fees on landfill or disposal facility users, and state or county grants and loans. Finan- cial assistance programs need to be regularly reviewed and continued if necessary to effectuate waste reduction. Changes in financing should be implemented in a manner which avoids budgetary disruption. The Legislature should continue to fund educational and operational pilot program efforts on the subject of solid and hazardous waste disposal, including alternatives for the disposal of household hazardous waste, such as those pro- moted by the household hazardous waste reduction project. The League also supports legislation requiring that the six percent garbage sales tax (SCORE tax) be distributed directly to the local unit of government that actually operates the recycling program within that jurisdiction. Siting process. The siting of solid waste facilities has become extremely difficult. The Legislature should continue to consider siting issues and provide additional incentives or mechanisms to encourage siting of necessary facilities. • Clean-up of hazardous substance locations. The clean -up and decontamination of existing hazard- ous waste sites, including closed municipal land- fills and dumps, should continue before there is further damage to public health and environment. The League supports the continuation of the state Superfund program, including its liability provi- sions, for most sites, but supports the creation of a separate landfill clean-up program financed out of a tax or fee on toxic materials. Regardless of the 26 League of Minnesota Cities clean -up program established, local governments should be protected from extreme clean -up costs, or costs which do not directly relate to their contribution to the problem. O Management of solid waste collection and dis- posal. Cities should retain their existing authority to organize collection and regulate solid waste - facilities and should not be required by statute to compensate parties for changes in regulations nor have their local authority to regulate land uses unilaterally overridden by other levels of govern- ment. LUEET -2. Transportation Systems Funding (A) The League urges the Legislature and the governor to take action to provide adequate state revenues for street, highway, and transit programs for city, county, township, and state roads, and to ensure the avail- ability of necessary matching funds for ISTEA funding for both transit and roads. The League supports an increase in the gas tax to meet the funding needs for roadways, and the dedication of a new or existing revenue for transit programs state- wide. Meeting future needs will require integrated planning and implementation of these modes of transportation. Cities understand that an efficient transportation system is a vital element in planning for fiscal, eco- nomic, and social development at state, regional, and local levels. The economy of the state and its cities are dependent on the effective movement of goods and people, particularly for agriculture and tourism. It is therefore necessary to establish and adequately fund long -range highway and transit needs to assure the vitality of the state's economy. The League urges the state to consider using multiple revenue sources which have adequate growth potential to meet increasing transportation needs, including: gas tax increases, sales tax on services, automobile registration fees, license fees, wheelage taxes, and other types of user fees. The League urges the Legislature and the governor to acknowledge the immediate need for planning, coordi- nation, and funding, particularly in light of the recent passage of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA). Cities, counties, and metro- politan planning organizations (MPOs) recognize their 1993 City.Policies and Priorities increased role to assist the state in planning and prioritizing the needs of Minnesota's transportation system. Cities encourage MnDOT to promote a process of local decisions being made by local govern- ments. Cities of all sizes across the state also recognize that they do not currently have adequate or diversified sources of revenue to meet their increasing demands and the role they will play in maintaining the statewide transportation system. A modern, accessible transit system is a vital element of the state's transportation system and should be provided statewide to meet local needs. Minnesota should pursue its commitment to public modes of transportation with goals of. meeting the mobility needs of our citizens, improving accessibility and efficiency of current transit programs, and reducing automobile congestion and overall energy and environ- mental concerns. The motor vehicle excise tax (MVET) is one of the most appropriate sources of funding to be dedicated for transportation purposes. If the Legislature and the governor are unable to acknowledge this prior commit- ment of these funds, it is vital that they acknowledge their responsibility to dedicate other revenues for road/ highway and transit purposes. Requirements for the local match for transit programs should not be increased, but the League supports authority for special local tax authority to be used to fund enhanced or specialized transit services which are locally determined to be necessary. Imposition of local taxes should not, however, affect the state responsibil- ity of funding for these transit services. Environmental concerns and the need to conserve energy require the use of alternate modes of transporta- tion to meet the diverse needs which exist in various communities and regions of the state. Increased support should be provided for innovative and intermodal transportation programs and policies. All levels of government in Minnesota should continue to encourage increased energy conservation, travel - demand management, ride -share programs, alternative fuels, bicycle facilities, and research and education of such options. The state should also acknowledge the importance of local bridges to the statewide transportation network. The bonding program should be continued at an annual '27 level of at least $30 million in order to provide the necessary funds for cities, towns, and counties to replace and repair local bridges. Additional bonding authority should be made available for new bridge construction across the state. LUEET -3. Transportation Utility Fee (A) The League urges the Legislature to authorize cities to create, at their option, a transportation utility. Such authority would acknowledge: the effects of limited local revenues and cuts to the state aid revenues; the benefit to all taxpayers of a properly maintained local transportation system; and the severe limitations of existing special assessment authority. A transportation utility, comparable to the statutory authority for cities to operate storm sewer utilities, would provide a stable, long -term, dedicated funding source for reconstruction and maintenance of city transportation facilities. Current transportation funding options available to cities are inadequate. Current special assessment law, Chapter 429 (Local Improvements, Special Assess- ments) does not meet cities' financing needs because of the benefit requirement. The law requires a minimum of 20 percent of such a project to be specially assessed against affected properties. In practice, however, proof of increased property value to this extent — benefit --can rarely,be proven for regular repair or replacement of existing transportation infrastructure. Alternatives to financing through the use of Chapter 429 authority are nearly nonexistent. The Legislature has given cities the authority to operate utilities for waterworks, sanitary sewers, and stormsewers. The stormsewer authority (1983), in ' particular, set the precedent for a process of charging a fee on a utility bill for a city service or infrastructure which is of value to the entire city without metering and without proof of property value increases (benefit). A transportation utility would use technical, well - founded measurements, based on traffic generated. It would equitably distribute the costs of providinglocal transportation services, including properties which are exempt from the property tax. Authority for cities to operate a transportation utility would reduce the need for cities to incur the additional costs of debt in order to finance major reconstruction 28 and maintenance projects. It would also limit the frequency of large special assessment charges on individual property owners. In addition, the transporta- tion utility would allow funding of local transportation system needs with no additional state costs. Finally, authority for this utility will be enabling only. Cities will need to individually weigh the benefits of such a tool for their long -term maintenance and reconstruction transportation needs and have their city councils approve the use of the utility. LUEET4. Wetlands Conservation (A) The League, along with many other governmental associations, supported passage of the 1991 wetlands conservation act Experience gained by administra- tion of the interim program and participation in the rule - writing for the permanent program indicates a need for additional legislative action. Specifically, the League supports the following legisla- tive initiatives. • Remove the $75 limitation on replacement plan. reviews. Since all proposals to alter, drain, or fill a wetland involve a substantial expenditure of local staff time, including, but not limited to, profes- sional engineers or hydrologists, any limitation on cost recovery less than actual expenses means that the general taxpayer is subsidizing the proponent of an activity which, by definition is potentially adverse to the environment. ® Clarify that the technical review panel, contem- plated under the law, is advisory to the local government unit administering the act and not the sole determinant of questions regarding typing, delineation, public values, and the adequacy of replacement plans. • Amend the governmental oversight process so landowners can clearly understand which govern- ment unit needs to review a proposal, and refine the system to ensure expedited reviews of propos- als consistent with the environmental goals of the program. • Provide for state defense and indemnification of local governments administering state laws for any "taking" claims which property owners might allege. League of Minnesota Cities • Make wetland replacement requirements equal between urban and non -urban land at a 1:1 ratio. LUEET -5. Annexation (A) A. The League supports legislation restricting further urban growth outside city boundaries and facilitating the annexation of urban land to cities. Public policies which encourage substantial develop- ment in non -urban area and which extend public services beyond existing jurisdictions and service areas are wasteful and counter - productive. Additionally, shoreland and prime agricultural land are major natural and economic resources and the state should include as a major objective their preservation and wise use. Particular attention should be given to the issue of development and the delivery of governmental services to urbanizing fringe areas. In the metropolitan area, the Legislature should not modify the existing frame- work for restricting or guiding development absent careful study and input from metropolitan cities and their associations. State law should continue to encourage the preserva- tion of shoreland and prime agricultural land and discourage the development of such land outside designated growth areas to be served by a city. The League recommends the following. • State statutes regulating annexation should make it easier for cities to annex developed or developing land within unincorporated areas which the annex- ing city has designated as a growth area. It is unfair to city residents to have individuals avoid paying their fair share for municipal services provided by the city government by living in the fringe area around a city. • Cities should be given the authority to extend their zoning ordinance and subdivision controls up to two miles outside the city's boundaries regardless of the existence of county or township controls, in order to ensure conformance with city facilities and services. B. The League also supports legislation restricting the ability of individual property owners to petition the Municipal Board to detach their land from one city and to annex it to an adjoining city. In 1985 the state's annexation statutes were amended to allow an owner of land to petition the Municipal Board for concurrent detachment and annexation. Prior to 1985, only the affected cities could begin the process. Since the amendment, several instances have arisen where owners have petitioned the board because they were dissatisfied with land use or development assistance decisions made by the host city. The Legislature should either repeal the property owner petition provision or provide the affected cities a right to veto the petition. At the very least, the Legislature should provide a list of factors for the Municipal Board to analyze when considering requests for concurrent detachment and annexation. LUEET -6. Municipal State Aid System (B) A. In order to more adequately represent the current eligible miles of city streets, the League supports raising the municipal state aid system (MSAS) limit to 3,000 miles This would be an administrative change and would not affect the actual distribution of MSA funding. Existing law limits the system to 2,500 miles and total mileage currently in the system is approximately 2,300. This mileage increase for the system is neces- sary to accommodate cities reaching the eligible 5,000 population threshold and mileage being added by currently eligible cities. B. The population factor of the municipal state aid system should be changed to reflect annual popula- tion updates based on estimates from the state demog- rapher or Metropolitan Council, rather than reliance on federal or special census counts. C. In spite of the consolidation of the two metropoli- tan state construction districts, 5 and 9, in 1989 -90, the League supports legislation which continues the previous metropolitan membership on MnDOT committees to ensure that adequate statewide repre- sentation continues. By law the MSA Screening Committee consists of one member from each highway district and from each fast class city. The unintended effect of combining the metropolitan districts reduces metropolitan representation on this body. D. Modify the existing system for municipal comment on fund apportionment and design standards on 1993 City Policies and Priorities 29 county state aid roads. Representatives from cities, counties, and the Department of Transportation Office of State Aid should review and make recommendations for a mechanism to mediate municipal approval of these county projects. LUEET -7. Railroad Right -of -Way Preservation (B) The League urges the Legislature to acknowledge the importance of abandoned railroad grades, and to work to preserve future abandonments for public use. Over 50 percent of Minnesota's railroad grades (5,000 miles) have been abandoned in the last 60 years and an additional 1,000 miles are projected to be abandoned in the next decade. These grades have great public value, for transportation, communication, recreation, and environmental purposes. Bicycle or hiking trails, snowmobile routes, light rail lines, utility corridors, transmission corridors, and pipeline corridors are just a few examples of important future uses of railroad grades. The public cost to acquire these rights -of -way increases substantially once grades have been abandoned or sold off in small parcels. Because future abandonments are unpredictable,. the time for public acquisition can be relatively short, and numerous governments may be involved, the state needs to become involved to ensure preservation of these corridors until such time as the future public use can be determined. LUEET-8. Transportation Services Fund (B) The League encourages further clarification and separation of transportation- related spending of the highway user distribution fund and those non - highway or non - transit purposes which should be funded from the transportation services fund Funding for local and state roads, for facilities, opera- tions, and maintenance should be clearly appropriated from the highway user distribution fund. The League opposes diversion of these funds for other state pro- grams (such as the Department of Public Safety, Tourism, the Safety Council, river parkways, etc.) which do not directly benefit the transportation or transit systems in the state. These operations should be funded directly through the state's general fund. The League supports the establishment of a transportation services fund by the 1991 Legislature as a positive first step toward this policy. 30 LUEET -9. Wastewater Treatment (B) The League supports continued state and federal assistance, and alternative programs, which provide financing for wastewater treatment construction projects. Clean water is vitally important to the citizens of this country and particularly to residents and visitors of Minnesota. Minnesota's cities remain committed to improving water quality. Unfortunately, the costs involved in providing cleaner water are staggering. Because of the incredible cost, it is economically impractical to immediately eliminate wastewater pollution. Therefore, all levels of government must take a reasonably balanced approach to solving the wastewater pollution problem. The ability of cities to comply with any clean water program is contingent upon the availability of adequate funds for treatment facilities. Since 1978, federal grant funding for the wastewater treatment construction grant program has been rapidly phased out. The same budget constraints facing the federal government exist at the state and local level but to a greater degree due to limited revenue sources. • The League supported creation of both the revolv- ing loan fund and the state independent grants program and continues to support state financial assistance which is based on the economic ability of each local government to finance its wastewater treatment infrastructure. The programs should be streamlined to minimize delays caused by state agency reviews of economic and engineering matters. Funding priorities should be established based on the environmental sensitivity of the receiving waters and the quality of the effluent discharged from the facility. • The League opposes efforts by either the state or federal governments to institute enforcement actions or impose increased fees or charges against communities for failure to meet effluent standards while at the same time assigning these communi- ties a low priority on the needs list for state and federal funding. • The League supports recent PCA efforts to have agency staff available to communities as resources for operator assistance, evaluation of treatment needs, educational or liaison efforts, and rate- League of Minnesota Cities setting assistance. The League particularly sup- ports the use of neighboring city staff as additional advisors for communities. The League requests that the Legislature provide additional staff and resources to the agency to continue and expand the community assistance program. availability of adequate funding, including state assistance.- These principles should apply to both the protection of our drinking water supplies and the operation of municipal services. The League supports the following groundwater and surface water protection initiatives. • Financial assistance programs should not penalize communities that have adjusted their local utility • rate system or reserve funds to meet facility financing needs. • The League supports restricting eligibility for on- site system financing to areas which are not readily able to connect to existing or programmed city sewage facilities. • The League opposes direct or indirect restrictions on construction of new city facilities if these restrictions are inconsistent with other state or regional development controls. LUEET -10. Water Conservation and Preservation (B) The League supports state water conservation and preservation programs that maintain a significant role for cities and provide adequate financial assis- tance and flexibility. In order to safeguard the public health and the environ- ment it is necessary to conserve and preserve our water resources. Many watershed districts, counties, cities, and towns have done a good job of dealing with surface and groundwater management issues and have the authority and ability to continue to do so in a cost - effective manner. These existing mechanisms should continue to be used to. the greatest extent possible to address surface and groundwater management prob- lems, instead of establishing a new system or creating new organizations. The League supports, as a basic principle, that no one has the right to pollute either ground or surface water resources. A reasonable relationship of economic and social costs and benefits should be a precondition toward achieving a goal of non - degradation or treat- ment resulting in clean water. The ability of cities to meet goals must be recognized as contingent upon the Increasing the fee on gasoline for petrofund clean- ups in order to shorten the delays currently being experienced by property owners. The Petrofund Board should be empowered to increase the fee as needed to meet the requests for reimbursement in a timely fashion. Additionally, greater controls on the program may be necessary to eliminate fraud. Finally, the League encourages greater standardiza- tion of clean-up actions to minimize delay and costs. . • Continuation of the state's safe drinking water act compliance program which undertakes federally mandated tests on behalf of cities. However, re- examination of the water connection fee imposed by the Department of Health on connections to public water supplies should be undertaken. The fee should be modified to eliminate the inequity in the current $5.21 per year fee being collected from community supplies but not from non - community systems. Additionally, measures to ensure that testing is accomplished in a cost - effective manner should be adopted, including the use of private sector laboratories. • Local units of government should retain the basic responsibility for surface water management, because they are closest to the problem. Efforts to minimize duplication in regulatory programs should be continued. S The League supports a full legislative review of all water- related permit fees and opposes the imposi- tion of these fees on local units of government to the extent that the actual costs to the state cannot be specifically justified and only serve as an alternative means for the state to raise revenue. If fees are determined to be properly imposed on governmental units, the fees should be based solely on the cost of actually- providing governmental services to the political subdivision, and private 1993 City Policies and Priorities 31 sector alternatives should be made available to ensure minimal costs to local taxpayers. LUEET -11. Zoning, Subdivision, and Planning Statutes (B) The League supports the recodificadon of the exist- ing planning enabling statutes but opposes changes that would restrict cities' current substantive and procedural flexibility to address unique circum- • stances. Minnesota's zoning, planning, and subdivision statutes and regulations are essential to promoting economic development, preserving environmental resources, and ensuring the efficient delivery of public services. The governor's advisory council on state -local relations' conducted a thorough review of the state's planning and zoning laws. The League participated in this study. A subcommittee of local elected officials was formed to review the recommendations developed by a technical committee composed of planning officials from townships, cities, counties, regional development commissions, and the state. Those recommendations have been collected in a report on land use legislation, and draft legislation has been prepared, reviewed, and modified by cities throughout Minnesota. The League supports passage of the legislation as currently pro- posed. LUEET -12. Energy Conservation (C) The League supports legislation providing incentives for energy conservation in both the public and private sectors. Overall energy conservation strategies involving the public, private, commercial, and industrial sectors are being developed based on the rationale that conserva- tion efforts achieve the greatest energy savings at the lowest cost. Many of these efforts are receiving valuable assistance from the state. The League believes that a city's individual energy conservation strategy can be accomplished if the Legislature permits or establishes some of the follow- ing measures. • The League recommends support of the use of bonding and special levies by local governments for implementation of energy conservation mea- sures, including building energy audits. This authority would supplement the current municipal energy loan program. The Legislature should also continue to encourage private sector conservation through tax credits and other incentives and should explore the possibility of expanding incentives for earth - sheltered, solar, super- insulated, and under- ground development. The League supports efforts to promote statewide applications of district heating and cooling technol- ogy including: providing additional funds or the ability to special levy for conducting district heating and cooling feasibility studies at the community level; ensuring consideration of district heating and cooling potential in the power plant siting process; and continuing use of the state district heating bond program for renovation of existing district heating and cooling systems. • Rising energy costs will continue to place a burden on the economic vitality of communities in Minne- sota. The League recommends: continuation of the fuel assistance program for low- income households, with expanded services to train recipients in energy conservation practices and with a requirement of recipient participation in weatherization programs if the recipient is the owner, support for weatherization programs operated through cities, counties, and community action program agencies; and continued support for the Minnesota Housing and Finance Agency's loan and grant program for home weatherization. • Local governments are in the best position to assess local needs and regulate energy consump- tion within their communities. The League recommends giving any municipality the option to adopt and enforce standardized provisions or appendices regarding energy conservations that are more stringent than the state building code. LUEET -13. Environmental Trust Fund (C) The voters have approved a constitutional amend- ment for the creation of an environmental trust fund, 32 League of Minnesota Cities and the Legislature should act promptly to include as eligible programs wastewater treatment facilities, superfund cleanup actions, and solid waste disposal facilities, except the siting of new incinerators The 1988 Legislature concluded that all Minnesotans share the responsibility to ensure wise stewardship of the state's environment and natural resources for the benefit of current citizens and future generations, and that the proper management of the state's environment and natural resources requires foresight, planning, and long -term activities that allow the state to preserve its high quality environment and provide for wise use of its natural resources. In order to provide a long -term, consistent, and stable source of funding, the.Legisla- ture asked Minnesota's citizens to approve the creation of a constitutionally dedicated environment and natural resources trust fund financed by one -half of the state lottery (with voter approval) and other state appropria- tions. The ballot indicated that the environmental trust fund "will be used for air, water, land, fish, wildlife, and other natural resources." The voters approved the measure overwhelmingly. Although the fund is constitutionally created, the eligibility of programs and projects for funding is set by statute. Current law provides that the following programs or projects are eligible for financing from the trust fund: • RIM (Reinvest in Minnesota), a program encourag- ing the use of marginal agricultural land as wildlife habitat; • Research projects; • Data collection; • Public education programs; • Capital projects preserving or protecting unique resources; and • Activities that preserve or enhance wildlife, fish, and other natural resources that otherwise may be substantially impaired or destroyed in any area of the state. Projects or programs specifically excluded from eligibility include: • Superfund cleanup actions; • Wastewater treatment projects; and • Solid waste disposal facilities (incinerators, landfills, etc.) The legislation does provide that if the principal of the trust fund reaches or exceeds $200 million, up to five percent of the fund ($10 million) may be used to provide cities with below market rate interest loans for water system improvements. Every one of the environ- mental protection programs identified as ineligible to receive trust funds have estimated needs of tens and hundreds of millions of dollars. The need to allocate governmental resources to ensure adequate and clean water for drinking, recreation, and commercial use should be one of Minnesota's highest priorities. The efficient management of solid waste is also an immedi- ate and demonstrated need, yet these programs are ineligible for trust fund financing. A trust fund may indeed be needed, but the Legislature should act to ensure that an environment and natural resources trust fund not ignore current serious and expensive environmental problems. A balance be-, tween short - and long -term environment and natural resources needs should and can be established. The state should adequately finance current programs designed to provide this and future generations with a quality environment and abundant natural resources, and increasing the types of programs eligible for funding from the trust fund is one way for the state to meet its obligations. LUEET -14. Road and Highway Jurisdiction and Funding (C) Cities support a process of planned and mutually agreeable jurisdictional changes of city, county, and state roads. Long -term funding for maintenance and improvements is needed, and authority for jurisdic- tional changes should be allowed only where such roads have first been brought to adequate mainte- nance and design standards The government turning back the road should be required to continue maintenance until the turnback to the city is com- plete. The increased cost for cities to assume responsibility for general maintenance and life -cycle treatment for a substantial number of additional miles of road greatly exceeds the current financial capacities of cities. Even with the removal of levy limits, cities are constrained by state pressures to limit property taxes, voter opposi- tion to increased costs, and demands for other city services. At this time, the level of funding in the 1993 City Policies and Priorities 33 municipal turnback account is inadequate for the • additional miles of road which are likely to be shifted from counties and the state in the near future. It is important to acknowledge that, rather than saving money, turnbacks merely shift the cost from one group of taxpayers to another. For these reasons, no whole- • sale program of highway turnbacks should be instituted at this time. The League also recommends the following changes to help facilitate individual turnbacks: 34 Rules should be changed to allow counties to upgrade county state aid highways using county state aid-highway funds prior to turnback when cities concur and without the penalty which is currently imposed; and The League supports allowing cities to participate in the decisions which determine whether a turnback road will be designated as a state -aid road or as a local street. If the city chooses to designate the road as a state -aid road, this designation should not affect the standard designation process, so that developing cities will be able to continue to designate a percentage of new road growth as part of the state-aid system. League of Minnesota Cities Revenue Sources RS -1. Property Tax Reform and State Aid to Cities (A) Over the past several years, changes in the state's property tax and aid systems along with volatile state tax revenues have resulted in increased instability and uncertainty in local government finance. In each of the last three years, state aids originally certified to cities during their budget process have been retroactively cut leaving local officials with few options but to reduce essential city services and delay necessary maintenance programs. The 1991 Legislature established the Local Govern- ment Trust Fund to create a dedicated and stable source of revenue for necessary state property tax relief programs. However, since its inception, LGTF rev- enues have been the target of budget balancing efforts of both the Governor and the Legislature. Faced with spending commitments $569 million in excess of-. available revenues, the 1992 Legislature shifted the funding for the homeowner's refund ($53 million annually) and county community social services aid ($52 million) to the LGTF while also funding the newly created county corrections aid program ($8 million), thereby reducing resources for existing property tax relief programs. With the additional prospect of a general fund imbalance for the 1994 -95 biennium of $837 million, the LGTF is beginning to resemble the unstable and undesirable system it was designed to replace. Recognizing the need to address these issues and numerous criticisms of the current LGA formula, the League recommends the following policy guidelines when changes are made to the LGTF and state aid systems: A. Local government aid (LGA), or an equivalent program of sharing revenues collected on a statewide basis with cities, should remain an essential compo- nent of the property tax system. The League acknowledges that the state is facing another large projected budget imbalance for fiscal year 1993. However, the League strongly opposes further cuts in LGA or HACA or further transfers of city aids to school districts or counties. Such aid cuts and transfers would increase disparities in tax burdens between taxing jurisdictions, affect cities' abilities to compete fairly for residents and economic develop- ment, and threaten the delivery of essential city ser- vices. In addition, property tax revenues now exceed the personal income tax in the total mix of statetlocal revenues. This heavy and increasing reliance on the property tax, especially for cities, could affect the stability of the entire state revenue system. Cities, like schools and counties, deliver basic, essen- tial services to the residents of Minnesota and similar to schools and counties, they need financial assistance from the state to ensure adequate delivery of these services at a reasonable cost to local taxpayers. B. The LGA formula, or its replacement, should reflect a city's essential needs and ability to raise local property tax revenues. The League recognizes problems faced by cities as a result of low property tax capacity, as well as extraor- dinary needs, and recommends that the LGA formula address both of these situations. The League supports continued efforts to'develop an accurate definition of the various revenue needs of different cities for use along with tax capacity in a new city aid formula. Only by addressing both sides of the revenue and expenditure equation —capacity and need —can a. balanced state aid formula be designed. C. The League continues to support the 1991 cre- ation of the local government trust fund (LGTF). This support, however, could be adversely affected by continual tinkering with either the revenue source or the programs funded by the LGTF. Cities support both an irrevocable dedication of 2 cents of the sales tax and motor vehicle excise tax, and payment for a defined and stable set of property tax relief programs from the fund Because experience has shown that statutory dedication cannot be assured, the League supports a constitutional amendment to dedicate two cents of the sales and motor vehicle excise'tax (MVE7) to a property taxpayers' trust fund that will guarantee continuation of the property tax relief payments which are currently being distributed through the LGTF. Specific language for the consti- tutional amendment is very important, and the League of Minnesota Cities, in conjunction with their constituency groups, will develop the amend- 1993 City Policies and Priorities 35 ment in order to ensure that it is in the best interest of cities and continued funding of LGA and HACA. The LGTF receives the revenues from 1 %2 cents of the state sales tax and motor vehicle excise tax (MVET) plus the' /2 cent local option sales tax and MVET. The total of 2 cents should be used only for the programs currently listed in statute for payment from the fund or equivalent programs such as a new city aid formula. The LGTF holds the promise of necessary stability for both property taxpayers and local governments and will only be successful if the integrity of the fund is maintained by keeping the 2 cent rate and not adding new programs to be funded by the LGTF. The 1992 legislature removed the income maintenance payments from the LGTF and added the homeowner's refund, community social services aid, and the new county corrections aid. The availability of sales tax/ MVET revenue growth for local aids should not be eroded by significant or extraordinary expansions of current programs or the addition of new programs to be funded by the LGTF. As a result, city. aid from the LGTF should grow annually at the same rate as sales tax/MVET revenues. D. The League opposes payment of additional HACA for property class rates reductions from the LGTF beyond those rate reductions already in law through taxes payable in 1994. Extensive use of HACA payments for additional class rate reductions could consume most of the growth of the LGTF. This would leave little growth for basic city aids and cause instability for city finances and for property taxpayers. Cities would be forced to adopt excessive percent increases in net levies to fund inflationary budget increases. If the Legislature wants to pay for additional class rate buydowns, then they should be paid through the general fund. RS -2. City Fund Balances (A) The Legislature should not attempt to control or restrict city fund balances. These funds are neces- sary to maintain the fiscal stability of city govern- ments, provide adequate cash flow, allow purchases of capital goods and infrastructure, and to maintain favorable bond ratings. 36 There are many financially sound reasons for cities to have adequate cash balances, including the following. 9 The funds a city has on January 1 must finance their expenditures for the first six months of the year. A city's primary revenue sources of city revenue, property taxes and state - shared revenues, are not received until June and July — six to seven months into the city fiscal year. Just as the state has asserted its need to maintain an adequate cash reserve account, a city must have a fund balance for its operating expenditures to avoid interfund or commercial borrowing. However, unlike the state government, cities do not receive monthly rev- enues from numerous sources (such as sales taxes, personal and corporate income taxes, and various fees and charges to other governments). The alternative is costly borrowing, which is not in the interest of local taxpayers or the state. 0 Some cities also use their fund balance for major capital purchases or infrastructure. By gradually accumulating revenue over a period of years, a city can save its taxpayers the expense of issuing debt and incurring a large expense in one year. Cities explain this process of "saving ".for major pur- chases, such as a fire engine, to their taxpayers and the state when cities "designate" their fund balance for such a purpose. • Cities need to maintain some fund balance to meet emergency or unanticipated expenditures created by situations such as natural disasters, lawsuits, and premature breakdown of vital equipment. Cities are not allowed other revenue raising authority to address these issues during their budget year. • Bond rating firms require proof of financial liquidity and a demonstrated ability to service debt in order to receive a favorable bond rating. Ad- equate city fund balances are required for preferen- tial bond ratings. Additional interest costs, and higher taxpayer burdens, result when cities without adequate fund balances receive poor bond ratings. The better the bond rating of a city, the lower the interest costs of borrowing are to the taxpayer. League of Minnesota Cities RS -3. Service Duplication Taxation Exclusion (B) The League supports legislation which would enable city property taxpayers to become exempt from county levies for services which are either not provided to city residents or which duplicate services provided by the city. In many cities, residents are paying the costs of county provided services such as police protection, which primarily benefit county residents outside the city. In other cases, city residents may receive benefits from the county spending, but the services duplicate services which city governments are already providing. In order to more fairly allocate the cost of services and to eliminate duplication, city taxpayers and city governments should be given authority to petition to be exempt from county taxes or fees for services that duplicate city service or for services that are not provided by the county within the city limits. Cur- rently, the city taxpayers in some cities are not required to contribute to the costs of a county library system if they are already paying for a city library system. Legislation should be passed to allow this arrangement to be extended to other services. RS4. City Financial Reporting Requirements (B) The League supports modernization and an increased level of comparability of financial data that cities report to state agencies. The League will continue to work with the FINREP study, IISAC, and the Legis- lative Commission on Planning and Fiscal Policy to accomplish these efforts. The Legislature should, however, fund lire study and implementation of changes through the general fund, rather than the Local Government Trust Fund which is to be dedi- cated to property tax relief. Local accounting prac- tices and preferences should not be required to change as a result of the study, nor should local costs increase. Finally, requirements for reporting addi- tional information should be carefully weighed to determine the validity of the state's need for local government data. Minnesota has one of the most modern and rigorous systems of municipal finance oversight in the nation. The State Auditor currently receives and reviews annual financial reports from all cities. Cities over 2,500 are required to have annual audits and the Auditor has authority to audit any city. Cities also report financial data to the department of revenue, pollution control agency, department of trade and economic development, and other state agencies. The private accounting field has proven to be fully competent to conduct city audits, and are likely to be more economical than contracting with a public agency. Therefore, the League would be opposed to giving the state auditor the authority to audit cities or their instrumentalities. For all audits, local govern- ments should be allowed to take proposals and use a private auditor rather than the state auditor, if the government chooses. In addition, cities with popula- tions under 2,500 should continue to be exempt from the expense of an annual audit. RS -5. Cooperation, Collaboration, and Consolidation (B) The League supports the extensive efforts which have been made by cities across the state to provide ser- vices through cooperative agreements, collaboration and, in some cases, consolidated programs or govern- ments. We encourage the Legislature to offer incen- tives to foster the creation of additional agreements, but not at the expense of funding for current aid programs, and to acknowledge that city officials are most qualified to determine where shared or consoli- dated services are most appropriate and will be most effective. Many studies and surveys of cities in Minnesota have shown that cooperative agreements and shared services are very common. Cities across the state continue to make efforts to increase the number and extent of programs provided, and/or to reduce the costs of public services. Because city officials are most qualified to assess local needs, the Legislature should not mandate cooperative agreements or consolidation requirements for any city services or the form of city government. RS -6. Penalties and Interest on Delinquent Property Taxes (B) Cities should receive their proportionate share of revenues from penalties and interest collected on delinquent property taxes. Under existing law, one -half of penalty and interest payments on delinquent property taxes are distributed to counties and one -half to school districts. This 1993 City Policies and Priorities 37 - inequitable policy does not correctly distribute the penalties and interest which accrue on taxes that are levied by cities. By law, cities are only entitled to receive penalties and interest which accrue to their special assessments. When property taxes are delinquent, cities--just like counties and school districts --lose expected revenue, and the current value of tax revenues. Delayed tax payments can cause a city to reduce services or spend down reserves as they wait for late payment of property taxes. Counties have always received such revenues without deductions from levy limits or from state aid payments; it is treated as "other income." Cities should receive their appropriate share of penalties and interest on their delinquent property taxes as an unlimited revenue source. RS -7. Service Fees for Government -Owned Property (B) The Legislature should establish a program for reimbursing municipalities for services to state and regional facilities. The program should (1) ensure that state and regional agencies pay for services that benefit their property, and (2) allow cities to receive compensation for services that are funded through general revenue, such as police and fire, which are valuable to state and regional agencies. Any such fee - f or- service program should not be funded through the local government trust fund The State of Minnesota owns a significant amount of property within cities in the state. Cities provide a range of services that benefit these properties. How- ever, since the state is exempt from paying property taxes, municipalities are not reimbursed for the cost of these services. This places an unreasonable burden on cities. The State of Wisconsin established a program called "Payment for Municipal Services" in 1973. The program provides a mechanism for municipalities to be reimbursed by the state for services they provide to state -owned properties. Through a formula based on the value of state -owned buildings within a city, the Wisconsin system reimburses cities for police, fire, and solid waste services. 38 RS -8. State Administrative Costs (B) The League opposes the policy of deducting state agency administrative costs from funds which are appropriated for property tax relief. If the state continues this inappropriate policy, the costs should be more equitably borne by the full local government trust fund, rather than only from funding for local government aid The League believes that all state government expenses should be subject to the standard appropriation review process and be funded directly by specific state appro- priation, not by blanket deductions from property tax relief programs and from state grants. Where a state agency is required to recover costs through a state charge -back for services to local units, the state should be required to hold administrative hearings to justify the charges on the basis of the services provided to the individual local units of government. City local government aid (LGA) provides financing for administrative costs for: the office of the state auditor, the department of administration (IISAC), the state demographer, and the department of employee relations. For 1993 LGA, $487,549 was deducted for these state agencies. In addition, LGA funds, distributed primarily to cities, have been used to finance operations by the state auditor and department of administration, which are not caused by cities alone, but by all local govern- ments, including counties, school districts, and town- ships. RS -9. License Fees (C) The Legislature should repeal all maximum fee provisions relating to off -sale liquor, on -sale wine, bottle club, and Sunday liquor licenses, and allow cities to decide locally the appropriate fee to charge for such licenses. The statutes typically grant authority to issue licenses or permits without specific maximum fees. Cities should have the discretion to set fees based on their own costs, needs, and standards. Case law provides ample limitations on cities' power to set license fees by requiring that revenues produced must be related to the cost of issuing the license and regulating the licensed League of Minnesota Cities 1 . 1 business. The statutory maximum fee has not in- creased in over 30 years. RS -10. Local Property Tax Authority (C) The League strongly supports the Legislature's repeal of city levy limits and support of local deci- sions on city spending. Without levy limits, local accountability are enhanced and cities are allowed to plan for, and respond to, changing financial condi- tions and the increasing costs of state and federal mandates. Levy limits are inconsistent with the principles of local self-government and accountabil- ity. RS -11. Referendum Levies (C) The League supports repeal of the requirement that city referendum levies, unlike general property tax levies, apply to property market value. In addition, it is inaccurate for a referendum ballot to state `By voting YES on this ballot question, you are voting for a property tax increase. " The state has deliberately designed a system of prop- erty classes based on property use which creates varying tax burdens. The method by which a property tax is adopted should not influence this class rate system. This law makes an inappropriate distinction between capital expenditures and operating expendi- tures only for city governments. Both spending items are components of total city spending and should impact taxpayers comparably. If the Legislature wants to adjust tax burdens, changes should be made in the classification system, rather than through the tax base. In addition, the simple statement that taxes will rise as a result of a referendum levy may be false. In cases where the city has reduced their general levy, or a previous debt is retired, a city's property tax levy will actually decline when compared to the previous year. RS -12. Sales Ratios (C) The League urges the Legislature to require that appraisals be used, rather than a countywide average, to determine the sales ratio in small communities where few property sales occur. Various state formulas consider property tax base valuation in distributing aid. Sales ratios are calculated 1993 City Policies and Priorities for each jurisdiction by comparing actual selling prices of properties to the estimated market value assigned by the assessor. These sales ratios are used to equalize assessed values so that all local governments are treated fairly and not rewarded or punished based on their assessment practices. Sales ratios are thus important determinants of the level of state aid received by a community. Yet, in small communities, there are often not enough sales in a given class of property to permit an accurate determi- nation of a sales ratio. In these cases, a countywide average is applied. The county average, however, may be overly influenced by sales in a larger regional center and thus may not accurately reflect the experience of smaller cities. RS -13. Taxation Hearing and Notification Law (C) The League supports the improvements which have been made to the taxation hearing law, which is incorrectly referred to as "truth in taxation. " The title should be changed "Truth in taxation " is a misleading title for these hearing requirements. The process should be renamed the "taxation hearing and notification law. " The League believes that the state government should set an example and be required to follow similar requirements for public hearings and notification processes on tax and budget issues. The League urges the Legislature to make the follow- ing changes. • Local governments should be allowed to amend the levy that they preliminarily propose to the county auditor on September 15. Many cities have a difficult time realistically assessing their budget needs to be able to certify a proposed levy and budget by September 15 — far in advance of the beginning of the next budget year. This early date, combined with the restriction that prevents the city's final levy from exceeding its preliminary estimate, works against responsible budgeting and forces cities to overestimate their budget needs to avoid potential revenue shortfalls. • As a state mandate, the costs of this requirement should be fully funded by the state. The appropria- tion made for the process for Pay 1991 taxes has not been renewed. Local governments must now 39 find additional funds to finance this state - mandated process from their tight or shrinking local budgets. • The League commends the Legislature for its 1992 action to reduce the size requirement for newspaper advertising and eliminating unnecessary data from the advertisement. The Legislature should con- sider eliminating the newspaper advertisement requirement. Notices sent to each property owner and posted in each apartment building effectively notifies citizens of the hearings and proposed levies. The costs of publishing advertisements consumes tax dollars which could be better spent on city services for taxpayers. • The requirement for parcel - specific notices should continue. Every effort should be made by the Legislature and the department of revenue to ensure that the notice accurately estimates pro- posed property taxes. • The title of the requirement should be changed to the "taxation hearing and notification law." The current title infers that there was and would be a lack of accuracy and accountability without this process. In addition, the calculations used in the process are frequently misleading and confusing, and challenge the "truthfulness" and accuracy of the information provided. 40 League of Minnesota Cities Federal Legislative FL -1. Single Family Mortgage Bonds The League urges Congress to extend cities' author- ity to issue single-family mortgage revenue bonds and to oppose recapture restrictions. The League also supports proposals to enable cities to expand their efforts to provide below market -rate home mortgages for second and third -time homebuyers in inner city neighborhoods. Cities' authority to issue mortgage revenue bonds (MRBs) should be extended to support redevelopment and to provide affordable housing. The League supports reasonable income eligibility requirements in order to target MRBs to areas where 50 percent or more of the families have incomes of 80 percent or less of the statewide median as well as to areas of severe economic distress. Previous congressional proposals to restrict the avail- ability of MRBs have required recapture of a portion of the interest subsidy received if the home is sold within five years. Recapture provisions and effective dates of proposed restrictions would impose strict tax liability on bond issuers and add unreasonable costs for quali- fied homebuyers at a time when cities are struggling to make affordable housing available. Effective dates for recapture provisions and disclosure requirements for bond issuers with outstanding MRBs would seriously hamper bond sales after the effective date for imposi- tion of restrictions, resulting in a loss of financing for housing needs. City officials view the program as a means to provide homeownership opportunities to buyers with limited incomes while encouraging flexibility in housing purchases as family conditions change. At the same time, the program gives families a means of building home equity and serves as a source of neighborhood and community strength and stability. Efforts should be made to permit greater flexibility in the use of allocations of mortgage revenue bonds for programs in targeted areas. Under existing law, the first -time homebuyer requirement is waived in census tracts where 70 percent or more of families have incomes of 80 percent or less of the statewide median: This should be broadened to permit bond issuers to elect to waive the first -time homebuyer requirements in census tracts in which 50 percent or more of the families have incomes of 90 percent or less of median. This proposal would aid cities in meeting housing needs in transitional neighborhoods and would be an important tool to encourage neighborhood stability where conditions suggest increased likelihood of property conversion to rental use or abandonment. FL -2. Homelessness/Housing Issues The League supports full funding of federal assis- tance programs for emergency, long -term assistance and preventive measures to aid cities to meet the needs of homeless families and individuals. The League also urges Congress to strengthen federal/ local partnerships in providing affordable housing at the local level to reduce risks of homelessness Reauthorization of the Steward B. McKinney homeless assistance act in 1990 is encouraging in view of federal action restoring previous budget cuts in homeless assistance programs. Restoration of funding levels for emergency shelter grants, and Section 8 and SRO rehabilitation programs have been important in sup- porting local efforts to provide housing services. Demonstration supportive housing programs and supplemental assistance, along with health care and mental health block grants, emergency food and shelter, and emergency service grants should continue to be funded. Long -term federal assistance to the homeless should include a firm commitment to finance low- income housing programs to permit new construction as well as rehabilitation and access to loan financing through the Farmers Home Administration housing loan programs and other federal elderly and handicapped housing assistance for those in poverty. Measures to promote maintenance and rehabilitation of low - income housing for families and individuals are also important strategies to reduce homelessness. Programs are needed to make such housing available in rural areas as well. Tax incentives for construction and rehabilitation of low- income housing must be contin- ued and strengthened to make it possible for cities to respond to such housing needs. 1993 City Policies and Priorities 41 The lack of adequate community mental health services contributes to the number of persons who are home- less. The needs of vulnerable individuals remain a major concern for local officials. The federal govern- ment must work with states and cities to improve eligibility for healthcare, long -term transitional housing, food stamps, and other federally subsidized benefits to assist such individuals. FL -3. HOME Investment Partnership The League strongly supports full funding of the . HOME investment partnership program to provide housing block grants to cities and states to develop and rehabilitate affordable housing units. City officials are eager to take advantage of increased flexibility to address local needs through this program. It is important for Congress to identify new funds for this program and maintain funding for on -going federal housing assistance and community development programs, particularly for community block grants and public housing operating assistance and modernization. Congress needs to address remaining concerns over local match requirements. The League supports a relaxation of those requirements. In future years, efforts should be made to provide greater flexibility in any local match requirements. Congress should also make it clear that local tax - exempt financing may be used to meet match requirements. Eligibility thresholds for direct entitlements limit the number of cities that can benefit from allocation of HOME funds in Minnesota. It is important to maintain at least a $2 billion level of funding for the program in order to provide more cities with direct assistance. Reducing the threshold allocation needed for additional cities to qualify for direct funding would make such assistance available to cities that currently receive direct CDBG entitlements. FL4. HOPE - Home Ownership and Opportunity for People Everywhere The League does not support the proposed HOPE homeownership program because it is not well designed to help public housing tenants afford the cost of purchasing and maintaining their own homes. 42 More care must be exercised to assure that the needs bf such households are fully recognized so that they will be able to afford mortgage payments and expenses and to increase the opportunity to improve their economic status. HOPE must not be used as a means of selling off public housing units to reduce the inventory of proper- ties which the federal government has a direct respon- sibility to maintain. The federal government must help cities assure that an adequate supply of public housing is available for low- income households. Public housing tenants able to afford a limited down payment for affordable housing in the community can be aided to purchase such units without risking the loss of public housing needed for those who cannot afford housing available in the private market. City officials support federal policy to encourage the development of homeownership programs for public housing residents. It is important that such legislation establish realistic income thresholds and provide the funding necessary to help cities coordinate the neces- sary mortgage financing and access to services needed to make it possible for families to purchase and main- tain market -rate housing. FL -5. Incentives to Preserve Affordable Rental Housing The League encourages Congress to maintain funding for programs that prevent mortgage prepay- ments or expiring contracts to result in buyouts that reduce the availability of subsidized rental housing. for low - income households. Financing for building owners and tenant subsidies, along with incentives to owners to maintain affordable rental units, will allow low- income units to be retained in the community and provide a mix of housing for city residents. Continued financial incentives will be necessary to encourage developers to help preserve federally subsidized affordable housing units. FL -6. Removal of Regulatory Barriers The League opposes federal pre- emption of local housing and zoning ordinances and regulations and the withholding of federal housing assistance from cities which fail to conform local housing codes to standards imposed at the federal level. League of Minnesota Cities Local land use regulations, subdivision ordinances and building codes are adopted to protect public health, safety and welfare. City officials are alarmed by proposals that would preempt local authority to estab- lish building and zoning requirements and demand that cities alter such local regulation under threat of the loss of federal housing assistance. When necessary, cities are in the best position to determine if such requirements can be modified to lower the costs of producing affordable housing. But regulatory reform will not help cities increase the supply of affordable housing if federal funds for low - income subsidized housing are not available. HUD has no direct experience in the review of local building code and zoning requirements. Imposing federal review on cities is an unacceptable intrusion into the authority of local government to adopt land - use and community development policies which assure neighborhood stability and orderly growth. FL -7. Comprehensive Housing Assistance Strategy (CHAS) The League urges a reduction of the extensive documentation cities are required to produce in order to receive federal housing funds under the national affordable housing act. The comprehensive housing assistance strategy (CHAS) reports to be submitted by cities to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development have substantially increased the workload of local housing agencies. In many cases, local agencies may not receive additional federal housing assistance despite completion of this lengthy and difficult analysis and reporting requirement. Serious doubts have also been raised about the useful- ness of CHAS reports as a planning tool. Use of outdated census information, rapidly changing housing markets and lack of documentation on specific popula- tion groups limits the accuracy and reliability of some information. Cities are unlikely to propose ambitious strategies when addressing such needs because of concern that failure to achieve objectives will result in the loss of federal housing assistance in the future. 1993 City Policies and Priorities FL -8. FHA Insurance Changes The League supports easing limits on financing of closing costs required by FHA housing insurance programs. City officials are concerned that limits on the amount of closing costs that may be financed will make homeownership increasingly difficult, particularly for younger, first -time homebuyers. Cities have ample supplies of affordable housing that must be maintained and made available on a continuing basis for those seeking a first mortgage. FL -9. Portability of Section 8 Housing Certificates and Vouchers The League urges Congress to modify Section 8 tenant assistance requirements to relieve local problems caused by the demand for Section 8 units. Modifications should also be made to help public housing authorities meet the needs of Section 8 certificate holders who have moved from another city. The League recommends the following changes in federal rules to ease difficulties for housing agencies adversely affected by loss of income and tenant assis- tance as a result of portability: • Require that certificates and vouchers be used in the jurisdiction in which they have been issued for a minimum 12 -month period; • Compensate agencies experiencing losses because of housing adjustment payments (HAP) to agen- cies in other cities for the added administrative and financial charges incurred; • Make federal funding available to assist smaller local HRAs (outside MSMAs) to deal with additional record - keeping and accounting required as a result of experience with portability; 0 Examine the feasibility of setting limits on the number of portable certificates that will be avail- able from the originating PHA or make it possible for agencies to adopt a more flexible method of adjusting for the loss of Section 8 units. 43 City officials recognize that mobility of low income persons seeking rental housing necessitates portability of Section 8 assistance, but the impact on communities and neighborhoods must also be addressed. Officials are duly alarmed by indications that Section 8 units may become concentrated in certain localities, which, in turn, contributes to a loss of a mix of housing and income levels within the neighborhood. FL -10. Siting of Group Home Residential Facilities The League urges Congress to modify the fair hous- ing act to permit cities to exercise reasonable dis- persal and spacing requirements for residential care facilities to prevent over - concentration and to provide the benefit of normal residential surroundings to people with mental illness, the homeless, battered women and children, those with developmental disabilities Cities must be authorized to establish appropriate dispersal and spacing requirements while protecting the rights of the disabled to assure that they are not denied access to housing in residential zones. It is also clear that those who license and purchase services from residential providers must exercise responsibility to make available to disabled citizens the benefits of normal residential surroundings. Access must not be denied through improper application of local zoning codes. Cities must be clearly authorized to exercise local controls to prevent over - concentration of residences within neighborhoods and to enhance the opportunity for disabled residents to receive needed health and social services as well as access to public transporta- tion, education, and recreation, to help sustain a quality of life for them, and for the community in which the facilities are located. Efforts to mainstream individuals requiring special care is of particular interest to cities. Such people must not be forced to reside in areas that threaten to become defacto institutional zones. This not only defeats the purpose of fair housing legislation designed to scatter such uses in a variety of settings, but also pits social service providers against neighborhood residents who become fearful and resentful about the influx of such facilities into the local area. 44 FL -11. Mixed Populations The League urges Congress to relieve serious prob- lems resulting from requirements to house people with disabilities in public high -rises originally designed assenior citizen residences. Immediate action must be taken to overcome problems of security and unworkable living arrangements to protect the well -being of residents and prevent further deterioration of buildings and loss of housing units. Seniors must be accorded the opportunity and the assurance that they can enjoy a suitable environment and security as residents of public housing units. Elderly residents must not be subjected to increased stress and anxiety as a result of the assignment of emotionally unstable younger people to the same buildings in which senior citizens reside. It is important that cities be permitted to devise alterna- tive housing options to allow those with disabilities to have access to programs and services associated with housing assignments that will more closely fit their needs and lifestyle. At the same time, such'approaches can provide more appropriate surroundings and secu- rity for the elderly. FL -12. Anti -Drug Abuse: Prevention and Assistance The League supports full funding of the anti -drug, abuse act and urges the federal government, in partnership with cities, to provide assistance to local law enforcement agencies, courts, schools, commu- nity-based organizations, treatment facilities, and other local resources to combat the threat of drug abuse and related crime and violence. The failure of some states to pass grant allocations through to cities threatens to undo valuable intedurisdictional cooperation and implementation of statewide drug control strategies. Congress must make it possible for cities to receive funding in a timely manner by requiring states to guarantee that they will distribute funds efficiently and direct them to local . units of government. Such agreements must assure allocation of at least 80 percent of federal drug control systems improvement grants to local law enforcement League of Minnesota Cities and drug control activities and demonstrate that smaller non - metropolitan efforts are awarded a proportionate share of funding. Coordination and broad -based cooperation at state and local levels should be encouraged in order to increase the effectiveness of measures designed to deal with the grievous personal, social, and economic consequences of drug abuse. City officials acknowledge the need for reasonable controls to assure accountability in the use of federal funds. It is also important that federal grant requirements remain flexible and that complicated -- grant application procedures be kept to a minimum. The League supports efforts of the Minnesota Office of Drug Policy to seek waivers from the federal govern- ment to assist local governments to provide the 25 - percent local match required for receipt of such federal funds. The League encourages other states to seek such waivers from the federal government to aid cities which do, not have sufficient resources to meet the federal match. Increasing match requirements to 50 percent would make cities with a smaller tax base ineligible for federal grants needed to aid local'law enforcement and drug control efforts. City officials oppose proposals to increase such local matching requirements. The League urges Congress, in concert with state and local government, to support efforts to strengthen the capacity and improve the effectiveness of local law enforcement agencies, both urban and'rural; to combat drug trafficking and other illegal activities that threaten neighborhoods and the safety of city streets and homes. It is also necessary for the federal government to intensify U.S. and international efforts to reduce the agricultural and manufacturing sources of illicit drugs in other nations. Strategies to reduce the supply and demand for drugs must be clearly defined with realistic objectives and goals. It is essential that Congress provide a consis- tent, stable source of funding for federal grant pro- grams and permit sufficient flexibility at the local level to allow cities to make use of funds in a timely and effective manner. Past experience demonstrates it is difficult to implement effective local strategies when. restrictive and complicated grant application proce- dures are imposed and funding levels are inconsistent. 1993 City Policies and Priorities The trend toward increased alcohol abuse among youth is equally alarming and difficult to eradicate. Direct experience with this problem at the state and local levels has provided an understanding of substance abuse problems. For all these reasons, local officials must be granted the flexibility to design programs to address the special problems faced in their communi- ties. Serious economic problems and cultural differ- ences within city populations also create obstacles which must be overcome to reduce the spread of drug and alcohol abuse. Local officials are in the best position to help individuals at highest risk of addiction overcome distrust and lack of confidence in govern- ment- sponsored programs. FL -13. Federal/Local Fiscal Relations The League of Minnesota Cities urges Congress to uphold the authority of cities to issue tax- exempt bonds and oppose further intrusion when restrictions result in higher issuance costs, loss of investor incentives for construction and preservation of affordable housing, or the loss of tax - exempt status for general obligation bonds. Cities face critical decisions in the investment of funds to meet costly infrastructure and public service needs. Cities need to be able,to take advantage of the small issuer deductibility exemption for banks and pools which purchase or sell municipal bond, issues. The League urges Congress to enact legislation that will bring banks back into the tax- exempt market to accom- plish these objectives and save local tax dollars. The following changes in federal fiscal policy will aid cities to make effective use of tax- exempt financing for such purposes: • Increase smaller issuer arbitrage rebate exemp- tions; • Make relief from arbitrage rebates retroactive to 1986; • Raise small issuer bank deductibility; • Ease restrictions on the use of municipal bonds for environmental facilities; . • Allow cities to keep 10 percent of arbitrage earn- ings. 45 Congress should provide cities relief from costly arbitrage rebate restrictions and allow local government to retain investment earnings to revitalize neighbor- hoods and strengthen the community. City officials also urge Congress to study the state volume cap on private activity bonds for financing environmental projects to determine whether activities are being delayed because of such restrictions. The study should also examine the added cost to cities of meeting environmental mandates if taxable financing must be used or if delays lead to fines or penalties imposed by federal law. The League also supports investor incentives for construction and preservation of affordable housing, including the following: • Rehabilitation tax credits; • Low and moderate- income housing tax credits. Such tax policy should be made a permanent feature of federal -local fiscal relations. In addition, the League supports low - income housing tax credit policies more workable by making full credit available for projects in which cities use tax - exempt financing or community development block grant (CDBG) funds. The League supports the following,policies to broaden the authority of cities to use tax - exempt financing: 0 Restore the private use test to 25 percent for bond issues of less than $25 million; • Expand qualifications for exemption from bank and arbitrage deductibility; • Maintain the current limit on the authority of nonprofit corporations to issue tax- exempt bonds. Federal regulation of municipal bonds should not require unnecessary reporting. Failure to report bond issues to federal regulatory agencies should not result in taxation of interest income to the city. Federal arbitrage restrictions should not apply to municipal bond reserves or sinking funds. Arbitrage which results from fluctuating interest rates, issuance procedures, prudent management of the bond issue, or refundings should not be subject to retroactive tax liability. FL -14. Federal Mandates Congress must provide direct financial support to compensate local governments for the cost of imple- menting federal requirements and programs. Previ- ous attempts to provide fiscal relief have jailed because congress has not provided a dependable and stable source of funding for federal -local fiscal assistance. Congress must also make it less costly for cities to. cant' out federal requirements by permitting local flexibility in complying with mandates.. Legislation which establishes new or additional responsibilities and costs for local government must also indicate the source of funding to. pay for local programs and services required under provisions of the bill. Further, such requirements must also acknowledge local responsibility for paying those costs in the absence of federal funding. It is important that federal legislation imposing in- creased responsibilities and duties on cities be required to include funding to lessen the fiscal impact of complying with those requirements at the local level. The following federal mandates have direct and substantial fiscal impact on cities: • Compliance with environmental regulations, particularly wastewater treatment and safe drinking water standards, stormwater permit requirements, as well as imposition of penalties for failure to attain standards; • Regulation of landfills,• incinerators, ash disposal, and other solid waste management activities; • Local match requirements for new federal transpor- tation and HOME block grants; • Tax - exempt bond reporting, arbitrage restrictions, and penalties. The League urges Congress to assess current federal programs, regulations and policies to determine the extent of impacts on cities. The League supports federal legislation to require fiscal impact statements (fiscal notes) for all proposals, rules, and regulations prior to enactment or enforcement at the local level. 46 League of Minnesota Cities . i Traditionally, city officials have agreed to comply with federal requirements associated with the distribution of federal aid to local government, federal housing assistance, community development block grants, wastewater treatment construction grants, etc. In recent years, however, federal policymaking has often resulted in shifting new duties and responsibilities to the local level without a corresponding increase in federal revenues to cities or the expansion of local authority to raise revenues to pay for those new man- dates. FL -15. Solid Waste Management The League strongly urges Congress to undertake a major effort to establish a national program of resource recovery, recycling, source reduction, and environmentally safe disposal of solid waste as environmental priorities. • Amend the comprehensive environmental re- sponse, compensation and liability act (CERCLA) to provide that municipal solid waste is not a hazardous substance in the same manner as pro - vided under the resource conservation and recovery act (RCRA); • Define the degree of toxicity of municipal solid waste in assessing liabilities for cities which arrange or license pick -up and hauling of munici- pal waste within the city; • Grant the federal government sole authority to sue local governments for clean-up cost - sharing costs under the superfund statute if they have handled hazardous waste; • Regulate resource recovery and ash emissions through a permitting process that requires periodic monitoring and achievable emission controls; The following measures must be taken to protect the environment and to make it possible for cities to carry • out responsibility for disposal of municipal solid waste: 0 Establish packaging standards for manufacturers, distributors, and retailers and require all new • products and packaging to be non - toxic, recyclable, and/or biodegradable; • Authorize the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to require industry to eliminate toxic, nonrecyclable, and/or nonbiodegradable products and packaging; • Provide funding and other assistance to expand the market for recyclables; • Restore favorable tax treatment for financing of resource recovery facilities, landfills, and recycling centers; • Develop national recycling goals and initiatives; • Provide funding for pilot recycling programs to assist cities to develop new recycling methods and programs; • Develop siting criteria for waste disposal facilities; 1993 City Policies and Priorities Require retrofitting of existing incinerators only to correct major pollution problems not recognized at the time of construction or to install new cost - effective technologies; Designate incinerator ash as a special waste and establish testing and treatment requirements along with development of flexible methods of ash disposal for residue that has been tested or treated; • Establish design criteria for ash monofills to be used for untreated or toxic ash; • Further, the federal government must develop options for solid waste disposal and assist local governments in implementing cost - effective programs to reduce the chance of future environ- mental damage from waste disposal methods. Source reduction also plays a critical part in manage- ment of increasing costs of disposal. Congress must establish packaging standards for manufacturers, distributors, and retailers to reduce the volume and pollution problems associated with toxic and non- biodegradable materials. Removal of toxic, nonrecyclable, or nonbiodegradable packaging and products must be a major focus of a national solid waste management policy. 47 Local officials need to have assurance that required standards and restrictions for solid waste disposal have been determined in order to plan and construct waste disposal facilities with adequate safeguards to protect the environment. Development of integrated strategies that utilize source reduction, recycling, resource recovery, and landfilling is required. The League supports NLC development of a national solid waste management policy for cities to provide management options that allow cities to meet local needs. FL46. Airport Noise Control The League strongly supports enactment of a na- tional noise policy which upholds local authority to regulate airport noise levels and aircraft operations to protect the health, safety, and well -being of the public. Congress must not preempt local zoning authority and policies aimed at reducing unaccept- able aircraft noise levels that affect nearby neighbor- hoods and populations. The federal government should establish firm deadlines for the phasing out of older, noisier aircraft used by commercial and air cargo carvers. Congress must also act to restrict use of Stage II aircraft by carriers when a ban on such airplanes goes into effect in Europe. Communities adjacent to municipal or major hub airports must retain the authority to impose noise restrictions and to regulate airport capacity to provide for the health and safety of residents and those work- ing in locations affected by airport operations. Cities must be free to protect public health and safety by adopting land use and zoning regulations, licensing requirements, and other measures designed to preserve the character and quality of life of residential areas affected by airport operations. The Federal Aviation Administration should also adopt "non- addition" rules to regulate the use of Stage II aircraft by domestic air carriers following the ban on the use of such planes in Europe. FL- 17. Cable Television Regulation The League urges Congress to ensure that rates established for basic cable services by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) under the 1992 Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competi- Lion Act provide protection for local cable subscrib- ers. Cities strongly support local regulation of rates charged for cable services. Under provisions of the new law, cities are authorized to apply for certification to enforce FCC rate regulations of charges established by local cable operators for basic service, installation and leased equipment. City officials object to this arrangement, particularly because local government can most effectively regulate rates charged to subscribers by the cable company with which the city has a franchise agreement. Cable franchise regulation must also assure that cable operators are responsible for: • Providing wide access to cable services; • Maintaining the quality of cable signals; and • Assuring satisfaction with customer service standards. Strengthening local regulation The League strongly supports city authority to estab- lish and enforce customer service standards more stringent than those adopted by the FCC. Cities also welcome changes in federal law to create local author- ity to revoke a cable operator's franchise for cause and the provision of damages immunity for local franchise authorities in the regulation of cable systems. Leased Access Reforms Of equal importance are concerns for leased access to cable channels, particularly for public and educational (PEG) programming. The League has supported reforms which would require cable operators to provide a set -aside of channel capacity for such purposes. The new cable law requires the FCC to establish a maxi- mum reasonable rate which cable operators could charge as well as establish the terms and conditions of such leases. Signal Quality Enforcement The League supports strengthening FCC authority over minimum technical standards to require operators to maintain or improve signal quality. Cities should also be authorized to include enforcement provisions in 48 League of Minnesota Cities local franchise agreements. Recognition of the impor- tance of local enforcement is critical. Cities also insist that FCC approval of additional local authority to institute more stringent standards be granted without delay to communities in which serious difficulties and customer dissatisfaction is already documented. Enhancing Competition Cities also support prospects for encouraging competi- tion in the delivery of cable services. It is important that competitors have reasonable opportunities to offer comparable services. But congress must see to it that cities are in a better position in the immediate future to discourage attempts by the cable industry to eliminate competition in the delivery of local cable and video services. Programming Access Improvements Local franchising authorities have always insisted on the importance of access to programming in order to discourage monopolistic practices within the cable industry. The League supports measures to disallow video programmers affiliated with cable operators from discriminating against a multichannel video program- ming distributor. In addition, congress should assure that exclusive programming contracts between a cable operator and programmers affiliated with the that operator are strictly limited and regulated. Measures to-restrain monopolistic practices in the cable industry are key to increasing opportunity for competi- tion. Therefore, it is essential that cable operators be prevented from engaging in the following activities: • Requiring video programmers to grant operator's financial interest in programming service in order to guarantee channel placement; • Discriminating against unaffiliated video program- mess; • Extending multiple system operational control over an unlimited number of subscribers; • Allowing affiliated video programmers exclusive use of available channels; • Obtaining licenses for multichannel multipoint distribution service (MMDS) or providing satellite master antenna tv (SMATV) service in areas the cable operator serves. 1993 City Policies and Priorities Municipal Cable System Ownership It is also essential that cities' authority to operate a cable television system be upheld and secured. Such efforts have previously been challenged by cable operators, resulting in costly litigation and actions by cable systems to undercut rates charged by municipal cable systems in an attempt to force the city to discon- tinue offering services at the local level. DBS Regulations Requirements for the FCC to adopt rules that would make direct broadcast satellite (DBS) services subject to public interest requirements are also needed. Con- sumers receiving such broadcast and video program- ming services must be assured of the opportunity to receive noncommercial public service programming. Reserving channel capacity for noncommercial pur- poses is of fundamental importance to communities in which such DBS services are offered. Cable System Sales/Transfers Finally, there must be limits placed on the frequent sale and transfer of cable system ownership. The League supports measures which limit the frequency of those transactions and require cable operators to obtain local approval of such sales or transfers within the cable franchise agreement. FL -18. Economic Development The League urges Congress to take the following actions to help cities encourage the development of the local economy. A. Strengthen Small Business Administration (SBA) guaranteed loan programs in urban and rural areas; B. Encourage banks to work with cities and SBA - certified community development corporations (CDCs) to develop revolving loan programs for housing rehabilitation and new construction; and C. Provide financing for expansion and retention of businesses, as well as public works grants and revolving loan programs to cities through the Eco- nomic Development Agency (EDA). ►r Congress should coordinate federal assistance to cities with existing state economic development and housing assistance and financing programs as well as those initiated by local banks in response to Community Reinvestment Act requirements. The efforts by cities to work with local businesses, churches and community organizations, foundations and private organizations must also be coordinated with federal action. Such an approach will establish a federal -local partner- ship with a strong interest in supporting the creation of locally based initiatives and cooperation. Federal funding can make it possible to stimulate local invest- ment in business development and rehabilitation programs which will strengthen and improve employ- ment and business opportunities. Cities also utilize EDA programs for business expan- sion and job retention. EDA provides valuable assis- tance in the form of grants for infrastructure improve- ments and upgrading of public utilities to support economic development objectives. Therefore, it is vital for Congress to continue to fund EDA programs that make it possible for cities to support local business expansion and encourage development of a skilled workforce. The League also supports efforts by cities to collabo- rate with other local educational, community develop- ment, housing, and social service organizations in the development of local economic development strategies. Regional development commissions (RDCs) also provide an important resource for cities. RDCs can assist in administering small city CDBG grants and provide technical assistance in developing grant applications and strategies to address local economic and community development priorities. It is particularly important that congress provide sufficient funding to make SBA guaranteed loans for. businesses in cities located at a distance from major metropolitan areas and urban centers. Cities must also have the financial resources to establish revolving loan funds to aid business, encourage job development, and improve the effectiveness of local economic develop- ment strategies. Smaller cities must be able to provide business start-up loans of $25,000 to $500,000. Cities in rural areas have been adversely affected by the loss of locally owned banks, making it more difficult for businesses in the community to obtain start -up loans or financing for improvements or expansion. It is essential that ' employers in such communities be able to obtain SBA micro loans, particularly for prospective business owners who do not have sufficient equity to qualify for regular bank financing. In addition, federal tax policy must address the urgent need to encourage development of private sector initiatives to aid development of small businesses, particularly in non - metropolitan locations. Cities located at a distance from population centers and major urban areas have a vital interest in the availabil- ity of venture capital and financing for small business development. Federal policy should also address the potential for making use of the requirements of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) to encourage the creation of locally -based consortia of non - profit development corporations and banking interests. Such activities could generate development of micro business loan programs in distressed neighborhoods and lead to creation of community revolving loan programs for housing rehabilitation and construction. FL -19. Rural Development Issues The League urges Congress to recognize and support the responsibility and authority of cities to provide water and sewer services and to refrain from autho- rizing the financing of rural utilities that would adversely affect orderly growth of unincorporated areas, particularly those adjacent to corporate city limits. The League also supports programs and increased funding to strengthen rural economies and to aid cities to provide services and public improvements that stimulate economic development. Such programs must uphold the authority of cities to provide public utility services and recognize the importance of orderly growth within a comprehensive land use planning process which involves cooperation among local units of government. The federal government must increase the capacity of local units of government to deal with problems of groundwater contamination and water resource man- agement; to comply with federal environmental 50 League of Minnesota Cities n 1. standards; and to make services that will increase economic activity and planned development available to residents in surrounding rural areas. Congress must also assure that federal authorization for rural electric cooperatives (RECs) to finance the constriction of water and waste disposal facilities in unincorporated areas will include criteria for approval of grants or loans that take account of existing munici- pal utilities and service delivery and the impact of such facilities on regional and/or local land -use planning and development: — - - -- - -- Unplanned development in unincorporated areas (rural sprawl) creates serious problems in rural communities. Such development weakens, rather than strengthens local economies in agricultural areas. The federal government must strengthen the role and capacity of cities in such locales to maintain a quality of life, encourage economic development, sustain a growing population, and efficiently use agricultural resources. Proposed expansion of REC involvement in the financing of rural water and sewer systems seeks to take advantage of the capital resources of RECs to provide rural areas with improved water and waste disposal. City officials are familiar with the serious environmental and economic problems faced in areas with local population densities and limited capacity to finance major public improvements. Previous federal legislation failed to acknowledge or include the role of cities in the delivery of such public services, and overlooked the necessity for local government coopera- tion to establish and'maintain support for rational patterns of development. It is unnecessary for the federal government to expand the role of RECs to accomplish the objectives of federal rural development legislation. It is essential that city officials and utilities work in a coordinated manner to meet shared public service objectives. The federal government has a continuing responsibility to enact appropriate tax policy and to maintain funding for current EPA and Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) grant and loan programs to aid such areas:. The League opposes initiatives to make RECs eligible for low- interest loans to provide water and sewer services in areas without such service delivery. Such policies are not in keeping with the purpose or role of RECs to provide electricity to support family farms 1993 City Policies and Priorities and to strengthen the agricultural sector. The role of rural electric cooperatives is to serve farmers and those living outside urban centers with electric service, and should not be to provide additional water and sewer utility services in areas where cities are prepared to extend current services or expand facilities to provide needed capacity. Increased REC interest in competing with cities to provide such utility services in Waal areas experienc- ing residential growth and commercial/industrial development has raised- serious concerns at -the local level. Cities are experiencing increased intrusion by RECs in annexation proceedings and disputes, and in the delivery of municipal services to subdivisions. It is evident that, on a national level, the REA; is encourag- ing local cooperatives to pursue authority to provide utility services that cities have traditionally been authorized to deliver. If Congress enacts rural development legislation that establishes REC eligibility to borrow funds for devel- opment of such systems, such financing should only be approved if the following criteria are satisfied by the proposals submitted by local cooperatives: 40 Demonstration that the proposal to serve rural areas with water or sewer services will not result in, or encourage the loss of valuable agricultural land and resources; • Completion of an environmental impact statement or other evaluation of the effect of such facilities on water resources, population settlement patterns, development strategies, and availability of other federal grants or loans (EPA water and sewer loans and grants); • Compliance with local comprehensive land use and water management policies; Demonstration that such rural utility systems will not create obstacles to annexation and orderly growth of cities. Further, such policies must incorporate the following principles to assure that provision of utility services in rural areas provide for the following: • Recognition of the role and capacity of cities to deliver water and sewer services; 51 • Right of first refusal by cities with current or planned capacity to deliver water and sewer service to extend such utilities to properties requesting improvements; • Eligibility of cities for such financing to extend or improve current municipal utilities to extend those services; • Direct participation of cities in the review of REC project proposals to serve locations adjacent to cities. FL -20. Groundwater Protection The League supports policies to protect groundwater resources and urges Congress to concentrate on measures designed to minimize the use and disposal of toxic chemicals and to assist local governments to protect groundwater supplies. Federal legislation should emphasize management of groundwater resources rather than elimination of all contamina- tion and the development of national programs to aid small and rural communities. Cities are concerned with preventing the transport of contaminants into city water supplies and public drinking water systems. Since the aquifers where contamination may occur are not limited to city/county boundaries, it is important that protection measures and monitoring requirements reflect such circumstances and make federal assistance available to local govern- ments to help carry out appropriate groundwater protection strategies. Flexibility in implementing groundwater protection programs is needed to enable state and local govern- ments to address management problems using current laws and intergovernmental cooperation already in' place, rather than instituting extensive changes. Federal legislative proposals have included provisions for national groundwater quality standards. Cities are concerned that proposed requirements to assure that all subterranean pore space in area aquifers to contain drinkable water may be difficult and costly to achieve. The expense of monitoring is likely to cause cities difficulty in maintaining other necessary water man- agement programs. Solutions to the threat or existence of groundwater pollution should be based on the local conditions and adequate understanding of the cost - effectiveness of remedies preferred by local officials. 52 Background Efforts in Congress have led to the addition of ground- water provisions to the reauthorization of the federal insecticide, rodenticide and fungicide act (FIFRA). Such requirements were also added to the safe drinking water act, which called for the EPA to determine the potential for pesticides to leach into groundwater supplies; notification of detection of pesticides; estab- lishment of groundwater monitoring and registration requirements based on detection of pesticides in wells used for drinking water; and the creation of groundwa- ter pesticide standards. Groundwater contamination issues have been difficult to resolve. Among the issues on which Congress has focused are notification of contamination detection and establishment of groundwater action levels for pesti- cides detected in the groundwater as the result of "normal use" that exceeds the action level. FL -21. Clean Water Act The League urges Congress to fully fund the state revolving loan (SRL) program to aid cities to fully comply with toxic control and sewage treatment requirements. In addition, Congress must recognize its responsibility to aid cities to comply with non - point source pollution and combined sewer - overflow controls. The League also supports measures that will assure a moratorium on enforcement of EPA - mandatory stormwater permits for cities under 100,000 population through 1992 to provide sufficient time to rewrite requirements. Cities over 100,000 population are prepared to con- tinue stormwater management planning and monitoring activities, but Congress must defer implementation of management requirements until completion of the reauthorization of the clean water act. Failure to fund the SRL program has reduced aid to local government by nearly $2 billion since 1987. Many smaller cities cannot participate in such loan programs in any case for lack of local fiscal capacity to repay the financing. For that reason, the League is encouraged by introduction of legislation that would provide federal aid to cities for construction of drinking water systems as well as wastewater treatment and solid waste facilities, and for costs associated with League of Minnesota Cities • c' replacement of underground storage tanks. Of particu- lar importance are provisions that would allow cities under 2,500 population to apply for low or no interest loans or grants, with an accompanying state 25 percent match, that could cover as much as 75 percent of such costs. There is also a need to identify new revenues for meeting the cost of financing combined sewer overflow pollution control measures as well as regulations which allow cities to use available technology, and which recognize the necessity of weighing costs and benefits in the development of pollution control guidelines. FL -22. Lead Contamination The League supports federal programs to help cities reduce harmful levels of lead in public drinking water systems and urges Congress to work with local officials to develop standards and operating require- ments that are feasible and realistic. Congress must also continue support and increase funding for Farmers Home Administration grant and loan programs as major sources of financing for smaller city water systems in rural areas. Legislation requiring the EPA to impose more strin- gent lead contamination standards in drinking water should be modified to allow a longer time period for implementing and evaluating corrosion control mea- sures and alternatives. Congress must also substan- tially change requirements that would make cities responsible for removing lead service lines in privately owned homes if lead levels exceed new, more stringent maximum contamination levels (MCL). Further, Congress must establish a program of special grants and loans for special needs to help meet the costs for new or modified treatment facilities required for compliance with federal standards. Expanded training and technical assistance is also needed, as well as a limit on the development of new MCL standards for those substances which occur widely, and which cause adverse health effects. City officials acknowledge the responsibility for taking steps to reduce the level of lead in drinking water and to assure that such contamination is treated to reduce levels as low as technically possible. Establishing standards with each water supply distribution system and the monitoring of such levels is necessary, but establishing MCL requirements at the customer's tap is misleading and prohibitively expensive. If such requirements are put in place, cities will be required to undertake both corrosion control measures, as well as replacement of lead service lines at costs which will be extraordinarily high and prohibitive at the local level. Insistence on the removal of such pipes as a prime strategy for reducing lead in public drinking water supplies is seriously flawed. EPA - proposed regulations announced in May 1991 place more appropriate emphasis on corrosion control measures as the key means to control lead contamination levels. Costs to city residents for drinking water service would rise to intolerable levels under terms of this legislation, especially in smaller cities. The League urges Con- gress to support provisions that make allowances for small and medium -sized systems. Small cities bear a disproportionate share of the cost of compliance with safe drinking water requirements because they lack larger and more broadly based rate structures. The EPA has estimated that smaller water systems will bear more than 60 percent of the cost of meeting federal safe drinking water requirements. Capital costs required are estimated to be $14.6 billion. In addition, provisions make cities subject to liability that can result in fines of as much as $25,000 per day for failure to maintain low levels of lead in drinking water supplies. It is unreasonable to hold city-owned and operated systems both responsible for violations of standards over which they have limited, or no control, as well as making them liable for monetary penalties for failure to meet such requirements. FL -23. Transportation The League supports redirection of national trans- portation priorities un der lhe In term odal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act ( ISTEA), which underscores the importance of the increased role for cities in planning 'and prioritizing transportation needs at the state level. The League urges Congress to examine difficulties encountered by cities in efforts to get state transporta- tion departments to include the views of local officials in determining the expenditure of ISTEA funds to meet local transportation needs. This is particularly impor- tant in rural and less populated areas of the state where 1993 City Policies and Priorities 53 cities are not represented through metropolitan plan- ning organizations (MPOs). Cities are aware of the immediate need for states to implement effective methods for encouraging local level decisions regarding transportation issues. Cities also underscore the importance of the increased role of MPOs in assisting states with transportation planning and the use of ISTEA funding. The League strongly supports direct involvement of city officials in the development of the following key elements of the ISTEA program: • Determination of levels of federal funding for all categories of federal highway programs 411 (inter- state repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation and renovation); BBR (bridge replacement and repair); rural and urban/suburban; • Mandatory pass- through of funds for urban/ suburban roads to cities or planning MPOs in areas with a population of more than 200,000; • Removal of barriers to intermodal, interagency and public /private cooperation in the development of prominent transit program; • Flexible transfer of highway and transit funds to meet local needs and encourage innovative ap- proaches to emerging urban and suburban mobility problems; • Incentives to increase transit ridership; • Integration of transportation modes for freight linkages to railheads, ports, and markets; • Increasing the importance of investments in rural and urban transportation programs that directly benefit the development of agriculture, tourism, and industry; 40 Separate authorization of transit programs includ- ing designation of funds for discretionary uses; ® Increased emphasis on management of transporta- tion demand through the use of high occupancy vehicle lanes (HOVs), ridesharing, traffic signal timing, ramp metering, staggered work hours, and other traffic management techniques. 54 The League also continues support for the draw down of the balance and accumulated interest in federal highway and airport trust funds and the return of those revenues to maintain highway, airport and transit systems. Restrictions in the federal budget process have thus far prevented congress from fully funding ISTEA highway and transit programs. Local officials are particularly concerned about the severely reduced spending levels for public transportation programs from appropriation levels authorized by ISTEA. Such circumstances are particularly worrisome because of the restrictions and potential reductions in funding for transit operating assistance. The League continues to support the following national transportation priorities as states implement ISTEA programs: • Improve commuter mobility, traffic congestion, air quality and energy conservation; • Increase investment in technologies that offer solutions to the problems resulting from depen- dence on movement of vehicles, including research and development of transportation alternatives; • Allocate federal funds to principal arterials to relieve interstate highway congestion; • Include metro and non -metro (primary) highway systems in the national highway classification system; • Support regional decision - making for project selection under the federal urban -aid highway program; • Increase reliance on movement of people by providing incentives to commuters to use highway transportation alternatives; • Maintain federal investment in transportation on a long -term basis. FL -24. Passenger Facility Charges and Airport Trust Fund Expenditures The League supports authorization of local airports to impose passenger facility charges (PFCs) to fund League of Minnesota Cities airport capital development projects. The League also insists that the federal government spend down balances in the airport and airway trust funds as the principal mechanism for financing airport develop- ment and improvements. Legislation authorizing airport operators to levy PFCs on airline passenger tickets should be implemented only if federal financial support for other local, airport programs is maintained and airline passengers are protected from exorbitant price increases for connect- ing flights to major airline routes at regional hub airports. Another essential condition for implementa - tion of the PFC is the spending down of the airport trust fund surplus over the next five years. Smaller airports and air travelers dependent on con- necting flights must also be assured of proportionate revenues and equity in the imposition of PFCs on such tickets. Congress must increase the rate of spending out of existing airport trust funds to meet pressing local capital needs and to increase grants to smaller airports. Airports should also be granted flexibility in the use of PFC revenues for • Airport access road improvements; • Noise reduction and measures designed to aid nearby residential neighborhoods seriously im- pacted by airport operations; and • Airport operational costs. The transfer of a portion of aviation trust fund entitle- ment revenues from large and medium hub airports which decide to levy PFCs to smaller non -hub airports is a critical means by which small cities can also benefit from PFCs paid by passengers using connecting flights. It is estimated that PFCs will generate more than $1 billion per year to be used for construction, improved safety, and better air traffic control. In 1990, FAA estimated annual airport capital improvement at needs at S10 billion. The current PFC charge will cost passengers a maximum of $3 per enplanement, with no more than two such levies per one way ticket, regard- less of the number of connections. 1993 City Policies and Priorities While increasing competition among airlines, such provisions must also provide sufficient safeguards for consumers to strengthen regional passenger airservice. It is also essential to assure that airline passengers from smaller airports who rely on reasonable rates for connecting flights at hub airports are not required to pay disproportionately higher fares as a result of imposition of PFCs by major airport operators. Ticketing and travel schedules that require more than two connecting flights should not be subject to disproportionate rate increases as result of PFC charges. City officials support restoration of funding to the essential air service program for small municipal airports hurt by deregulation. Provisions that would prevent the U.S. Department of Transportation from reducing the number of cities in the program and authorize sufficient funds (at least 526.6 million for fiscal year 1991) from the federal aviation trust fund must be key components of federal policy and must be included in legislation to authorize PFCs at larger airports. FL -25. Refugee Assistance The League supports full funding of the refugee act of 1980 and urges Congress to improve coordination between federal government agencies in the formula- tion of refugee policy. The League also urges the National League of Cities and the federal government to study refugee settlement concerns and to take further action based on timely research. Resettlement is a national issue, and the League believes that more federal assistance is warranted. Funding levels for assistance programs to refugees need to be more representative of annual admission levels. Further congressional action should establish greater cohesion among the refugee admissions policy of the U.S. Department of State, the level of appropria- tions for assistance programs established by Congress, and the administration of the refugee assistance act by the office of refugee resettlement in the department of health and human services. Refugees who settle in the United States, particularly Southeast Asians, face a number of serious problems. The educational system is generally ill- equipped to 55 help young refugees and their children. Along with the obvious cultural'and linguistic barriers to achieving self - sufficiency, educational problems promote a cycle of poverty and welfare dependence among refugees. In addition, refugees experience social and psychological problems.that are uniquely related to their past experi- ences and recent settlement in the United States. Their isolation from other Americans and the lack of federal funding for specific education, social services, and job training for refugees compounds the problem. The continual arrival of new refugees, the significant numbers of settled refugees, and the cultural and linguistic barriers to serving these unique people, all point to an ever - growing strain upon cities, counties, and states across the nation. The League recommends that the federal government study these concerns to assist in the formation of a more comprehensive program to achieve the goals of self - sufficiency and cultural assimilation for refugees. Increased federal funding to special programs for refugees has been encouraging. Restoration of funding levels for AFDC, refugee cash assistance, state and county administrative costs and the refugee unaccompanied minor program continue to be impor- tant to cities coping with the strain of refugee settle- ment. However, municipalities do not have adequate resources to address refugee concerns. FL -26. Social Security Deductions for Election Judges The League. urges Congress to provide a permanent blanket exemption from Social Security coverage for election judges. Uniform exclusion of all election workers from provi- sions of the new federal tax requirements that apply is necessary to eliminate this unnecessary requirement for employees whose average age nationally is 54 and among whom are a large number of retirees. It should also be noted that election judges earning less than $100 per year are already exempt from these provisions. The League is encouraged by efforts underway to raise the income threshold for election judges which will exempt most of them from these new requirements. Congress should also consider exempting election judges from current Medicare payment requirements. 56 This matter is urgent in view of many local elections ' scheduled each year. The impact of the Social Security tax on local election judges will make it especially difficult to recruit and retain citizens willing to take part in the important work of conducting election day activities at the polls. City officials are also dismayed at the increased administrative workload needed to comply with these requirements and the reactions of those serving as election judges who will now have additional deduc- tions made from the modest wages earned as polling place workers on election day. Senior citizens who serve as election judges have expressed anger and frustration over the recent tax changes and have indicated that they will refuse to serve in the future as a result of the imposition of these coverage requirements. FL -27. Government Accounting Reporting 'Requirements The League of Minnesota Cities urges the Govern- ment Accounting Standards Board (GASB) to refine the GASB 10 statement to allow for the recognition of future revenues to offset the present value of risk liabilities and promises of future benefits for retirees. The League supports accurate reporting of city finances with full recognition of realistic revenue streams for future years to offset liabilities for obligations which require future payments. The GASB 10 requires cities to report the present value and available assets to finance the following types of liabilities for annual reports and operating statements: • Accident, health, dental, and other medical ben- efits; • Post - retirement benefits; • Torts; • Job - related illnesses or injury to employees; • Theft or damage to or destruction of assets; • Acts of God; and • Errors or omissions. League of Minnesota Cities GASB 10 reporting requirements, as proposed, would fundamentally alter the way in which governments account for insurance costs as well as self-insured claims and have budgetary and management implica- tions in addition to impact on accounting and financial reporting. If modifications in proposed financial accounting standards for full disclosure of long -term liabilities are not made in GASB 10, many cities will show substan- tial negative fund balances. The proposed national accounting standards, which take effect June 15, 1994, will adversely affect units of state and local govern- ment as well as public employee systems, government utilities, hospitals, and colleges and universities. Failure to devise remedies to reduce liabilities that must be reported under GASB 10 will increase the likelihood of the reduction in city bond ratings due to the magnitude of unfunded long -term obligations. 1993 City Policies and Priorities - 57 OCTOBER HANDWRITTEN CHECKS COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK NUMBER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 1:10 AM page 1 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 129601 10/02/92 $2,807.60 DELTA DENTAL DENTAL PREMIUM 1092 CENT SVC GENER HOSPITALIZATI < *> $2,807.60* 129602 10/02/92 $16,088.16 GROUP HEALTH INC HOSPITALIZATION PREMI 1092 CENT SVC GENER HOSPITALIZATI < *> $16,088.16* 129603 11/07/92 $515.50 EAGLE WINE LI19921012 612908 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$5.16 EAGLE WINE LI19921012 612908 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,127.07 EAGLE WINE LI19921012 612910 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $11.27 EAGLE WINE LI19921012 612910 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $845.24 EAGLE WINE LI19921012 612911 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$8.45 EAGLE WINE LI19921012 612911 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 - $88.00 EAGLE WINE LI19921012 68676 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $0.88 EAGLE WINE LI19921012 68676 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 < *> $2,375.81* 129604 11/07/92 $689.50 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38526 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $93,092.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38739 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $93,092.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38739 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $212.25 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38739 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $612.65 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38764 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $558.30 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 68741 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $371.90 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38527 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $220.30 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38740 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -54.41 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38740 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $333.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38766 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$6.66 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38766 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $203.40 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 39456 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $247.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38761 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$4.94 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38761 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $74.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38737 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.48 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38737 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $674.45 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38738 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $646.85 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38762 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $839.95 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38742 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $16.80 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38742 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $121.24 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38768 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$2.42 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38768 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $642.42 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38401 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $686.20 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38743 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $42.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 39229 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $67.80 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 39512 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $111.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 39455 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $595.10 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 38618 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $11.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921012 138417 50TH ST SELLIN TRADE DISCOUN LI1107 <*> $7,901.60* 129605 11/07/92 $3,767.19 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921012 613440 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$75.34 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921012 613440 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,317.82 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921012 613441 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $26.36 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921012 613441 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $4,827.41 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921012 613442 YORK SELLING CST OF GD.LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $96.55 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921012 613442 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 < *> $9,714.17* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK NUMBER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 1:10 AM page 2 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 129606 11/07/92 $77.88 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7755309 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $1.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7755309 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$0.78 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7755309 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,224.24 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784994 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $26.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784994 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $12.24 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784994 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $801.57 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784945 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $8.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784945 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$8.03 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784945 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $238.24 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784978 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $1.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784978 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$2.38 JOHNSON WINE CO. LIL9921014 7784978 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,909.49 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784952 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $15.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784952 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $38.19 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784952 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $415.80 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7760259 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $2.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7760259 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$8.32 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7760259 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $776.03 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784846 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $3.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784846 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$12.52 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784846 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $421.14 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784879 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 .$9.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784879 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$4.23 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784879 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $752.12 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784838 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $7.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784838 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$7.52 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784838 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $86.11 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784861 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $2.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784861 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$0.88 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784861 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $415.80 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7760267 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $2.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7760267 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$8.32 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7760267 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $414.04 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784937 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $9.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784937 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$4.15 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784937 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $337.46 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784911 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $2.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784911 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$3.37 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784911 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $52.56 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784929 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $1.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784929 50TH ST. SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$0.54 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784929 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,307.36 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784895 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $12.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784895 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $13.10 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784895 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,384.03 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784903 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $7.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784903 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $27.69 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784903 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $415.80 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7760242 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $2.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7760242 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$8.32 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7760242 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $247.37 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784986 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $5.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784986 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$2.48 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784986 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $2,673.16 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784960 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK NUMBER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 1:10 AM page 3 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT I VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 129606 11/07/92 $14.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784960 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $53.46 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784960 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT L11107 11/07/92 $30.25 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784853 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN L11107 11/07/92 -$0.30 JOHNSON WINE CO. L119921014 7784853 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $2,963.66 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784853 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $15.75 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784853 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $59.28 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921014 7784853 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 < *> $16,817.26* 129607 11/07/92 $770.18 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921012 612804 VERNON SELLING CST OF GO WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$7.70 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921012 612804 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $240.89 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921012 612806 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GO WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$2.41 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921012 612806 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT L11107 11/07/92 $764.90 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921012 612808 YORK SELLING CST OF GO LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$7.65 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921012 612808 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 - $34.92 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921012 68073 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $0.35 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921012 68073 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 - $13.40 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921012 68843 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $0.13 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921012 68843 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 - $27.40 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921012 610912 50TH ST SELLIN TRADE DISCOUN LI1107 < *> $1,682.97* 129608 11/07/92 $1,323.14 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 025951 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $13.23 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 025951 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $956.37 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 029103 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$9.56 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 029103 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,666.93 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 029107 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $16.67 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 029107 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $665.31 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 029394 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$6.65 QUALITY WINE L11992LO14 029394 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $98.77 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 029502 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.98 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 029502 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT L11107 11/07/92 $533.22 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 029504 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $10.66 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 029504 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $443.68 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 029506 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$8.87 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 029506 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,468.87 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 029996 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $29.38 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 029996 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,591.50 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 30000 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $31.83 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 30000 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $593.62 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 30003 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $11.87 QUALITY WINE LI19921014 30003 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 < *> $9,200.71* 129609 10/07/92 $70.00 ANDERSON, ERIC PETTY CASH SET -UP 100792 LIQUOR PROG PETTY CASH < *> $70.00* 129610 10/09/92 $131,000.00 CITY OF EDINA PAYROLL TRANSFER SEPT 9, LIQUOR PROG CASH 10/09/92 - $131,000.00 CITY OF EDINA PAYROLL TRANSFER OCT 9, 1 LIQUOR PROG CASH < *> $0.00* 129611 10/13/92 $19,512.52 FIDELITY BANK FICA /MEDICARE 1013 GENERAL FD PRO PAYROLL PAYAB < *> $19,512.52* 129612 11/07/92 $145.90 EAGLE WINE LI19921015 614034 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK NUMBER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 1:10 AM page 4 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 129612 11/07/92 -$1.46 EAGLE WINE LI19921015 614034 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $983.69 EAGLE WINE LI19921015 615569 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$9.84 EAGLE WINE LI19921015 615569 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $576.40 EAGLE WINE LI19921015 615570 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$5.76 EAGLE WINE LI19921015 615570 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $186.00 EAGLE WINE LI19921015 615839 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.86 EAGLE WINE LI19921015 615839 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $80.00 EAGLE WINE LI19921015 616408 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$0.80 EAGLE WINE LI19921015 616408 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 -$5.76 EAGLE WINE LI19921015 69170 50TH ST SELLIN TRADE DISCOUN LI1107 <A> $1,946.51" 129613 11/07/92 $441.65 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 40991 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $313.70 ED PHILLIPS & SONS L119921015 40964 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $234.95 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 40943 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $250.70 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 40990 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$5.01 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 40990 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $114.74 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 40920 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$2.29 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 40920 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,452.90 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 40997 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $29.06 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 40997 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $634.80 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 40924 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $84.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 40925 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.68 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 40925 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $979.70 ED PHILLIPS & SONS L119921015 40998 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $535.70 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 41202 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$535.70 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 41202 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,030.20 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 41001 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $20.60 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 41001 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $754.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 40926 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $1,189.85 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 41002 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$535.70 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 41202 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $535.70 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 41202 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92535-70 $5i5.918 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 41202 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $11,,73344.774 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921015 41203 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 < *> 129614 11/07/92 $9x,6V!dt" $75.45 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921015 614575 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.51 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921015 614575 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $4,676.18 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921015 615823 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $93.52 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921015 615823 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $217.98 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921015 615824 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$4.36 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. L119921015 615824 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,578.82 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921015 615825 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $31.58 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. L119921015 615825 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $4,307.73 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921015 615827 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $86.15 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921015 615827 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 <•> $10,639.04" 129615 11/07/92 $241.42 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810377 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $5.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. L119921016 7810377 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$2.43 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810377 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $27.83 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810369 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $0.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810369 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -50.28 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810369 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK NUMBER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 1:10 AM page 5 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 129615 11/07/92 $134.82 JOHNSON WINE CO. L119921016 7810336 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $1.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810336 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -51.34 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810336 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $546.81 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810328 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $6.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810328 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$5.49 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810328 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 5513.10 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810344 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $4.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810344 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $10.26 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810344 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,335.69 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810351 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $6.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810351 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - 326.71 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810351 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $140.70 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810286 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $1.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810286 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.41 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810286 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $579.36 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810294 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 511.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810294 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$5.80 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810294 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 55,039.76 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810278 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 525.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810278 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $100.79 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810278 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $454.33 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810260 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $5.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810260 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$4.52 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810260 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $306.96 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7702855 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $4.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7702855 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$3.07 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7702855 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $544.71 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810252 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN L11107 11/07/92 $7.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810252 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$5.45 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7810252 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $805.24 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807928 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $17.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807928 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$8.08 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807928 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $98.95 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807902 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $1.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807902 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$0.99 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807902 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $465.84 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807860 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $5.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807860 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$4.66 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807860 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $696.72 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807878 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $5.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807878 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$6.97 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807878 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $5,190.94 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807894 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $26.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807894 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $103.85 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807894 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,742.39 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807886 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ L11107 11/07/92 $11.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807886 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $34.84 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807886 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $27.83 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807910 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $0.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807910 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN L11107 11/07/92 -$0.28 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921016 7807910 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 <�> $18,711.18- 129616 11/07/92 $257.20 PAUSTIS & SONS LI19921016 26726 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN L11107 11/07/92 $6.00 PAUSTIS & SONS LI19921016 26726 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK NUMBER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 1:10 AM page 6 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 129616 11/07/92 $276.20 PAUSTIS & SONS LI19921016 26734 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $6.00 PAUSTIS & SONS LI19921016 26734 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 <•> $545.40* 129617 11/07/92 $756.44 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921016 615210 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$7.56 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921016 615210 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $384.78 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921016 615211 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$3.85 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921016 615211 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $531.44 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921016 615212 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$5.31 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921016 615212 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $285.45 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921016 615807 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$2.82 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921016 615807 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 - $13.40 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921016 68844 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $0.13 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921016 68844 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 -$3.16 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921016 69190 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 c *> $1,922.14" 129618 11/07/92 $3,162.51 QUALITY WINE LI19921016 031229 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $63.25 QUALITY WINE LI19921016 031229 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $27.06 QUALITY WINE LI19921016 031232 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$0.27 QUALITY WINE LI19921016 031232 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $2,734.71 QUALITY WINE LI19921016 031234 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $54.69 QUALITY WINE LI19921016 031234 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,926.35 QUALITY WINE LI19921016 031236 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $19.26 QUALITY WINE LI19921016 031236 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,159.37 QUALITY WINE LI19921016 031239 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $23.19 QUALITY WINE LI19921016 031239 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $529.73 QUALITY WINE LI19921016 031247 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$5.30 QUALITY WINE LI19921016 031247 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT L11107 11/07/92 $832.55 QUALITY WINE LI19921016 031256 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$8.33 QUALITY WINE LI19921016 031256 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $81.54 QUALITY WINE LI19921016 031622 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.63 QUALITY WINE LI19921016 031622 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT L11107 <*> $10,277.90* 129619 11/07/92 $480.00 SALUD AMERICA LI19921016 08263 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $5.10 SALUD AMERICA LI19921016 08263 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 c *> $485.10* 129620 11/07/92 $112.00 WINE MERCHANTS LI19921016 3254 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $2.00 WINE MERCHANTS LI19921016 3254 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 < *> $114.00* 129621 11/07/92 $731.00 WORLD CLASS WINE LI19921016 12197 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $7.50 WORLD CLASS WINE LI19921016 12197 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 c *> $738.50* 129622 10/13/92 $19.62 PERA PERA 101392 CENT SVC GENER EMPLYR SH PER 10/13/92 $29,278.86 PERA PERA 101392 CENT SVC GENER EMPLYR SH PER < *> $29,298.48* 129624 10/13/92 $60.00 ANDERSON, ERIC LIQUOR PETTY CASH 101392 LIQUOR PROG PETTY CASH c *> $60.00* 129625 11/07/92 $229.40 EAGLE WINE LI19921020 615571 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK NUMBER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 1:10 AM page 7 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 129625 11/07/92 -$2.29 EAGLE WINE LI19921020 615571 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $103.00 EAGLE WINE LI19921020 617779 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.03 EAGLE WINE LI19921020 617779 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $956.55 EAGLE WINE LI19921020 617854 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$9.57 EAGLE WINE LI19921020 617854 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $435.20 EAGLE WINE LI19921020 617856 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$4.35 EAGLE WINE LI19921020 617856 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $382.40 EAGLE WINE LI19921020 - 617857 -YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$3.82 EAGLE WINE LI19921020 617857 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $60.60 EAGLE WINE LI19921020 618206 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$0.61 EAGLE WINE LI19921020 618206 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 < *> $2,145.48* 129626 11/07/92 $383.25 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43293. 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$7.67 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43293 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $66.12 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43446 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.32 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43446. 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $731.15 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43602 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $388.20 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43447 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $251.20 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43551 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN.LI1107 11/07/92 $891.80 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43307 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $686.55 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43306 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$13.73 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LIL9921020 43306 YORK SELLING _CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $283.97 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43491 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$5.68 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43491 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $292.55 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43493 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $382.35 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43556 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $717.40 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43308 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $14.35 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43308 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,601.70 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43430 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $885.35 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43496 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $174.50 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43495 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$3.49 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43495 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $744.25 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921020 43309 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $102.00 ED PHILLIPS &SONS LI19921020 138701 VERNON SELLING CST OF GO WIN LI1107 < *> $7,732.10* 129627 11/07/92 $1,308.40 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921020 618371 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $26.17 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921020 618371 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $3,686.06 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921020 618372 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $73.72 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921020 618372 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $3,660.36 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921020 618370 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $73.21 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921020 618370 - VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT'LI1107 < *> $8,481.72* 129628 11/07/92 $381.82 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835812 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $22.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835812 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$3.80 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835812 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,288.53 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835788 50TH.ST,SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $16.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835788 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $25.78 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835788 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $269.76 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835762 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $9.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835762 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$2.70 -JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835762 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $269.10 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 835754 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK NUMBER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 1:10 AM page 8 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. 8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 129628 11/07/92 $9.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 835754 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$2.69 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021• 835754 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT'LI1107 11/07/92 $107.87 JOHNSON WINE CO. L119921021 7835804 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $7.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. ..LI19921021 7835804 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -51.08 JOHNSON WINE, CO. LI19921021 7835804 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT L11107 11/07/92 $66.65 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835796 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $1.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835796 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$0.67 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835796 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $76.30 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835770 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $4.50. JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835770 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GO WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$0.76 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835770 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT L11107 11/07/92 $1,107.07 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835457 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $13.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835457 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$22.14 JOHNSON WINE CO. L119921021 7835457 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $817.90 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835499 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN L11107 11/07/92 $48.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835499 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$8.20 JOHNSON WINE CO. L119921021 7835499 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $192.18 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835440 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $9.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835440 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.92 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835440 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,988.65 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835465 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $25.62 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835465 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $39.79 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835465 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $571.64 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835432 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $18.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835432 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$5.73 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835432 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $77.88 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835473 YORK SELLING CST OF GD.WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $1.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835473 YORK SELLING CST OF GD.WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$0.78 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835473 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $95.68 JOHNSON WINE CO. L119921021 7835481 YORK,SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $6.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835481 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$0.96 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7835481 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $5,169.33 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7834260 VERNON SELLING CST OF.GD.LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $75.25 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7834260 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $103.42 JOHNSON WINE CO. L119921021 7834260 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $652•.88 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7834286 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $37.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. L119921021 7834286 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$6.54 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7834286 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,048.57 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7834252 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $18.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7834252 VERNON SELLING•CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$20.98 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7834252 _ VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $433.37 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7834237 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $15.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7834237 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$4.34 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7834237 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $147.89 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7834278 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $10.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7834278 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.48 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7834278 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107. 11/07/92 $368.37 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7834245 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $9.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7834245 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN L11107 11/07/92 -$3.69 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921021 7834245 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 < ■> $15,231.36" 129629 11/07/92 MN CROWN DIST LI19921020 2317 YORK SELLING CST OF GO WIN LI1107 $781.80 * COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK NUMBER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 1:10 AM page 9 CHECK• DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 129630 11/07/92 $321.20 PAUSTIS & SONS LI19921020 26780 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $5.60 PAUSTIS & SONS LI19921020 26780 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 < *> $326.80* 129631 11/07/92 $658.03 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921020 617795 YORK SELLING CST OF GO WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$6.58 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921020 617795 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $786.99 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921020 617793 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$7.87 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921020 617793 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $726.39 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921020 617794 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$7.54 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921020 617794 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 <*> $2,149.42* 129632 11/07/92 $1,322.39 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 032285 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $26.45 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 032285 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $256.41 QUALITY WINE LIL9921021 032286 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$5.13 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 032286 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $277.60 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 032287 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$5.55 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 032287 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $374.10 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 032334 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$7.48 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 032334 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,074.01 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 032749 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $10.74 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 032749 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,163.25 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 032753 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$11.63 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 032753 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $868.28 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 033078 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $17.37 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 033078 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,998.64 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 033090 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $39.97 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 033090 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,667.49 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 033104 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $16.67 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 033104 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $2,764.49 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 033132 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $55.29 QUALITY WINE LI19921021 033132 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 < *> $11,570.38* 129633 10/23/92 $155,000.00 CITY OF EDINA PAYROLL TRANSFER 102392 LIQUOR PROG CASH 10/23/92 - $155,000.00 CITY OF EDINA PAYROLL TRANSFER 102392 LIQUOR PROG CASH < *> $0.00* 129634 10/27/92 $19,094.58 FIDELITY BANK FICA /MEDICARE 102792 GENERAL FD PRO PAYROLL PAYAB < *> $19,094.58* 129635 10/27/92 $29,114.99 PERA PERA 102792 CENT SVC GENER EMPLYR SH PER < *> $29,114.99* 129636 10/27/92 $19.62 PERA PERA 102792 CENT SVC GENER EMPLYR SH PER < *> $19.62* 129637 11/07/92 $1,117.05 EAGLE WINE LI19921029 619993 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $11.17 EAGLE WINE LI19921029 619993 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,221.24 EAGLE WINE LI19921029 619994 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $12.21 EAGLE WINE LI19921029 619994 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $60.00 EAGLE WINE LI19921029 621738 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GO WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$0.60 EAGLE WINE LI19921029 621738 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 - $78.68 EAGLE WINE LI19921029 69563 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $1.57 EAGLE WINE LI19921029 69563 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK NUMBER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 1:10 AM page 10 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION. INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - - - - -- < *> $2,297.20* 129638 11/07/92 $232.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 47022 11/07/92 $620.65 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46223 11/07/92 - $12.41 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46223 11/07/92 $73.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46179 11/07/92 -$1.46 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46179 11/07/92 $215.25 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46180 11/07/92 $563.65 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46177 11/07/92 $524.15 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46224 11/07/92 $664.65 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46230 11/07/92 - $13.29 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46230 11/07/92 $300.85 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46228 11/07/92 $825.55 ED PHILLIPS & SONS L119921029 46229 11/07/92 $124.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46369 11/07/92 $239.84 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46181 11/07/92 -$4.80 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46181 11/07/92 $1,179.94 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46182 11/07/92 $90.60 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46297 11/07/92 $73.10 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46216 11/07/92 -$1.46 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46216 11/07/92 $72.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS L119921029 46107 11/07/92 -$1.44 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46107 11/07/92 $593.65 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46166 11/07/92 $179.45 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46296 11/07/92 $597.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921029 46295 < *> $7,134.47* LI19921029 7864614 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLIN 50TH ST SELLIN 50TH ST SELLIN 50TH ST SELLIN 50TH ST SELLIN 50TH ST SELLIN 50TH ST SELLIN 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN CST OF GD LIQ CASH DISCOUNT CST OF GD LIQ CASH DISCOUNT CST OF GO WIN CST OF GD WIN CST OF GD WIN CST OF GD LIQ CASH DISCOUNT CST OF GD WIN CST OF GD WIN CST OF GD WIN CST OF GD LIQ CASH DISCOUNT CST OF GD WIN CST OF GD WIN CST OF GD LIQ CASH DISCOUNT CST OF GD LIQ CASH DISCOUNT CST OF GD WIN CST OF GD WIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 LI1107 129639 11/07/92 $183.73 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921029 617297 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$3.67 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921029 617297 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $308.74 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921029 618937 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$6.17 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921029 618937 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $154.37 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921029 618938 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$3.09 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. L119921029 618938 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $4,707.10 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921029 620714 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $94.14 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921029 620714 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,180.30 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921029 620716 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $23.61 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921029 620716 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $3,722.14 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. L119921029 620717 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $74.44 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921029 620717 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 <*> $10,051.26* 129640 11/07/92 $635.90 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7871833 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $3.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7871833 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $12.72 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7871833 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $353.93 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864622 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $1.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. L119921029 7864622 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$7.08 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864622 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $183.69 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864614 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $1.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864614 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$3.67 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864614 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $382.55 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864598 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $4.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. L119921029 7864598 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN L11107 11/07/92 -$3.84 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864598 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $208.58 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864606 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK. NUMBER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 1:10 AM page 11 CHECK# DATE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # 129640 11/07/92 $2.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864606 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$2.08 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864606 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $27.83 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864630 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $0.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864630 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$0.28 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864630 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $192.30 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864697 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $1.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864697 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.93 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864697 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,153.73 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864671 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $9.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864671 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $23.07 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864671 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $795.58 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864663 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $6.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864663 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$7.97 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864663 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 .$685.17 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864655 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $8.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864655 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$6.86 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864655 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $790.31 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864705 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $19.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864705 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$7.95 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864705 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $4,060.72 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864689 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $21.54 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864689 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $81.21 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864689 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 - $19.18 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7853377 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $417.19 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864523 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $5.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864523 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$4.18 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864523 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $90.75 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864531 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $1.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864531 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$0.91 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864531 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $141.78 - JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864564 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $0.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. •LI19921029 7864564 VERNON SELLING CST OF GO WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.42 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864564 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $55.66 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864572 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $1.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864572 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$0.56 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864572 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $563.57 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864580 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $11.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864580 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$5.67 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864580 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 - $563.57 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864580 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $11.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864580 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $5.67 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864580 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $563.77 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864580 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $11.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864580 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -95.67 JOHNSON WINE CO. L119921029 7864580 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,187.72 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864549 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $6.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864549 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $23.74 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864549 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $3,034.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864556 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $16.04 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864556 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $60.68 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864556 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 -$6.77 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7845845 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $86.99 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 1464932 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $309.52 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864648 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $6.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864648 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK NUMBER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 1:10 AM page 12 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ---------------- 129640 11/07/92 ----- - - - - -- -$3.10 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921029 7864648 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT L < *> $15,028.40* 129641 11/07/92 $290.60 PAUSTIS & SONS LI19921029 27013 27013 VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 LI1107 11/07/92 PUSTIS & SONS LI19921029 < *> $296.20* 129642 11/07/92 $809.29 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921029 LI19921029 620122 620122 VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING CST OF GO WIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 LI1107 11/07/92 -$8.09 $512.94 PRIOR WINE COMPANY PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921029 620123 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 11/07/92 -$5.13 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921029 620123 620124 50TH ST SELLIN YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT CST OF GD WIN LI1107 LI1107 11/07/92 $792.58 -$7.93 PRIOR WINE COMPANY PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921029 LI19921029 620124 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 11/07/92 -$5.05 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921029 69924 69924 VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 LI1107 11/07/92 $0.05 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921029 < *> $2,088.66* 129643 11/07/92 $390.00 QUALITY WINE LI19921029 LI19921029 034370 034370 VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 LI1107 11/07/92 11/07/92 -$3.90 $1,141.99 QUALITY WINE QUALITY WINE LI19921029 034678 034678 VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 LI1107 11/07/92 - $11.42 31,204.39 QUALITY WINE QUALITY WINE LI19921029 LI19921029 034694 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 11/07/92 - 312.04 QUALITY WINE LI19921029 034694 50TH ST SELLIN SELLING CASH DISCOUNT CST OF GD WIN LI1107 LI1107 11/07/92 $1,760.84 QUALITY WINE WINE LI19921029 LI19921029 034697 034697 YORK YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 11/07/92 - $17.61 $479.74 QUALITY QUALITY WINE LI19921029 035110 50TH ST SELLIN 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 LI1107 11/07/92 -$9.59 $2,101.72 QUALITY WINE QUALITY WINE LI19921029 LI19921029 035110 035111 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 11/07/92 - $42.03 QUALITY WINE LI19921029 035111 035113 YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 LI1107 11/07/92 $2,155.73 - $43.11 QUALITY WINE QUALITY WINE LI19921029 LI19921029 035113 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 11/07/92 - $95.24 QUALITY WINE LI19921029 035449 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 < *> $8,999.47* 129644 11/07/92 $70.00 WINE MERCHANTS L119921029 LI19921029 3325 3325 VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 LI1107 11/07/92 $2.00 WINE MERCHANTS < *> $72.00* 129645 11/07/92 $110.00 WORLD CLASS WINE LI19921029 13749 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 < *> $110.00* 129646 11/02/92 592.53 KNOX COMM CREDIT GENERAL SUPPLIES 021798. PUMP & LIFT ST GENERAL SUPPL < *> $92.53* 129647 10/30/92 $16,088.16 GROUP HEALTH INC HOSPITALIZATION PREMI 103092 CENT SVC GENER HOSPITALIZATI < *> $16,088.16* 129648 11/07/92 $327.57 EAGLE WINE LI19921103 LI19921103 620694 620694 50TH ST SELLIN 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 LI1107 11/07/92 11/07/92 -$4.02 $996.05 EAGLE WINE EAGLE WINE LI19921103 622260 622260 VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 LI1107 11/07/92 -$9.96 $200.75 EAGLE WINE EAGLE WINE LI19921103 LI19921103 622261 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 11/07/92 -$2.01 EAGLE WINE LI19921103 622261 622273 YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT CST OF GD WIN LI1107 LI1107 11/07/92 $56.00 EAGLE WINE EAGLE WINE LI19921103 LI19921103 622273 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 -$0.56 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK NUMBER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 1:10 AM page 13 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ < -> $1,563.82• 129649 11/07/92 $26.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48464 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $67.80 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 138994 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $1,107.36 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48563 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $22.15 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48563 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $251.50 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48434 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$5.03 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48434 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $41.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48461 YORK SELLING CST OF GO WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $384.45 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48435 YORK SELLING CST OF GO WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $549.85 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48564 YORK SELLING CST OF GO WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $595.75 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48566 YORK SELLING CST OF GO WIN LI1107 - 11/07/92 $1,253.07 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48331 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $773.85 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48466 VERNON SELLING CST OF GO WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $1,453.36 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48570 VERNON SELLING CST OF GO LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $29.07 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48570 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,441.75 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48571 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $410.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48465 VERNON SELLING CST OF GO WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $611.71 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48449 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GO LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $12.23 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48449 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $613.20 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48450 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $440.60 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48451 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $82.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48417 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GO WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $385.60 ED PHILLIPS & SONS LI19921103 48397 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 <•> $10,284.77" 129650 11/07/92 $3,667.44 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921103 622968 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $73.35 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921103 622968 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $4,027.38 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921103 622970 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $80.55 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921103 622970 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $4,160.70 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921103 622971 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $83.21 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921103 622971 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $314.10 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921103 623365 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$6.28 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921103 623365 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $157.05 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921103 623364 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$3.14 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921103 623364 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,256.40 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921103 623363 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $25.13 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921103 623363 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $260.88 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921103 623373 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$5.22 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. LI19921103 623373 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 < -> $13,567.07- 129651 11/07/92 $83.49 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7907033 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$0.84 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7907033 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 - $56.23 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7875362 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $235.23 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7894751 YORK SELLING CST OF GO WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $3.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7894751 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$2.35 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7894751 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $110.96 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7894744 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $1.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7894744 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.11 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7894744 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $190.77 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7882053 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $1.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7882053 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$3.82 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7882053 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,854.26 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7894769 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK NUMBER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 1:10 AM page 14 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 129651 11/07/92 $10.12 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7894769 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $37.08 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7894769 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $660.69 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7894777 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $14.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7894777 YORK SELLING CST OF GO WIN L11107 11/07/92 -$6.62 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7894777 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $734.79 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892896 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $8.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892896 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$7.36 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892896 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $161.65 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892904 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $2.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892904 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.63 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892904 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $696.79 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892912 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $6.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892912 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $13.94 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892912 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $3,584.96 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892920 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $18.37 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892920 VERNON SELLING CST OF GO LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $71.74 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892920 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $190.77 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7882061 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $1.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7882061 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$3.82 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7882061 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $779.88 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892938 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $15.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892938 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$7.82 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892938 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $204.94 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892995 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $4.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892995 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$2.06 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892995 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $117.40 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892961 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $1.00 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892961 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.17 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892961 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $3,714.45 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892987 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $17.70 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892987 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $74.31 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892987 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $198.66 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892979 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 $1.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892979 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 -$3.97 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892979 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $296.14 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892953 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $3.50 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892953 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$2.97 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7892953 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $111.32 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7907041 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.12 JOHNSON WINE CO. LI19921104 7907041 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 9- *' SiS.996.881L $13,737.88* 129652 11/07/92 $694.00 PAUSTIS & SONS LI19921104 27125 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $18.40 PAUSTIS & SONS LI19921104 27125 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $49.00 PAUSTIS & SONS LI19921104 27158 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $1.50 PAUSTIS & SONS LI19921104 27158 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $252.20 PAUSTIS & SONS LI19921104 27014 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 56.00 PAUSTIS & SONS LI19921104 27014 YORK SELLING CST OF GO WIN LI1107 <�> $1,021.10" 129653 11/07/92 $49.75 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921104 622254 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$0.50 PRIOR WINE COMPANY L119921104 622254 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $1,052.92 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921104 622293 VERNON SELLING CST OF GO WIN LI1107 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER BY CHECK NUMBER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 1:10 AM page 15 CHECKS DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 129653 11/07/92 - $10.53 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921104 622293 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $137.30 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921104 622294 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.37 PRIOR WINE COMPANY L119921104 622294 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $746.70 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921104 622295 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$7.47 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921104 622295 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $99.50 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921104 623541 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.00 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921104 623541 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $181.80 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921104 625123 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.82 PRIOR WINE COMPANY LI19921104 625123 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 <�> $2,245.28" 129654 11/07/92 $2,147.02 QUALITY WINE L119921104 036908 YORK SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $42.94 QUALITY WINE LI19921104 036908 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $3,143.90 QUALITY WINE LI19921104 036909 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $62.88 QUALITY WINE LI19921104 036909 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $129.50 QUALITY WINE LI19921104 036912 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$1.30 QUALITY WINE LI19921104 036912 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $2,753.06 QUALITY WINE LI19921104 036913 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GO LIQ LI1107 11/07/92 - $55.06 QUALITY WINE LI19921104 036913 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $2,959.46 QUALITY WINE LI19921104 037085 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $29.59 QUALITY WINE LI19921104 037085 50TH ST SELLIN CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $3,436.60 QUALITY WINE LI19921104 037102 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 - $34.37 QUALITY WINE LI19921104 037102 VERNON SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 $312.64 QUALITY WINE LI19921104 037125 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -53.13 QUALITY WINE LI19921104 037125 YORK SELLING CASH DISCOUNT LI1107 11/07/92 - $193.11 QUALITY WINE LI19921104 035970 YORK SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 <•> $14,459.80• 129655 11/07/92 $576.00 THE WINE COMPANY LI19921104 3700 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $6.30 THE WINE COMPANY LI19921104 3700 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN L11107 11/07/92 - $576.00 THE WINE COMPANY LI19921104 3700 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 -$6.30 THE WINE COMPANY LI19921104 3700 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $376.00 THE WINE COMPANY LI19921104 3700 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $6.30 THE WINE COMPANY LI19921104 3700 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 <■> $382.30' 129656 11/07/92 $80.00 WINE MERCHANTS L119921104 3338 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 11/07/92 $3.00 WINE MERCHANTS LI19921104 3338 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN LI1107 < ■> $83.00" $387,091.86" COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY BY CHECK'NUMBER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 1:16 AM page 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - - - - -- FUND # 10 FUND # 40 FUND # 50 $132,024.11 $92.53 $254,737.02 $25 "" $386,853.66* AFppnVED FOR PAf CHfcCK R£Gj$7En DAB DAi L �e'l �'j"►�IANACA , — '�� fi COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, AOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 1 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131429 11/16/92 $1,800.00 AIA SANDBLAST CO SERVICE CONTRACTS EQU 1428 MAINT OF COURS SVC CONTR EQU 3885 < *> $1,800.00* 131431 11/16/92 $459.52 AAGARD RUBBISH REMOVAL OCT 92 GENERAL MAINT RUBBISH REMOV 11/16/92 $107.54 AAGARD RUBBISH REMOVAL OCT 92 FIRE DEPT. GEN RUBBISH REMOV 11/16/92 $134.42 AAGARD RUBBISH REMOVAL OCT 92 CITY HALL GENE RUBBISH REMOV 11/16/92 $459.52 AAGARD RUBBISH REMOVAL OCT 92 PW BUILDING RUBBISH REMOV 11/16/92 $107.54 AAGARD RUBBISH REMOVAL OCT 92 LITTER REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOV 11/16/92 - $334.58 AAGARD RUBBISH REMOVAL OCT 92 LITTER REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOV 11/16/92 - $59.75 AAGARD RUBBISH REMOVAL OCT 92 LITTER REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOV 11/16/92 $53.77 AAGARD RUBBISH REMOVAL OCT 92 ART CENTER BLD RUBBISH REMOV 11/16/92 - $236.90 AAGARD RUBBISH REMOVAL OCT 92 CLUB HOUSE RUBBISH REMOV 11/16/92 $144.29 AAGARD RUBBISH REMOVAL OCT 92 MAINT OF COURS RUBBISH REMOV 11/16/92 $322.62 AAGARD RUBBISH REMOVAL OCT 92 ARENA BLDG /GRO RUBBISH REMOV 11/16/92 $425.87 AAGARD RUBBISH REMOVAL OCT 92 BUILDING & GRO RUBBISH REMOV 11/16/92 $36.75 AAGARD PREPAID INSURANCE OCT 92 50TH ST OCCUPA RUBBISH REMOV 11/16/92 $63.63 AAGARD RUBBISH REMOVAL OCT 92 YORK OCCUPANCY RUBBISH REMOV 11/16/92 $159.22 AAGARD RUBBISH REMOVAL OCT 92 VERNON OCCUPAN RUBBISH REMOV 11/16/92 $26.88 AAGARD RUBBISH REMOVAL OCT 92 GUN RANGE RUBBISH REMOV < *> $1,870.34* 131432 11/16/92 $70.63 AARESTED, DRU ART WORK SOLD 102392 ART CNTR PROG RETAIL SALES 11/16/92 $25.00 AARESTED, DRU AC INSTRUCTOR 110292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES < *> $95.63* 131433 11/16/92 $441.64 ABM EQUIPMENT & SUPP REPAIR PARTS 017579 -0 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4250 < *> $441.64* 131434 11/16/92 $195.71 ADT SECURITY SYS. ALARM SERVICE 06129843 BUILDING & GRO ALARM SERVICE < *> $195.71* 131435 11/16/92 $8.98 AIRSIGNAL DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 3293353 PARK ADMIN. DUES & SUBSCR < *> $8.98* 131436 11/16/92 $6.00 ALL FIRE TEST INC EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 5367 POLICE DEPT. G EQUIP MAINT 2373 < *> $6.00* 131437 11/16/92 $1,136.00 ALSTAD, MARIAN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 110292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES 11/16/92 $8.40 ALSTAD, MARIAN ART WORK SOLD 110292 ART CNTR PROG RETAIL SALES < *> $1,144.40* 131438 11/16/92 $140.25 ALTERNATOR REBUILD REPAIR PARTS 17190 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4339 11/16/92 $263.42 ALTERNATOR REBUILD GENERAL SUPPLIES 008579 STREET NAME SI GENERAL SUPPL 4360 < *> $403.67* 131439 11/16/92 $46.28 AMERICAN LINEN LAUNDRY 103192 50TH ST SELLIN LAUNDRY 11/16/92 $169.07 AMERICAN LINEN LAUNDRY 103192 CITY HALL GENE LAUNDRY 11/16/92 $60.90 AMERICAN LINEN LAUNDRY 103192 YORK OCCUPANCY LAUNDRY 11/16/92 $44.19 AMERICAN LINEN LAUNDRY 103192 VERNON OCCUPAN LAUNDRY 11/16/92 $395.15 AMERICAN LINEN LAUNDRY 103192 BUILDING & GRO LAUNDRY 11/16/92 $184.14 AMERICAN LINEN LAUNDRY 103192 FIRE DEPT. GEN LAUNDRY 11/16/92 $12.45 AMERICAN LINEN LAUNDRY 103192 LABORATORY LAUNDRY 11/16/92 $22.58 AMERICAN LINEN LAUNDRY 103192 GRILL LAUNDRY < *> $934.76* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 2 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131440 11/16/92 $164.02 AMERICAN SHARECOM TELEPHONE 101592 CENT SVC GENER TELEPHONE <*> $164.02* 131441 11/16/92 $132,963.16 ARNT CONSTRUCTION CO CONSTR. IN PROGRESS 92 -10 #1 GC CIP CIP <*> $132,963.16* 131442 11/16/92 $442.19 ASTLEFORD INTL ACCESSORIES A -90930 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 4364 11/16/92 $36.51 ASTLEFORD INTL REPAIR PARTS A -91016 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4502 < *> $478.70* 131443 11/16/92 $28.89 AT & T INFO SYSTEM TELEPHONE 102692 ART CENTER BLD TELEPHONE < *> $28.89* 131444 11/16/92 $19.80 AT &T CONS PROD DIV TELEPHONE 102992 SKATING & HOCK TELEPHONE < *> $19.80* 131445 11/16/92 $83.25 ATLAS PEN & PENCIL C COST OF COMMODITIES 110292 ART SUPPLY GIF CST OF GD F00 < *> $83.25* 131446 11/16/92 $88.39 AUDIO VISUAL WHSE GENERAL SUPPLIES 94995 BUILDING & GRO GENERAL SUPPL 4570 < *> $88.39* 131447 11/16/92 $40.00 AUTOMOBILE SERV CTR CONTRACTED REPAIRS 15387 EQUIPMENT OPER CONTR REPAIRS 4428 < *> $40.00* 131448 11/16/92 $16.04 AXT -LYLE COST OF GOODS SOLD FO 110592 GUN RANGE CST OF GD F00 11/16/92 $18.46 AXT -LYLE COST OF GOODS SOLD FO 110992 GUN RANGE CST OF GD FOO < *> $34.50* 131449 11/16/92 $141.51 BACHMANS GENERAL SUPPLIES 9972711 MAINT OF COORS GENERAL SUPPL 4410 11/16/92 $583.84 BACHMANS CONTRACTED REPAIRS 220481 GENERAL STORM CONTR REPAIRS 4108 11/16/92 $250.00 BACHMANS PLANTINGS & TREES L0075154 TREES & MAINTE PLANT & TREES 4178 < *> $975.35* 131450 11/16/92 $10,368.16 BARR ENG CONSTR. IN PROGRESS 14559 -18 GC CIP CIP < *> $10,368.16* 131451 11/16/92 $316.95 BATTERY WAREHOUSE REPAIR PARTS 215822 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4327 < *> $316.95* 131452 11/16/92 $244.00 BAY WEST BLUE PRINTING 2050 FIRE DEPT. GEN BLUE PRINTING 3741 < *> $244.00* 131453 11/16/92 $1,514.23 BAY WEST BLUE PRINTING 90142 FIRE DEPT. GEN BLUE PRINTING < *> $1,514.23* 131454 11/16/92 $100.00 BENNETT -WAYNE PERSONAL SERVICES DECEMBER RESERVE PROGRA PERS SERVICES < *> $100.00* 131455 11/16/92 $141.50 BERGFORD TRUCKING COST OF GOODS SOLD LI OCT /50TH 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GD LIQ 11/16/92 $195.00 BERGFORD TRUCKING COST OF GOODS SOLD LI OCT /YORK YORK SELLING CST OF GO LIQ 11/16/92 $266.50 BERGFORD TRUCKING COST OF GOODS SOLD LI OCT /VERN VERNON SELLING CST OF GO LIQ < *> $603.00* 131456 11/16/92 $17.07 BERTELSON BROS. INC. GENERAL SUPPLIES 830665 CENT SVC GENER GENERAL SUPPL r COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, KOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 3 CHECK* DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131456 11/16/92 $9.25 BERTELSON BROS. INC. GENERAL SUPPLIES 832963 CENT SVC GENER GENERAL SUPPL 11/16/92 $11.03 BERTELSON BROS. INC. GENERAL SUPPLIES 834104 POLICE DEPT. G'GENERAL SUPPL 11/16/92 $182.12 BERTELSON BROS. INC. GENERAL SUPPLIES 830663. CENT SVC GENER GENERAL SUPPL 11/16/92 $1.32 BERTELSON BROS. INC. GENERAL SUPPLIES 830403BI CENT SVC GENER GENERAL SUPPL < *> $220.79" 131457 11/16/92 $156.77 BEST LOCK OF MPLS REPAIR PARTS 031474 CITY HALL GENE REPAIR PARTS 4273 < *> $156.77* 131458 11/16/92 $4,454.76 BFI OF MN INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 921000 -1 50TH STREET RU PROF SERVICES < *> $4,454.76* 131459 11/16/92 $95.29 BISHOP, JOHN GENERAL SUPPLIES 102992 CENTENNIAL LAK GENERAL SUPPL < *> $95.29* 131460 11/16/92 $69.00 BLEDSOE, SARA AC INSTRUCTOR 110292 ART CENTER ADM ADVERT PERSON < *> $69.00* 131461 11/16/92 $100.00 BLOOD DAVID PERSONAL SERVICES DECEMBER RESERVE PROGRA PERS SERVICES < *> $100.00* 131462 11/16/92 $127.20 BLOOMINGTON RENTAL C EQUIPMENT RENTAL 01 -06668 BUILDING MAINT EQUIP RENTAL 3712 < *> $127.20* 131463 11/16/92 BORLAND INTERNATIONA GENERAL SUPPLIES 31991930 CENT SVC GENER GENERAL SUPPL 4216 * $63.20 * 131464 11/16/92 $16.29 BOYER TRUCKS REPAIR PARTS 169372 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4679 11/16/92 $116.31 BOYER TRUCKS REPAIR PARTS 170007 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4241 11/16/92 - $215.83, BOYER TRUCKS REPAIR PARTS 162154CM EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 3801 11/16/92 $30,241.50 BOYER TRUCKS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 3008S EQUIPMENT REPL EQUIP REPLACE 1768 11/16/92 $30,241.50 BOYER TRUCKS MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT 30085 UTILITY PROG MACH. & EQUIP 11/16/92 $15.63 BOYER TRUCKS REPAIR PARTS 173209 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4501 11/16/92 $137.60 BOYER TRUCKS REPAIR PARTS 174358 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4459 11/16/92 $697.27 BOYER TRUCKS REPAIR PARTS 174284 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4455 < *> $61,250.27* 131465 11/16/92 $250.00 BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE MEN'S CLUB 311597 ADMINISTRATION MEN'S CLUB 4413 < *> $250.00* 131466 11/16/92 $57.69 BRASK, JAY UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 110492 POLICE DEPT. G UNIF ALLOW < *> $57.69* 131467 11/16/92 $173.18 BROCK WHITE GENERAL SUPPLIES 58822701 BUILDING MAINT GENERAL SUPPL 4495 < *> $173.18* 131468 11/16/92 $73.50 BROCKWAY, MAUREEN ART WORK SOLD 102392 ART CNTR PROG RETAIL SALES < *> $73.50* 131469 11/16/92 $192.50 BROOKS, DARLENE ART WORK SOLD 102392 ART CNTR PROG RETAIL SALES < *> $192.50* 131470 11/16/92 $360.00 BRYANT, BETSY ART CENTER INSTRUCTOR 100292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES 11/16/92 $30.00 BRYANT, BETSY PT MAINT AC 100292 ART CENTER BLD SALARIES TEMP < *> $390.00* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 4 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------=----------------------------------------------------- 131471 11/16/92 $125.00 BUDAS, STEVE PERFORM EDINBOROUGH 112792 ADMINISTRATION PRO SVC OTHER < *> $125.00* 131472 11/16/92 $33.98 BUREAU OF BUSINESS P ADVERTISING PERSONNEL 48116918 CENT SVC GENER ADVERT PERSON , < *> $33.98* 131473 11/16/92 $18.24 BURNETT REALTY 4330 FRANCE AVE S REF 110592 UTILITY PROG ACCOUNTS REC. <*> $18.24* 131474 11/16/92 $100.00 BUTLER GEORGE PERSONAL SERVICES DECEMBER RESERVE PROGRA PERS SERVICES < *> $100.00* 131475 11/16/92 $63,735.33 C.S. MCCROSSAN CONST PAYMENT 92 -8 #3 STREET IMPROV. CIP < *> $63,735.33* 131476 11/16/92 $137.20 CALLAHAN,FRAN MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 110492 PUBLIC HEALTH MILEAGE < *> $137.20* 131477 11/16/92 $46.03 CARLSON. DAVID CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 110592 POLICE DEPT. G CONF & SCHOOL < *> $46.03* 131478 11/16/92 $165.00 CARMICHAEL, TARA AC INSTRUCTOR 110292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES < *> $165.00* 131479 11/16/92 $250.06 CATCO ACCESSORIES 303461 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 4423 11/16/92 $364.50 CATCO ACCESSORIES 303396 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 4359 11/16/92 $75.62 CATCO ACCESSORIES 303712 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 4453 11/16/92 $256.08 CATCO ACCESSORIES 303692 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 4453 11/16/92 $213.52 CATCO ACCESSORIES 303907 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 4452 11/16/92 $289.67 CATCO ACCESSORIES 303883 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 4452 11/16/92 - $56.98 CATCO REPAIR PARTS 3034653 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4453 11/16/92 $55.34 CATCO REPAIR PARTS 304385 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4612 < *> $1,447.81* 131480 11/16/92 $83.75 CELLULAR ONE ACCT # 025499262 102192/P PUMP & LIFT ST GENERAL SUPPL < *> $83.75* 131481 11/16/92 $361.20 CHEMLAWN WEED SPRAY SEPT ' GENERAL TURF C WEED SPRAY < *> $361.20* 131482 11/16/92 $35.00 CITY & STATE DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 110992 ADMINISTRATION DUES & SUBSCR < *> $35.00* 131483 11/16/92 $64.00 CITY BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BE OCT 50TH 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS BE 11/16/92 $462.65 CITY BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BE OCT YORK YORK SELLING CST OF GDS BE 11/16/92 $91.20 CITY BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BE OCT VERN VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS BE < *> $617.85* 131484 11/16/92 $31,976.00 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 15765 PUBLIC HEALTH PROF SERVICES < *> $31,976.00* 131485 11/16/92 $13.50 CITYWIDE WINDOW SERV CONTRACTED REPAIRS 37238 50TH ST OCCUPA CONTR REPAIRS 11/16/92 $13.50 CITYWIDE WINDOW SERV CONTRACTED REPAIRS 37239 YORK OCCUPANCY CONTR REPAIRS 11/16/92 $13.50 CITYWIDE WINDOW SERV CONTRACTED REPAIRS 37240 VERNON OCCUPAN CONTR REPAIRS < *> $40.50* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, AOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 5 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131486 11/16/92 $233.26 CLEAN -FLO LAB PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 6247 LAKES & PONDS PROF SERVICES < *> $233.26* 131487 11/16/92 $665.80 COCA COLA BOTTLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT VERN VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $207.25 COCA COLA BOTTLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT 50TH 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $250.59 COCA COLA BOTTLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT YORK YORK SELLING CST OF GDS MI < *> $1,123.64* 131488 11/16/92 $295.77 COMPRESSED AIR & EQU GENERAL SUPPLIES 33298 FIRE DEPT. GEN GENERAL SUPPL 3755 < *> $295.77* 131489 11/16/92 $60.00 CONNOLLY, BOB CARICATURES DEMO EDIN 112792 ADMINISTRATION PRO SVC OTHER < *> $60.00* 131490 11/16/92 $380.00 COURTNEY, C WAYNE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 102792 ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES < *> $380.00* 131491 11/16/92 $46.20 CRABB, KATY ART WORK SOLD 102392 ART CNTR PROG RETAIL SALES < *> $46.20* 131492 11/16/92 $360.63 CREATIVE IMAGES ON R PRINTING 01566 ARENA ADMINIST PRINTING 4230 < *> $360.63* 131493 11/16/92 $1,386.67 CRIMMINS TIMOTHY J M PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DECEMBER FIRE DEPT. GEN PROF SERVICES < *> $1,386.67* 131494 11/16/92 $69.00 CRONSTROMS MECHANICAL PERMITS 110992 GENERAL FD PRO MECHAN PERMIT < *> $69.00* 131495 11/16/92 $92.45 CSI CONTRACTED REPAIRS 18672 FIRE DEPT. GEN CONTR REPAIRS 8893 < *> $92.45* 131496 11/16/92 $100.00 CULLIGAN, MOLLY PERFORM EDINBOROUGH 1 112892 ADMINISTRATION PRO SVC OTHER < *> $100.00* 131497 11/16/92 $114.91 CUSHMAN MOTOR CO. REPAIR PARTS 56393 MAINT OF COORS REPAIR PARTS 4218 11/16/92 $1,473.13 CUSHMAN MOTOR CO. REPAIR PARTS 56394 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4237 11/16/92 $28.92 CUSHMAN MOTOR CO. REPAIR PARTS 56465 MAINT OF COURS REPAIR PARTS 4313 < *> $1,616.96* 131498 11/16/92 $107.19 D.C. HEY CO. GENERAL SUPPLIES .76128A ART CENTER ADM GENERAL SUPPL 4464 < *> $107.19* 131499 11/16/92 $135.00 DAN G JOHNSON PLBG CONTRACTED REPAIRS 100192 FIRE DEPT. GEN CONTR REPAIRS 3737 < *> $135.00* 131500 11/16/92 $150.80 DAVIDSEN DIST. INC. COST OF GOODS SOLD BE OCT YORK YORK SELLING CST OF GDS BE < *> $150.80* 131501 11/16/92 $89.27 DAVIES WATER EQUIP REPAIR PARTS 32919 DISTRIBUTION REPAIR PARTS 4354 11/16/92 $834.59 DAVIES WATER EQUIP REPAIR PARTS 33009 DISTRIBUTION REPAIR PARTS 4363 < *> $923.86* 131502 11/16/92 $838.80 DCA INC HOSPITALIZATION 51998 CENT SVC GENER HOSPITALIZATI < *> $838.80* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 6 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. 6. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131503 11/16/92 $186.31 DELEGARD TOOL CO. GENERAL SUPPLIES 83303 CENTENNIAL LAK GENERAL SUPPL 4323 < *> $186.31* 131504 11/16/92 $5:14 DEPENDABLE COURIER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 216449 ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES < *> $5.14* 131505 11/16/92 $996.50 DICKER, TOBIE ART CENTER INSTRUCTOR 110292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES 11/16/92 $132.00 DICKER, TOBIE PT MAINT /AC 110292 ART CENTER BLD SALARIES TEMP < *> $1,128.50* 131506 11/16/92 $426.90 DIESEL COMPONENTS REPAIR PARTS 60790 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4433 < *> $426.90* 131507 11/16/92 $192.00 DIETRICHSON, BILL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 11292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES < *> $192.00* 131508 11/16/92 $80.94 DISPATCH COMM /MN SERVICE CONTRACTS EQU 23268 CENTENNIAL LAK SVC CONTR EQU < *> $80.94* 131509 11/16/92 $720.00 DORADUS CORP _ EQUIPMENT- REPLACEMENT 0920714 CIVIL DEFENSE EQUIP REPLACE < *> $720.00* 131510 11/16/92 $2,640.00 DORSEY & WHITNEY CONSTR. IN PROGRESS 102292 GC CIP CIP 11/16/92 120,911.64 DORSEY & WHITNEY PROFESSIONAL SERV - L 295803 LEGAL SERVICES PRO SVC - LEG < *> $23,551.64* 131511 11/16/92 $66.03 EAGLE WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 625674 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $87.32 EAGLE WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 625676 YORK SELLING CST OF GDS MI < *> $153.35* 131512 11/16/92 $445.38 EARL F. ANDERSON SIGNS & POSTS 119352 STREET NAME SI SIGNS & POSTS 4429 11/16/92 $112.72 EARL F. ANDERSON REPAIR PARTS 119792 PW BUILDING REPAIR PARTS 4504 11/16/92 $495.00 EARL F. ANDERSON PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 120027 PATHS & HARD S PROF SERVICES 2044 < *> $1,053.10* 131513 11/16/92 $293.80 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT VERN VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $7,476.45 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COST OF GOODS SOLD BE OCT VERN VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS BE 11/16/92 $3,046.45 EAST.SIDE BEVERAGE COST OF GOODS SOLD.BE'OCT 50TH 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS BE 11/16/92 $101.70 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT 50TH 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $8,396.76 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COST OF GOODS SOLD BE OCT YORK YORK SELLING CST OF GDS BE 11/16/92 $305.10 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT YORK YORK SELLING CST OF GDS MI < *> $19,620.26* 131514 11/16/92 $23.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS COST OF,GOODS SOLD MI 48467 VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $174.55 ED PHILLIPS & SONS COST OF.GOODS SOLD BE 48468 VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS BE 11/16/92 $40.00 ED PHILLIPS & SONS COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 48463 YORK SELLING CST OF GDS BE 11/16/92 $43.44 ED PHILLIPS & SONS COST-OF GOODS SOLD MI 48565 YORK SELLING CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $161.31 -. ED PHILLIPS & SONS COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 50855 VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS BE < *> $442.30* 131515 11/16/92 $50.00 EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNI SERVICES EDIBNOROUGH 120692 ADMINISTRATION PRO SVC OTHER < *> $50.00* 131516 11/16/92 $515.00 EDINA CHAM OF COM PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 110192 ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES < *> $515.00* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, KOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 7 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131517 11/16/92 $30.00 EDINA CHAM OF COM MEETING EXPENSE 110392 ADMINISTRATION MEETING EXPEN < *> $30.00* 131518 11/16/92 $36.00 FACILITIES GROUP PAINT 101992 BUILDING & GRO PAINT < *> $36.00* 131519 11/16/92 $388.00 FETN TRAINING AIDS 89813 FIRE DEPT. GEN TRAINING AIDS 3739 < *> $388.00* 131520 11/16/92 $25.00 FINE,AGNES ISUAL ARTS 11/17 111792 ADMINISTRATION PRO SVC OTHER < *> $25.00* 131521 11/16/92 $3,358.00 FRANK B HALL & CO INSURANCE 090522 CENT SVC GENER INSURANCE < *> $3,358.00* 131522 11/16/92 $61.16 G & K SERVICES LAUNDRY 102392/E CENTENNIAL LAK LAUNDRY 11/16/92 $98.84 G & K SERVICES LAUNDRY 102392 ARENA BLDG /GRO LAUNDRY 11/16/92 $771.43 G & K SERVICES LAUNDRY 102392 GENERAL MAINT LAUNDRY 11/16/92 $382.32 G & K SERVICES LAUNDRY 102392 PUMP & LIFT ST LAUNDRY 11/16/92 $343.88 G & K SERVICES LAUNDRY 102392 EQUIPMENT OPER LAUNDRY 11/16/92 $532.64 G & K SERVICES LAUNDRY 102392 BUILDING MAINT LAUNDRY 11/16/92 $309.63 G & K SERVICES LAUNDRY 102392 PW BUILDING LAUNDRY < *> $2,499.90* 131523 11/16/92 $5,335.00 G.L. CONTRACTING INC CONTRACTED REPAIRS 29398 GENERAL STORM CONTR REPAIRS 4189 < *> $5,335.00* 131524 11/16/92 $916.50 GEREBI, LIZ SKATING INSTRUCTOR /ED 110692 ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES < *> $916.50* 131525 11/16/92 $300.00 GEREBI, NICK PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 102792 ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES < *> $300.00* 131526 11/16/92 $185,680.62 GLENN REHBEIN EXCAVA CONSTR. IN PROGRESS 92 -11 #1 GC CIP CIP < *> $185,680.62* 131527 11/16/92 $30.00 GOLDEN VALLEY ORCHES SERVICES EDINBOROUGH 112292 ADMINISTRATION PRO SVC OTHER < *> $30.00* 131528 11/16/92 $635.00 GOPHER STATE 1 CALL GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 2090219 SUPERV. & OVRH GOPHER STATE < *> $635.00* 131529 11/16/92 $288.00 GRAPP, JEAN AC INSTRUCTOR 110292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES < *> $288.00* 131530 11/16/92 $107.50 GRAY, CAROL AC INSTRUCTOR 110292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES < *> $107.50* 131531 11/16/92 $115.70 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO. GENERAL SUPPLIES 104 -5446 BUILDING MAINT GENERAL SUPPL 4185 < *> $115.70* 131532 11/16/92 $118.30 GRAYBOW DANIELS -PLYM REPAIR PARTS 76959 CITY HALL GENE REPAIR PARTS 4337 11/16/92 $96.90 GRAYBOW DANIELS -PLYM GENERAL SUPPLIES 76960 ART CENTER BLD GENERAL SUPPL 4337 11/16/92 $84.20 GRAYBOW DANIELS -PLYM GENERAL SUPPLIES 79206 ART CENTER BLD GENERAL SUPPL 4337 11/16/92 $188.91 GRAYBOW DANIELS -PLYM REPAIR PARTS 81670 PW BUILDING REPAIR PARTS 4345 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 8 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ <*> $488.31* 131533 11/16/92 $679.50 GUST, MARGARET AC INSTRUCTOR 110292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES 11/16/92 $66.50 GUST, MARGARET OFFICE ADM /AC 110292 ART CENTER ADM SALARIES TEMP < *> $746.00* 131534 11/16/92 $25.00 GUST, MARGARET VISUAL ARTS EDINBOROU 112992 ADMINISTRATION PRO SVC OTHER < *> $25.00* 131535 11/16/92 $1,309.52 H &L MESABI ACCESSORIES 021207 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 3695 11/16/92 $1,162.40 H &L MESABI ACCESSORIES 021234 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 4267 11/16/92 $1,251.59 H &L MESABI ACCESSORIES 021269 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 3695 11/16/92 $577.06 H &L MESABI ACCESSORIES 021342 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 3695 < *> $4,300.57* 131536 11/16/92 $30.00 HALL, MARILYN FACE PAINTING /EDINBOR 112792 ADMINISTRATION PRO SVC OTHER < *> $30.00* 131537 11/16/92 $508.30 HALLMAN LUBRICANTS 140185 EQUIPMENT OPER LUBRICANTS 4203 11/16/92 $1,431.54 HALLMAN LUBRICANTS 141447 EQUIPMENT OPER LUBRICANTS 4348 < *> $1,939.84* 131538 11/16/92 $30.00 HALVORSON, JIM LICENSES & PERMITS 110392 TRAINING LIC & PERMITS < *> $30.00* 131539 11/16/92 $7,554.00 HARRIS HOMEYER CO. INSURANCE 102592 CENT SVC GENER INSURANCE 11/16/92 $32,490.00 HARRIS HOMEYER CO. INSURANCE 102592 CENT SVC GENER INSURANCE 11/16/92 $10,594.00 HARRIS HOMEYER CO. INSURANCE 102592 CENT SVC GENER INSURANCE < *> $50,638.00* 131540 11/16/92 $272.00 HAYWA, PHYLLIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 110292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES < *> $272.00* 131541 11/16/92 $180.00 HEIM, HARRY AC INSTRUCTOR 110292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES < *> $180.00* 131542 11/16/92 $163.18 HEIMARK FOODS COST OF GOODS SOLD FO 102892 GRILL CST OF GD F00 < *> $163.18* 131543 11/16/92 $140.20 HENNEPIN COUNTY COMM FIRST AID SUPPLIES 102692 FIRE DEPT. GEN FIRST AID SUP < *> $140.20* 131544 11/16/92 $34.00 HENNEPIN COUNTY PUBL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 103092 CDBG PROG PROF SERVICES < *> $34.00* 131545 11/16/92 $5,504.26 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREA BOARD & ROOM PRISONER 000843 LEGAL SERVICES BRD & RM PRIS < *> $5,504.26* 131546 11/16/92 $143.80 HENNEPIN TECHNICAL C CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 033644 FIRE DEPT. GEN CONF & SCHOOL 3291 < *> $143.80* 131547 11/16/92 $218.93 HERKAL,HOWARD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 110992 ELECTION PROF SERVICES 11/16/92 $12.38 HERKAL,HOWARD MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 110992 ELECTION MILEAGE < *> $231.31* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, KOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 9 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131548 11/16/92 $36.96 HINTON, LAURA MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 110992 PARK ADMIN. MILEAGE < *> $36.96* 131549 11/16/92 $50.48 HINTON, LAURA GENERAL SUPPLIES 1109 PLAYGROUND & T GENERAL SUPPL < *> $50.48* 131550 11/16/92 $476.59 HIRSHFIELD'S PAINT M REPAIR PARTS 24981 BUILDING MAINT REPAIR PARTS 4444 < *> $476.59* 131551 11/16/92 $57.75 HOBART CORP CONTRACTED REPAIRS 083677 GRILL CONTR REPAIRS 4412 < *> $57.75* 131552 11/16/92 $100.00 HOFFMAN - WILLIAM PERSONAL SERVICES DECEMBER RESERVE PROGRA PERS SERVICES < *> $100.00* 131553 11/16/92 $640.00 HORWATH, TOM PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 110392 TREES & MAINTE PROF SERVICES < *> $640.00* 131554 11/16/92 $2,318.61 HYDRO SUPPLY CO INVENTORY WATER METER 0005179 UTILITY PROG INVENTORY WAT 8536 < *> $2,318.61* 131555 11/16/92 $509.18 INLANDER STEINDLER P GENERAL SUPPLIES 40003399 LITTER REMOVAL GENERAL SUPPL 4382 < *> $509.18* 131556 11/16/92 $660.00 INTERNATIONAL CITY /C DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 259439 ADMINISTRATION DUES & SUBSCR 11/16/92 $239.63 INTERNATIONAL CITY /C DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 259436 ADMINISTRATION DUES & SUBSCR < *> $899.63* 131557 11/16/92 $225.00 ISIA DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 035322 ARENA ADMINIST DUES & SUBSCR < *> $225.00* 131558 11/16/92 $45.41 J & W INSTRUMENTS IN GENERAL SUPPLIES 062910 PUMP & LIFT ST GENERAL SUPPL 4331 < *> $45.41* 131559 11/16/92 $555.00 J THOMAS NELSON AC INSTRUCTOR 110292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES < *> $555.00* 131560 11/16/92 $18.00 JAHR, NEIL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 110392 LIQUOR 50TH ST PROF SERVICES < *> $18.00* 131561 11/16/92 $100.00 JAMES, WILLIAM F PERSONAL SERVICES DECEMBER RESERVE PROGRA PERS SERVICES < *> $100.00* 131562 11/16/92 $989.00 JAMIESON AND ASSOCIA PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 92503 ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES < *> $989.00* 131563 11/16/92 $40.00 JANET CANTON MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 110992 FINANCE MILEAGE < *> $40.00* 131564 11/16/92 $40.66 JANY, EDWARDO CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 110992 POLICE DEPT. G CONF & SCHOOL < *> $40.66* 131566 11/16/92 $71.69 JERRYS HARDWARE REPAIR PARTS OCT CITY HALL GENE REPAIR PARTS 11/16/92 $319.50 JERRYS HARDWARE REPAIR PARTS OCT PW BUILDING REPAIR PARTS 11/16/92 $548.74 JERRYS HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES OCT BUILDING & GRO GENERAL SUPPL COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 10 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. 8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131566 11/16/92 $102.41 JERRYS HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES OCT CENTENNIAL LAK GENERAL SUPPL 11/16/92 $28.65 JERRYS HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES OCT GUN RANGE GENERAL SUPPL 11/16/92 $364.58 JERRYS HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES OCT BUILDING MAINT GENERAL-SUPPL 11/16/92 $107.02 JERRYS HARDWARE DUE FROM HRA OCT GENERAL FD PRO DUE FROM HRA 11/16/92 $89.08 JERRYS HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES OCT PUMP & LIFT ST GENERAL SUPPL 11/16/92 $54.26 JERRYS HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES OCT EQUIPMENT OPER GENERAL SUPPL 11/16/92 $17.48 JERRYS HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES OCT GENERAL MAINT GENERAL SUPPL 11/16/92 $28.27 JERRYS HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES OCT ADMINISTRATION GENERAL SUPPL 11/16/92 $21.71 JERRYS HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES OCT ST LIGHTING OR GENERAL SUPPL 11/16/92 $111.33 JERRYS HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES OCT FIRE DEPT. GEN GENERAL SUPPL 11/16/92 $28.94 JERRYS HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES OCT POLICE DEPT. G GENERAL SUPPL 11/16/92 $24.92 JERRYS HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES OCT ENGINEERING GE GENERAL SUPPL 11/16/92 $37.26 JERRYS HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES OCT PW BUILDING GENERAL SUPPL 11/16/92 $3.58 JERRYS HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES OCT STREET NAME SI GENERAL SUPPL 11/16/92 $42.18 JERRYS HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES OCT RECYCLING GENERAL SUPPL < *> $2,001.60* 131567 11/16/92 $101.03 JERRYS PRINTING PRINTING C12042 COMMUNICATIONS PRINTING 11/16/92 $93.93 JERRYS PRINTING PRINTING C13483 ART CENTER ADM PRINTING 4308 < *> $194.96* 131568 11/16/92 $100.00 JOHNSON WALTER PERSONAL SERVICES DECEMBER RESERVE PROGRA PERS SERVICES < *> $100.00* 131569 11/16/92 $45.99 JOHNSON WINE CO. COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 7894736 YORK SELLING CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $413.05 JOHNSON WINE CO. COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 7923667 VERNON SELLING CST OF GO WIN 11/16/92 $100.36 JOHNSON WINE CO. COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 7923634 VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS MI < *> $559.40* 131570 11/16/92 $24.65 JOHNSON, NAOMI GENERAL SUPPLIES 110292 ART SUPPLY GIF GENERAL SUPPL 11/16/92 $34.54 JOHNSON, NAOMI POSTAGE 110292 ART CENTER ADM POSTAGE 11/16/92 $67.23 JOHNSON, NAOMI CRAFT SUPPLIES 110292 ART CENTER ADM CRAFT SUPPLIE 11/16/92 $22.99 JOHNSON, NAOMI GENERAL SUPPLIES 110292 ART CENTER BLD GENERAL SUPPL 11/16/92 $7.42 JOHNSON, NAOMI OFFICE SUPPLIES 110292 ART CENTER ADM OFFICE SUPPLI < *> $156.83* 131571 11/16/92 $127.50 JONES, JENNIFER SKATING INSTRUCTOR /ED 110492 ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES < *> $127.50* 131572 11/16/92 $391.40 KELLY SERVICES INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 43383538 ELECTION PROF SERVICES < *> $391.40* 131573 11/16/92 $51.56 KENNETH ROSLAND MEETING EXPENSE 110892 ADMINISTRATION MEETING EXPEN < *> $51.56* 131575 11/16/92 $46.39 KNOX COMM CREDIT LUMBER 217 -0280 BUILDING MAINT LUMBER 11/16/92 - $71.44 KNOX COMM CREDIT LUMBER 378196 BUILDING MAINT LUMBER 11/16/92 $90.78 KNOX COMM CREDIT GENERAL SUPPLIES 034037 GENERAL MAINT GENERAL SUPPL 4236 11/16/92 $41.74 KNOX COMM CREDIT GENERAL SUPPLIES 034175 STREET RENOVAT GENERAL SUPPL 4260 11/16/92 $18.47 KNOX COMM CREDIT LUMBER .034649 BUILDING MAINT LUMBER 4330 11/16/92 $25.09 KNOX COMM CREDIT REPAIR PARTS 034704 BUILDING MAINT REPAIR PARTS 4334 11/16/92 $40.45 KNOX COMM CREDIT LUMBER 034864 BUILDING MAINT LUMBER 4324 11/16/92 $12.08 KNOX COMM CREDIT GENERAL SUPPLIES 034971 MAINT OF COORS GENERAL SUPPL 4315 11/16/92 $19.67 KNOX COMM CREDIT GENERAL SUPPLIES 035390 BUILDING MAINT GENERAL SUPPL 4352 11/16/92 $38.00 KNOX COMM CREDIT LUMBER 035625 BUILDING MAINT LUMBER 4431 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 11 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131575 11/16/92 $78.51 KNOX COMM CREDIT LUMBER 035486 BUILDING MAINT LUMBER 4366 11/16/92 $28.02 KNOX COMM CREDIT TOOLS 035703 BUILDING MAINT TOOLS 4445 11/16/92 $109.59 KNOX COMM CREDIT LUMBER 035836 BUILDING MAINT LUMBER 4449 11/16/92 $21.19 KNOX COMM CREDIT GENERAL SUPPLIES 036074 BUILDING MAINT GENERAL SUPPL 4455 11/16/92 $101.11 KNOX COMM CREDIT GENERAL SUPPLIES 036138 BUILDING MAINT GENERAL SUPPL 4485 11/16/92 $85.85 KNOX COMM CREDIT LUMBER 036135 BUILDING MAINT LUMBER 4485 11/16/92 $22.12 KNOX COMM CREDIT LUMBER 086213 BUILDING MAINT LUMBER 4489 11/16/92 $249.14 KNOX COMM CREDIT GENERAL SUPPLIES 036364 BUILDING MAINT GENERAL SUPPL 4499 11/16/92 $234.30 KNOX COMM CREDIT GENERAL SUPPLIES 036485 BUILDING MAINT GENERAL SUPPL 4499 11/16/92 $234.30 KNOX COMM CREDIT GENERAL SUPPLIES 036486 BUILDING MAINT GENERAL SUPPL 4499 11/16/92 $55.83 KNOX COMM CREDIT GENERAL SUPPLIES 036359 BUILDING MAINT GENERAL SUPPL 4498 11/16/92 $64.78 KNOX COMM CREDIT GENERAL SUPPLIES 036549 MAINT OF COURS GENERAL SUPPL 4559 <•> $1,625.97• 131576 11/16/92 $248.75 KOKESH ATHLETIC COST OF GOODS SOLD FO 67386 ARENA CONCESSI CST OF GD F00 4403 < ■> $248.75" 131577 11/16/92 $31.19 KONTERS, VIK CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 110692 POLICE DEPT. G CONF & SCHOOL <•> $31.19" 131578 11/16/92 $30.00 KRONICK, STANLEY JURIED SHOW REFUND 110292 ART CNTR PROG DONATIONS < +> $30.00' 131579 11/16/92 $15.95 KUETHER DIST. CO. COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT 50TH 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $2,397.10 KUETHER DIST. CO. COST OF GOODS SOLD BE OCT 50TH 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS BE 11/16/92 $5,822.40 KUETHER DIST. CO. COST OF GOODS SOLD BE OCT YORK YORK SELLING CST OF GDS BE <•> $8,235.45" 131580 11/16/92 $1,070.37 LANIER WORLDWIDE INC EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 02605139 PARK ADMIN. EQUIP REPLACE 4381 <•> $1,070.37• 131581 11/16/92 $42.50 LARSEN, PHILIP CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 103092 POLICE DEPT. G CONF & SCHOOL < ■> $42.50" 131582 11/16/92 $35.00 LASER QUIPT SERVICE CONTRACTS EQU 72062 CENT SVC GENER SVC CONTR EQU < *> $35.00" 131583 11/16/92 $131.11 LAWSON PRODUCTS GENERAL SUPPLIES 1659974 DISTRIBUTION GENERAL SUPPL 7929 11/16/92 $299.12 LAWSON PRODUCTS REPAIR PARTS 1836167 BUILDING & GRO REPAIR PARTS 4114 11/16/92 $302.04 LAWSON PRODUCTS ACCESSORIES 1836170 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 4140 11/16/92 $391.74 LAWSON PRODUCTS REPAIR PARTS 1836168 PUMP & LIFT ST REPAIR PARTS 4136 11/16/92 $319.18 LAWSON PRODUCTS ACCESSORIES 1836169 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 4137 11/16/92 $34.88 LAWSON PRODUCTS REPAIR PARTS 1837557 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4261 11/16/92 $222.92 LAWSON PRODUCTS GENERAL SUPPLIES 1839241 BUILDING MAINT GENERAL SUPPL 4257 11/16/92 $459.59 LAWSON PRODUCTS REPAIR PARTS 1840204 PUMP & LIFT ST REPAIR PARTS 4258 11/16/92 $343.88 LAWSON PRODUCTS GENERAL SUPPLIES 1840207 GENERAL MAINT GENERAL SUPPL 4261 11/16/92 $241.44 LAWSON PRODUCTS GENERAL SUPPLIES 1840205 STREET NAME SI GENERAL SUPPL 4259 11/16/92 $476.30 LAWSON PRODUCTS ACCESSORIES 1840206 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 4256 11/16/92 $282.36 LAWSON PRODUCTS REPAIR PARTS 1843704 BUILDING & ORO REPAIR PARTS 4027 11/16/92 $381.25 LAWSON PRODUCTS TOOLS 1843581 FIRE DEPT. GEN TOOLS 4276 <•> $3,885.81" 131584 11/16/92 $800.00 LAYNE MINNESOTA CO. CONTRACTED REPAIRS 18350 PUMP & LIFT ST CONTR REPAIRS 4347 <•> $800.00" COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 12 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131 585 11/16/92 $24.32 LEEF BROS. INC. LAUNDRY 103192 MAINT OF COURS LAUNDRY * 131586 11/16/92 $180.00 LEGEROS, NICK AC INSTRUCTOR 110292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES < *> $180.00* 13587 11/16/92 $284.00* LEMET, TERRA SKATING INSTRUCTOR /ED 110492 ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES 131588 11/16/92 $31.26 LINHOFF ADVERTISING OTHER 218695 ART CENTER ADM ADVERT OTHER 4306 < *> $31.26* 131589 11/16/92 $394.85 LITTLE FALLS MACH ACCESSORIES 7758 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 4249 < *> $394.85" 131590 11/16/92 $754.40 LOCATOR & MONITOR SA CONTRACTED REPAIRS 02500 PUMP & LIFT ST CONTR REPAIRS 4497 < *> $754.40" 131591 11/16/92 $213.00 LONG ISLAND PRODUCTI TRAINING AIDS 27479 FIRE DEPT. GEN TRAINING AIDS 4538 11/16/92 $218.00 LONG ISLAND PRODUC•TI PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 28332 CIVIL DEFENSE PROF SERVICES 4638 <•> $431.00" 131592 11/16/92 $530.96 M AMUNDSON COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 16083 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $341.08 M AMUNDSON COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 16077 VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $505.00 M AMUNDSON COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 16159 YORK SELLING CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $151.20 M AMUNDSON COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 16231 VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $339.80 M AMUNDSON COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 16283 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $341.08 M AMUNDSON COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 16318 YORK SELLING CST OF GDS MI <•> $2,209.12" 131593 11/16/92 $707.27 MAC QUEEN EQUIP INC. REPAIR PARTS 28297 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4488 11/16/92 $564.45 MAC QUEEN EQUIP INC. BROOMS 28358 STREET CLEANIN BROOMS 4585 <+> $1,271.72" 131594 11/16/92 $360.00 MACKERMAN, DANNY AC INSTRUCTOR 110292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES 00 * 131595 11/16/92 $250.00 MADSON,JOHN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 102792 ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES < *> $250.00" 131596 11/16/92 $45.00 MAKELA, BARB AC INSTRUCTOR 110292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES 11/16/92 $146.00 MAKELA, BARB CRAFT SUPPLIES /ART CE 08611 ART CENTER ADM CRAFT SUPPLIE <•> $191.00* 131597 11/16/92 $62.30 MARGL, LINDA J MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 110692 FINANCE MILEAGE < *> $62.30* 131598 11/16/92 $30.00 MARIE, ROBIN ART DEMO EDINBOROUGH 112792 ADMINISTRATION PRO SVC OTHER < *> $30.00* 131599 11/16/92 $7,699.30 MARK VII SALES COST OF GOODS SOLD BE OCT YORK YORK SELLING CST OF GDS BE 11/16/92 $170.40 MARK VII SALES COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT YORK YORK SELLING CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $216.10 MARK VII SALES COST OF GOODS SOLD BE OCT GC GRILL CST OF GDS BE 11/16/92 $2,892.90 MARK VII SALES COST OF GOODS SOLD BE OCT 50TH 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS BE 11/16/92 $22.60 MARK VII SALES COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT 50TH 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS MI COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, KOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 13 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. • ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131599 11/16/92 $209.50 MARK VII SALES COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT VERN VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $7,790.45 MARK VII SALES COST OF GOODS SOLD BE OCT VERN VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS BE <*> $19,001.25* 131600 11/16/92 $25.00 MAUMA DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 102792 COMMUNICATIONS DUES & SUBSCR 11/16/92 $25.00 MAUMA DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 102792 ADMINISTRATION DUES & SUBSCR < *> $50.00* 131601 11/16/92 $245.15 MCC /MIDWEST GENERAL SUPPLIES 73635 ART CENTER BLD GENERAL SUPPL 4463 11/16/92 $180.00 MCC /MIDWEST COST OF GOODS SOLD FO 73635 ART CENTER ADM CST OF GD F00 < *> $425.15* 131602 11/16/92 $818.79 MCCAREN DESIGN TREES, FLOWERS, SHRUB 7809 BUILDING & GRO TREES FLWR SH 4291 < *> $818.79* 131603 11/16/92 $352.39 MCGUIRE AUTO SUPPLY REPAIR PARTS 110192/G MAINT OF COURS REPAIR PARTS < *> $352.39* 131604 11/16/92 $282.81 MCNEILUS STEEL GENERAL SUPPLIES 01511452 CENTENNIAL LAK GENERAL SUPPL 4253 11/16/92 $424.21 MCNEILUS STEEL GENERAL SUPPLIES 0153784 CENTENNIAL LAK GENERAL SUPPL 4350 < *> $707.02* 131605 11/16/92 $100.00 MERFELD -BERT PERSONAL SERVICES DECEMBER RESERVE PROGRA PERS SERVICES < *> $100.00* 131606 11/16/92 $477.65 MERIT SUPPLY GENERAL SUPPLIES 31340 TRAFFIC SIGNAL GENERAL SUPPL 4266 11/16/92 $302.46 MERIT SUPPLY CALCIUM CHLORIDE 31360 GENERAL MAINT CALCIUM CHLOR 4336 11/16/92 $444.90 MERIT SUPPLY CALCIUM CHLORIDE 31428 GENERAL MAINT CALCIUM CHLOR 4424 11/16/92 $198.00 MERIT SUPPLY REPAIR PARTS 31437 50TH ST OCCUPA REPAIR PARTS 4446 11/16/92 $367.32 MERIT SUPPLY CLEANING SUPPLIES 31473 BUILDING & GRO CLEANING SUPP 8873 11/16/92 $479.24 MERIT SUPPLY CLEANING SUPPLIES 31469 BUILDING & GRO CLEANING SUPP 4571 < *> $2,269.57* 131607 11/16/92 $142.40 MESSERLI & KRAMER AMBULANCE FEES 100192 GENERAL FD PRO AMBULANCE FEE < *> $142.40* 131608 11/16/92 $103.00 MESSERLI & KRAMER AMBULANCE FEES 000016 GENERAL FD PRO AMBULANCE FEE 11/16/92 $175.00 MESSERLI & KRAMER AMBULANCE FEES 000015 GENERAL FD PRO AMBULANCE FEE < *> $278.00* 131609 11/16/92 $198.33 METRO AREA PROMOTION ADVERTISING OTHER 2521 50TH ST SELLIN ADVERT OTHER 11/16/92 $198.33 METRO AREA PROMOTION ADVERTISING OTHER 2521 YORK SELLING ADVERT OTHER 11/16/92 $198.34 METRO AREA PROMOTION ADVERTISING OTHER 2521 VERNON SELLING ADVERT OTHER < *> $595.00* 131610 11/16/92 $4,158.00 METRO WASTE CONTROL BUILDING PERMITS OCTOBER GENERAL FD PRO BUILDING PERM < *> $4,158.00* 131611 11/16/92 $75.37 METZ BAKING CO COST OF GOODS SOLD FO 102492 GRILL CST OF GD FOO 9037 11/16/92 $66.41 METZ BAKING CO COST OF GOODS SOLD FO 103192 GRILL CST OF GD FOO ' < *> $141.78* 131612 11/16/92 $57.82 MID - AMERICA BUSINESS GENERAL SUPPLIES 10503 EQUIPMENT OPER GENERAL SUPPL 3820 < *> $57.82* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 14 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131613 11/16/92 $356.15 MIDWEST A011A CARE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 102692 LAKES & PONDS PROF SERVICES < *> $356.15* 131614 11/16/92 $166.91 MIDWEST ASPHALT COR. DUMPING CHARGES 2141 STREET RENOVAT DUMPING CHARG 1367 - 11/16/92 $177.52 MIDWEST ASPHALT COR. BLACKTOP 8643 GENERAL MAINT BLACKTOP 1367 11/16/92 $51.17 MIDWEST ASPHALT COR. BLACKTOP 2188 SIDEWALKS S PA BLACKTOP 11/16/92 $3,787.27 MIDWEST ASPHALT COR. BLACKTOP 8700 PATHS & HARD S BLACKTOP 11/16/92 $179.12 MIDWEST ASPHALT COR. BLACKTOP 8700 GENERAL MAINT BLACKTOP 11/16/92 ';291.99 MIDWEST ASPHALT COR. BLACKTOP 8700 DISTRIBUTION BLACKTOP < *> $4,053.98* 131615 11/16/92 $109.04 MIDWEST MACHINERY IN REPAIR PARTS 12585 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4332 11/16/92 $37.98 MIDWEST MACHINERY IN REPAIR PARTS - 12599 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4335 11/16/92 $110.27 MIDWEST MACHINERY IN REPAIR PARTS 12697 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4508 11/16/92 $29.96 MIDWEST MACHINERY IN REPAIR PARTS 12815 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4361 11/16/92 $13.86 MIDWEST MACHINERY IN REPAIR PARTS 12836 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4507 11/16/92 $29.96 MIDWEST MACHINERY IN REPAIR PARTS 12955 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4506 < *> $331.07* 131616 11/16/92 $449.59 MINNEGASCO HEAT 102392' CITY HALL GENE HEAT 11/16/92 $1,343.85 MINNEGASCO HEAT 102392 ARENA BLDG /GRO HEAT 11/16/92 $549.49 MINNEGASCO HEAT 102392 BUILDING & GRO HEAT 11/16/92 =667.14 MINNEGASCO HEAT 102992 GOLF DOME HEAT 131617 11/16/92 $80.00 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT MASTER PLBG LICENSE 102892 GENERAL(BILLIN DUES & SUBSCR < *> $80.00* 131618 11/16/92 $75.00 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT. CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 110392 ADMINISTRATION CONF & SCHOOL < *> $75.00* 131619 11/16/92 $240.00 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT TELETYPE SERVICE 92Q3176 POLICE DEPT. G TELETYPE SERV 11/16/92 $150.00 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT TELETYPE SERVICE 92Q3175 POLICE DEPT. G TELETYPE SERV < *> $390.00* 131620 11/16/92 $1,345.77 MINNESOTA DISTRIBUTI CONSTR. IN PROGRESS 024381 PARKS CIP 4021 < *> $1,345.77* 131621 11/16/92 $22.65 MINNESOTA PIPE & EQU REPAIR PARTS 3194 DISTRIBUTION REPAIR PARTS 3957 11/16/92 $142.34 MINNESOTA PIPE & EQU REPAIR PARTS 3352 DISTRIBUTION REPAIR PARTS 3957 < *> $164.99* 131622 11/16/92 $17.81 MINNESOTA TAXPAYERS GENERAL SUPPLIES UYPT9272 CITY COUNCIL GENERAL SUPPL 4573 < *> 817.81* 131623 11/16/92• $436.60 MN DEPT nr GASOLINE OCT EQUIPMENT OPER GASOLINE < *> $436.60 *. 131624 11/16/92 $2,407.00 MN STATE TREA /BLG IN BUILDING PERMITS OCT GENERAL FD PRO BUILDING PERM < *> $2,407.00* 131625 11/16/92 $114.57 MN SUBURBAN NEWS ADVERTISING LEGAL 7041 ADMINISTRATION ADVERTISING L 11/16/92 $33.50 MN SUBURBAN NEWS ADVERTISING LEGAL 7040 ADMINISTRATION ADVERTISING L 11/16/92 $13.40 MN SUBURBAN NEWS ADVERTISING LEGAL 7039 ADMINISTRATION ADVERTISING L < *> $161.47* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, IIOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 15 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # -------7---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 131626 11/16/92 $193.14 MN. BAR COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT VERN VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $129.83 MN. BAR COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT 50TH 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $495.58 MN. BAR COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT YORK YORK SELLING CST OF GDS MI < *> $818.55* 131627 11/16/92 $519.19 MN. CONWAY GENERAL SUPPLIES 23075 FIRE DEPT. GEN GENERAL SUPPL 4544 < *> $519.19* 131628 11/16/92 $93.85 MN. ELEVATOR SERVICE CONTRACTS EQU 100410 BUILDING & GRO SVC CONTR EQU <*> $93.85* 131629 11/16/92 $102.43 MN. TORO INC. REPAIR PARTS 300225 TREES & MAINTE REPAIR PARTS 4216 11/16/92 $137.38 MN. TORO INC. REPAIR PARTS 302090 MAINT OF COURS REPAIR PARTS 4398 11/16/92 $307.47 MN. TORO INC. REPAIR PARTS 304645 MAINT OF COURS REPAIR PARTS 4560 < *> $547.28* 131630 11/16/92 $230.97 MODEL STONE CONCRETE 158737 SIDEWALKS & PA CONCRETE 1369 11/16/92 $614.49 MODEL STONE CONCRETE 158735 STREET RENOVAT CONCRETE 11/16/92 $241.83 MODEL STONE CONCRETE 158736 DISTRIBUTION CONCRETE < *> $1,087.29* 131631 11/16/92 $10,000.00 MOODY INVESTORS SERV DUE FROM HRA 92 -00022 GENERAL FD PRO DUE FROM HRA < *> $10,000.00* 131632 11/16/92 $395.19 MOTOROLA INC EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT W2338448 POLICE DEPT. G EQUIP REPLACE < *> $395.19* 131633 11/16/92 $808.01 MPLS FINANCE DEPARTM WATER PURCHASED 101492 DISTRIBUTION WATER PURCHAS < *> $808.01* 131634 11/16/92 $700.00 MPLS SEWER & WATER CONTRACTED REPAIRS 030404 DISTRIBUTION CONTR REPAIRS 4426 < *> $700.00* 131635 11/16/92 $354.00 MTS NW SOUND GENERAL SUPPLIES 108267 BUILDING & GRO GENERAL SUPPL 4280 < *> $354.00* 131636 11/16/92 $53.50 MUNICILITE CO ACCESSORIES 4066 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 4340 < *> $53.50* 131637 11/16/92 $25.00 N.R.P.A. DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 110992 PARK ADMIN. DUES & SUBSCR < *> $25.00* 131638 11/16/92 $143.10 NAME BRAND SPORTS GENERAL SUPPLIES 101992 FIRE DEPT. GEN GENERAL SUPPL 3747 11/16/92 $208.95 NAME BRAND SPORTS LAUNDRY 6321 CENTENNIAL LAK LAUNDRY 11/16/92 $230.10 NAME BRAND SPORTS GENERAL SUPPLIES 6345 ARENA BLDG /GRO GENERAL SUPPL 4630 < *> $582.15* 131639 11/16/92 $93.05 NAME BRAND SPORTS UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 102792 FIRE DEPT. GEN UNIF ALLOW < *> $93.05* 131640 11/16/92 $219.50 NAPA AUTO PARTS ACCESSORIES 843813 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 4356 11/16/92 $53.24 NAPA AUTO PARTS ACCESSORIES 844601 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 4438 11/16/92 $169.65 NAPA AUTO PARTS COMMODITIES 845923 EQUIPMENT OPER COMMODITIES 4490 < *> $442.39* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 16 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131641 11/16/92 $17.15* NATIONAL CUSTOM ENTE REPAIR PARTS 22763 PW BUILDING REPAIR PARTS 4191 131642 11/16/92 $504.70 NFPA FIRE PREVENTION 749483 FIRE DEPT. GEN FIRE PREVENTI 3308 11/16/92 $504.70 NFPA FIRE PREVENTION 749484 FIRE DEPT. GEN FIRE PREVENTI 3729 11/16/92 $263.50 NFPA FIRE PREVENTION 749485 FIRE DEPT. GEN FIRE PREVENTI 3730 < *> $1,272.90* 131643 11/16/92 $118.80 NICKLOW, LIA PT MAINT /AC 110292 ART CENTER BLD SALARIES TEMP < *> $118.80* 131644 11/16/92 $100.00 NISSEN DICK PERSONAL SERVICES DECEMBER RESERVE PROGRA PERS SERVICES < *> $100.00* 131645 11/16/92 $1,974.38 NORBACK,FLORENCE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 110992 ELECTION PROF SERVICES 11/16/92 $14.85 NORBACK,FLORENCE MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 110992 ELECTION MILEAGE < *> $1,989.23* 131646 11/16/92 $529.81 NORBACK,HOWARD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 110992 ELECTION PROF SERVICES 11/16/92 $48.95 NORBACK,HOWARD MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 110992 ELECTION MILEAGE < *> $578.76* 131647 11/16/92 $2,634.78 NORTH STAR SOUND INC EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 21431 POLICE DEPT. G EQUIP REPLACE 4016 <*> $2,634.78* 131648 11/16/92 $50.75 NORTHERN AIRGAS FIRST AID SUPPLIES 953645 FIRE DEPT. GEN FIRST AID SUP 8899 11/16/92 $50.75 NORTHERN AIRGAS FIRST AID SUPPLIES 954729 FIRE DEPT. GEN FIRST AID SUP 8899 < *> $101.50* 131649 11/16/92 $314.14 NORTHERN HYDRAULICS GENERAL SUPPLIES 40160013 SNOW & ICE REM GENERAL SUPPL 4437 < *> $314.14* 131650 11/16/92 $273.60 NORTHSTAR ICE COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT VERN VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $169.80 NORTHSTAR ICE COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT 50TH 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $159.60 NORTHSTAR ICE COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT YORK YORK SELLING CST OF GDS MI < *> $603.00* 131651 11/16/92 $4,807.77 NORTHWESTERN TIRE CO TIRES & TUBES 10470 EQUIPMENT OPER TIRES & TUBES 3950 < *> $4,807.77* 131652 11/16/92 $250,000.00 NORWEST BANK MN NA DUE FROM HRA 95048 GENERAL FD PRO DUE FROM HRA 11/16/92 $16,250.00 NORWEST BANK MN NA DUE FROM HRA 95048 GENERAL FD PRO DUE FROM HRA 11/16/92 $255.00 NORWEST BANK MN NA DUE FROM HRA 95048 GENERAL FD PRO DUE FROM HRA < *> $266,505.00* 131654 11/16/92 $420.39 NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 GENERAL MAINT LIGHT & POWER 11/16/92 $700.19 NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 TRAFFIC SIGNAL LIGHT & POWER 11/16/92 $90.54• NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 PONDS & LAKES LIGHT & POWER 11/16/92 $299.52 NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 PONDS & LAKES LIGHT & POWER 11/16/92 $1,294.23 NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 FIRE DEPT. GEN LIGHT & POWER 11/16/92 $29.53 NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 CIVIL DEFENSE LIGHT & POWER 11/16/92 $2,344.11 NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 PW BUILDING LIGHT & POWER 11/16/92 $568.17 NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 ART CENTER BLD LIGHT & POWER 11/16/92 $3,044.85 NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 BUILDING MAINT LIGHT & POWER 11/16/92 $1,872.33 NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 CLUB HOUSE LIGHT & POWER COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 17 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131654 11/16/92 $6.84 NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 MAINT OF COURS LIGHT & POWER 11/16/92 $93.20 NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 POOL OPERATION LIGHT & POWER 11/16/92 $1,688.10 NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 ARENA BLDG /GRO LIGHT & POWER 11/16/92 $286.40 NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 GUN RANGE LIGHT & POWER 11/16/92 $809.60 NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 PUMP & LIFT ST LIGHT & POWER 11/16/92 $12,066.01 NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 DISTRIBUTION LIGHT & POWER 11/16/92 $509.07 NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 VERNON OCCUPAN LIGHT & POWER 11/16/92 $840.57 NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 GOLF DOME LIGHT & POWER 11/16/92 $755.97 NSP LIGHT & POWER 111692 CENTENNIAL LAK LIGHT & POWER < *> $27,719.62* 131655 11/16/92 $135.05 NW GRAPHIC SUPPLY CRAFT SUPPLIES 200755 ART CENTER ADM CRAFT SUPPLIE 4306 11/16/92 $33.48 NW GRAPHIC SUPPLY COST OF GOODS SOLD FO 200803 ART SUPPLY GIF CST OF GD FOO 4461 11/16/92 $118.20 NW GRAPHIC SUPPLY COST OF GOODS SOLD FO 201193 ART SUPPLY GIF CST OF GD F00 4469 < *> $286.73* 131656 11/16/92 $192.00 ODLAND, DOROTHY AC INSTRUCTOR 110292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES < *> $192.00* 131657 11/16/92 $16.40 OLD DUTCH FOODS COST OF GOODS SOLD FO 103092 GRILL CST OF GD F00 < *> $16.40* 131658 11/16/92 $386.60 OSWALD HOSE & ADAPTE GENERAL SUPPLIES 10412 CENTENNIAL LAK GENERAL SUPPL 4298 < *> $386.60* 131659 11/16/92 $164.90 PALEN /KIMBALL COMPAN CONTRACTED REPAIRS 26893S CLUB HOUSE CONTR REPAIRS 4415 < *> $164.90* 131660 11/16/92 $130.06 PAPER DEPOT COST OF GOODS SOLD FO 0350 018 ART SUPPLY GIF CST OF GD F00 4093 11/16/92 $127,07 PAPER DEPOT COST OF GOODS SOLD FO 0350 018 ART SUPPLY GIF CST OF GD FOO < *> $257.13* 131661 11/16/92 $92.80 PAPERDIRECT INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 52139300 COMMUNICATIONS GENERAL SUPPL < *> $92.80* 131662 11/16/92. $150.00 PARSONS, DUDLEY MAGAZINE /NEWSLETTER E AUTUMN 1 COMMUNICATIONS MAG /NEWSLET E < *> $150.00* 131663 11/16/92 $69.42 PARTS COMPANY OF AME REPAIR PARTS 970 -4074 MAINT OF COURS REPAIR PARTS 4399 < *> $69.42* 131664 11/16/92 $804.42 PAT GREER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 102792 ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES < *> $804.42* 131665 11/16/92 $27.50 PAUSTIS & SONS COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 27017 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $27.50 PAUSTIS & SONS COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 27126 VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS MI < *> $55.00* 131666 11/16/92 $218.16 PEPSI COLA BOTTLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT YORK YORK SELLING CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $128.85 PEPSI COLA BOTTLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT 50TH 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $137.95 PEPSI COLA BOTTLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT VERN VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS MI < *> $484.96* 131667 11/16/92 $20.00 PETERSON, JENNIFER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 103092 ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES < *> $20.00* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 18 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131668 11/16/92 $200.00 PETTIT, DAN REFUND /EDINBOROUGH 102992 EDINB /CL PROG RENTAL INCOME < *> $200.00* 131671 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 131672 11/16/92 131673 11/16/92 131674 11/16/92 131675 11/16/92 131676 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 131677 11/16/92 11/16/92 11/16/92 $1.62 $6.00 $43.98 $1.00 $2.61 $16.00 $16.00 $18.86 $9.18 $15.00 $19.00 $20.30 $35.04 $22.50 $3.00 $5.00 $37.52 $5.60 $6.32 $5.13 $12.00 $5.59 $28.74 $41.37 $18.04 $16.21 $44.59 $20.93 $2.88 $4.20 $484.21* $45.00 $45.00* PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PINNACLE SIGNS & GRA $140.26 PIP PRINTING $140.26* $29.90 PLUNKETTS $29.90* $3,468.28 POWER INVESTIGATIONS $3,468.28* $14,130.27 $1,826.48 $423.66 $16,380.41* $75.73 $63.85 $69.79 PRECISION LANDSCAPE PRECISION LANDSCAPE PRECISION LANDSCAPE PRIOR WINE COMPANY PRIOR WINE COMPANY PRIOR WINE COMPANY GENERAL SUPPLIES 110692 MEETING EXPENSE 110692 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 110692 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 110692 GENERAL SUPPLIES 110692 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 110692 MEETING EXPENSE 110692 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 110692 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQU 110692 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 110692 MEETING EXPENSE 110692 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 110692 GENERAL SUPPLIES 110692 DRAFTING SUPPLIES 110692 MEETING EXPENSE 110692 GENERAL SUPPLIES 110692 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 110692 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 110692 GENERAL SUPPLIES 110692 PAPER SUPPLIES 110692 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 110692 POSTAGE 110692 GENERAL SUPPLIES 110692 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 110692 GENERAL SUPPLIES 110692 GENERAL SUPPLIES 110692 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 110692 GENERAL SUPPLIES 110692 GENERAL SUPPLIES 110692 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 110692 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1375 CITY COUNCIL GENERAL SUPPL ADMINISTRATION MEETING EXPEN ADMINISTRATION MILEAGE PLANNING MILEAGE PLANNING GENERAL SUPPL FINANCE CONF & SCHOOL FINANCE MEETING EXPEN FINANCE MILEAGE ELECTION MILEAGE ASSESSING CONF & SCHOOL ASSESSING MEETING EXPEN ASSESSING MILEAGE ASSESSING GENERAL SUPPL ASSESSING DRAFTING SUPP FIRE DEPT. GEN MEETING EXPEN . FIRE DEPT. GEN GENERAL SUPPL PUBLIC HEALTH PHOTO SUPPLIE INSPECTIONS MILEAGE INSPECTIONS GENERAL SUPPL CITY HALL GENE PAPER SUPPLIE PARK ADMIN. DUES & SUBSCR PARK ADMIN. POSTAGE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL SUPPL ARENA BLDG /GRO CONTR REPAIRS PLAYGROUND & T GENERAL SUPPL SPECIAL ACTIVI GENERAL SUPPL SPECIAL ACTIVI PHOTO SUPPLIE ARENA BLDG /GRO GENERAL SUPPL LIQUOR 50TH ST GENERAL SUPPL LIQUOR YORK GE PROF SERVICES CENTENNIAL LAK GENERAL SUPPL PRINTING 11694 ADMINISTRATION PRINTING 4572 GENERAL SUPPLIES 458849 ARENA BLDG /GRO GENERAL SUPPL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 002073 LIQUOR 50TH ST PROF SERVICES 4223 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 101692 TREES & MAINTE CONTR REPAIRS CONSTR. IN PROGRESS 110592 TREES CIP CONSTR. IN PROGRESS 110592 TREES CIP COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 622296 COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 625330 COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 625332 YORK SELLING CST OF GDS MI VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS MI 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS MI COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, AOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 19 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ <*> $209.37* 131678 11/16/92 $3,761.08 PROGRESSIVE CONTRACT FINAL PAYMENT P -3 PARKING /RAMP CIP <*> $3,761.08* 131679 11/16/92 $147.80 QUICK SERV BATTERY REPAIR PARTS 27276 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4275 11/16/92 $162.56 QUICK SERV BATTERY REPAIR PARTS 28719 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4439 11/16/92 $80.83 QUICK SERV BATTERY REPAIR PARTS 29088 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4244 < *> $391.19* 131680 11/16/92 $411.32 REM SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES 01916 CENTENNIAL LAK GENERAL SUPPL 4574 11/16/92 $1,414.94 REM SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES 01879 BUILDING & GRO GENERAL SUPPL 4417 < *> $1,826.26* 131681 11/16/92 $8,666.55 REX DISTR. COST OF GOODS SOLD BE OCT YORK YORK SELLING CST OF GDS BE 11/16/92 $122.90 REX DISTR. COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT YORK YORK SELLING CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $66.75 REX DISTR. COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT 50TH 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $5,370.90 REX DISTR. COST OF GOODS SOLD BE OCT 50TH 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS BE 11/16/92 $209.50 REX DISTR. COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT VERN VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $6,692.07 REX DISTR. COST OF GOODS SOLD BE OCT VERN VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS BE < *> $21,128.67* 131682 11/16/92 $88.74 RIEGGER, PETER OR DE AMBULANCE FEES 103092 GENERAL FD PRO AMBULANCE FEE < *> $88.74" 131683 11/16/92 $30.88 RINE, DAVE CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 103092 POLICE DEPT. G CONF & SCHOOL < *> $30.88* 131684 11/16/92 $400.00 ROBERT B. HILL GENERAL SUPPLIES 50534 ARENA BLDG /GRO GENERAL SUPPL 4864 11/16/92 $157.50 ROBERT B. HILL CHEMICALS 50632 MAINT OF COURS CHEMICALS 4648 11/16/92 $38.75 ROBERT B. HILL GENERAL SUPPLIES 36661 FIRE DEPT. GEN GENERAL SUPPL 8896 < *> $596.25* 131685 11/16/92 $17.00 ROBINSON, JAMES E MEETING EXPENSE 102792 FIRE DEPT. GEN MEETING EXPEN 11/16/92 $64.86 ROBINSON. JAMES E MEETING EXPENSE 102792 FIRE DEPT. GEN MEETING EXPEN 11/16/92 $58.58 ROBINSON, JAMES E GENERAL SUPPLIES 102792 FIRE DEPT. GEN GENERAL SUPPL < *> $140.44* 131686 11/16/92 $470.71 ROLLINS OIL CO GASOLINE .902871 MAINT OF COURS GASOLINE 9379 11/16/92 $2,562.62 ROLLINS OIL CO GASOLINE 3192 EQUIPMENT OPER GASOLINE 4581 11/16/92 $3,960.80 ROLLINS OIL CO GASOLINE 3191 EQUIPMENT OPER GASOLINE 4581 < *> $6,994.13* 131687 11/16/92 $120.00 ROXANNE SEIDEL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 102792 ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES < *> $120.00* 131688 11/16/92 $1,200.00 RTW INC INSURANCE 2196 CENT SVC GENER INSURANCE < *> $1,200.00* 131689 11/16/92 $100.00 RUDOLPH, MIKAEL PERFORM EDINBOROUGH 111992 ADMINISTRATION PRO SVC OTHER < *> $100.00* 131690 11/16/92 $811.50 RUDQUIST, MONICA AC INSTRUCTOR 110292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES 11/16/92 $159.00 RUDQUIST, MONICA PT MAINT /AC 110292 ART CENTER BLD SALARIES TEMP 11/16/92 $14.00 RUDQUIST, MONICA ART WORK SOLD 110292 ART CNTR PROG RETAIL SALES COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 20 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ <*> $984.50* 131691 11/16/92 $127.71 RUGG, MICHAEL C GENERAL SUPPLIES 008807 SEWER CLEANING GENERAL SUPPL 4509 131692 11/16/92 $3,373.26 RYANS COMPANY INC REPAIR PARTS 213673 BUILDING & GRO REPAIR PARTS 4018 < *> $3,373.26* 131693 11/16/92 $75.60 SAMUELSON, RONALD MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 102892 FIRE DEPT. GEN MILEAGE < *> $75.60* 131694 11/16/92 $600.00 SATELLITE NETWORK SY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 92206 CONTINGENCIES PROF SERVICES < *> $600.00* 131695 11/16/92 $96.00 SCHMECHEL, JANE OFFICE ADM /AC 110292 ART CENTER ADM SALARIES TEMP < *> $96.00* 131696 11/16/92 $531.25 SCHMIDT, MICHAEL TARGETS 102452 GUN RANGE TARGETS 4477 11/16/92 $294.00 SCHMIDT, MICHAEL AMMUNITION 102452 GUN RANGE AMMUNITION < *> $825.25* 131697 11/16/92 $25.00 SCHWANESECK, CLAIRE AC INSTRUCTOR 110292 ART CENTER ADM ADVERT OTHER < *> $25.00* 131698 11/16/92 $100.00 SHEPARD JOHN PERSONAL SERVICES DECEMBER RESERVE PROGRA PERS SERVICES < *> $100.00* 131699 11/16/92 $176.25 SHERMAN, MITCHELL B PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 102992 POLICE DEPT. G PROF SERVICES < *> $176.25* 131700 11/16/92 $70.24 SHERWIN WILLIAMS PAINT 4979 -4 PUMP & LIFT ST PAINT 4443 < *> $70.24* 131701 11/16/92 $372.74 SHIRLEY, TOM GENERAL SUPPLIES 110392 BUILDING & GRO GENERAL SUPPL < *> $372.74* 131702 11/16/92 $253.21 SIGN SERVICE INC MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT 00507274 LIQUOR PROG MACH. & EQUIP 8398 < *> $253.21* 131703 11/16/92 $21.65 SINGLETON, JAMES MEETING EXPENSE 102792 FIRE DEPT. GEN MEETING EXPEN < *> $21.65* 131704 11/16/92 $532.50 SIR SPEEDY PRINT SIGNS & POSTS 47122 STREET NAME SI SIGNS & POSTS 3974 < *> $532.50* 131705 11/16/92 $7,086.95 SOUTHSIDE DISTR. CO. COST OF GOODS SOLD BE OCT YORK YORK SELLING CST OF GDS BE 11/16/92 $238.55 SOUTHSIDE DISTR. CO. COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT YORK YORK SELLING CST OF GDS MI 11/16/92 $1,785.35 SOUTHSIDE DISTR. CO. COST OF GOODS SOLD BE OCT 50TH 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS BE 11/16/92 $56.50 SOUTHSIDE DISTR. CO. COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT 50TH 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS MI < *> $9,167.35* 131706 11/16/92 $1,934.70 SPRINGSTED PUBLIC FI PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 102692 POOL ADMIN PROF SERVICES 11/16/92 $10157.15 SPRINGSTED PUBLIC FI PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 102692 ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES < *> $12,,091.85* 7 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, KOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 21 CHECK• DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131707 11/16/92 $53.61 SPS REPAIR PARTS 1944506 CITY HALL GENE REPAIR PARTS 4252 11/16/92 $42.70 SPS REPAIR PARTS 1950357 CITY HALL GENE REPAIR PARTS 4355 11/16/92 $224.51 SPS CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1954004 ARENA BLDG /GRO CONTR REPAIRS 4535 < *> $320.82* 131708 11/16/92 $10,600.00 STANDARD & POORS COR DUE FROM HRA 0319698 GENERAL FD PRO DUE FROM HRA < *> $10,600.00* 131709 11/16/92 $168.00 STANGHELLE, GAIL ART WORK SOLD 110292 ART CNTR PROG RETAIL SALES < *> $168.00* 131710 11/16/92 $296.50 STAR TRIBUNE ADVERTISING PERSONNEL 103192 CENT SVC GENER ADVERT PERSON < ■> $296.50* 131711 11/16/92 $60.00 STATE OF MN /DEPT OF INSURANCE 110192 CENT SVC GENER INSURANCE < *> $60.00* 131712 11/16/92 $105.00 STOVER, SUE ART WORK SOLD 110292 ART CNTR PROG RETAIL SALES < *> $105.00* 131713 11/16/92 $628.24 STREICHERS AMMUNITION 53846.1 POLICE DEPT. G AMMUNITION 3783 11/16/92 $628.24 STREICHERS AMMUNITION 53846.2 POLICE DEPT. G AMMUNITION 3783 11/16/92 $238.56 STREICHERS AMMUNITION 54858.1 POLICE DEPT. G AMMUNITION 4094 11/16/92 $44.39 STREICHERS ACCESSORIES 55921.1 EQUIPMENT OPER ,ACCESSORIES 4508 11/16/92 $1,005.19 STREICHERS AMMUNITION 55996.1 POLICE DEPT. G AMMUNITION 4418 11/16/92 $17.52 STREICHERS UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 56400.1 POLICE DEPT. G UNIF ALLOW 11/16/92 $251.30 STREICHERS AMMUNITION 55996.2 POLICE DEPT. G AMMUNITION 4418 11/16/92 $12.53 STREICHERS UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 56746.1 POLICE DEPT. G UNIF ALLOW < *> $2,825.97* 131714 11/16/92 $111.75 STROIA, BARBARA J PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 070792 ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES < *> $111.75* 131715 11/16/92 $164.32 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET CONTRACTED REPAIRS 9320 EQUIPMENT OPER CONTR REPAIRS 11/16/92 $53.31 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET ACCESSORIES 174997 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 11/16/92 $27.99 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET REPAIR PARTS 175105 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 11/16/92 $245.15 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET ACCESSORIES 148539 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 11/16/92 $2.56 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET REPAIR PARTS 175327 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS < *> $493.33* 131716 11/16/92 $117.50 SUPERIOR FORD REPAIR PARTS 163181 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4338 < *> $117.50* 131717 11/16/92 $69.00 SUSAN FRAME PT OFFICE AC 110292 ART CENTER ADM SALARIES TEMP 11/16/92 $384.00 SUSAN FRAME AC INSTRUCTOR 110292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES 11/16/92 $210.00 SUSAN FRAME PT OFFICE ART CENTER 110992 ART CENTER ADM SALARIES TEMP < *> $663.00* 131718 11/16/92 $927.50 SUTPHEN CORP REPAIR PARTS 53483 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 2380 < *> $927.50* 131719 11/16/92 $100.00 SWANSON HAROLD PERSONAL SERVICES DECEMBER RESERVE PROGRA PERS SERVICES < *> $100.00* 131720 11/16/92 $125.79 SYSCO MN GENERAL SUPPLIES 110192 GRILL GENERAL SUPPL COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 22 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131720 11/16/92 $216.53 SYSCO MN CLEANING SUPPLIES 110192 GRILL CLEANING SUPP 11/16/92 $1,258.63 SYSCO MN COST OF GOODS SOLD FO 110192 GRILL CST OF GD F00 < *> $1,600.95* 131721 11/16/92 $199.87 TARGET GENERAL SUPPLIES 388570 FIRE DEPT. GEN GENERAL SUPPL 3735 < *> $199.87* 131722 11/16/92 $38.13 TERMINAL SUPPLY CO ACCESSORIES 0011850 EQUIPMENT OPER ACCESSORIES 4110 < *> $38.13* 131723 11/16/92 $55.50 THE KANE SERVICE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4343621 BUILDING & GRO PROF SERVICES < *> $55.50* 131724 11/16/92 $150.00 THE SUNSHINE TWO SERVICES- EDINBOROUGH 112792 ADMINISTRATION PRO SVC OTHER < *> $150.00* 131725 11/16/92 $200.00 THE WINE COMPANY COST OF GOODS SOLD WI 3700 VERNON SELLING CST OF GD WIN 11/16/92 $48.90 THE WINE COMPANY COST OF GOODS SOLD BE 3701 VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS BE < *> $248.90* 131726 11/16/92 $9,003.55 THORPE DISTR. COST OF GOODS SOLD BE OCT VERN VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS BE 11/16/92 $238.70 THORPE DISTR. COST OF GOODS SOLD MI OCT VERN VERNON SELLING CST OF GDS MI < *> $9,242.25* 131727 11/16/92 $80.00 TOENSING, JAMES PROFESSIONAL SVC - OT 110292 ADMINISTRATION PRO SVC OTHER < *> $80.00* 131728 11/16/92 $112.54 TOLL COMPANY GENERAL SUPPLIES 448595 PUMP & LIFT ST GENERAL SUPPL < *> $112.54* 131729 11/16/92 $87.50 TWIN CITIES CORR OFF ADVERTISING /ART CENTE 110992 ART CENTER ADM ADVERT OTHER < *> $87.50* 131730 11/16/92 $326.06 TWIN CITY FILTER REPAIR PARTS 27236 PW BUILDING REPAIR PARTS 4175 < *> $326.06* 131731 11/16/92 $308.87 TWIN CITY GAR. DOOR REPAIR PARTS 12617 PW BUILDING REPAIR PARTS 4503 < *> $308.87* 131732 11/16/92 $13.98 TWIN CITY HOME JUICE COST OF GOODS SOLD MI 85693 50TH ST SELLIN CST OF GDS MI < *> $13.98* 131733 11/16/92 $453.64 TWIN CITY SAW SERVIC EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 4228 EQUIPMENT REPL EQUIP REPLACE 3472 11/16/92 $68.85 TWIN CITY SAW SERVIC REPAIR PARTS 4284 TREES & MAINTE REPAIR PARTS 3552 < *> $522.49* 131734 11/16/92 $86.75 UNIFORM UNLIMITED UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 381030 POLICE DEPT. G UNIF ALLOW < *> $86.75* 131735 11/16/92 $241.14 UNITED ELECTRIC CORP REPAIR PARTS 20293000 CITY HALL GENE REPAIR PARTS 4262 < *> $241.14* 131736 11/16/92 $25.38 US WEST CELLULAR DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 101092 ADMINISTRATION DUES & SUBSCR < *> $25.38* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, AOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 23 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131737 11/16/92 $52.43 US WEST COMM. TELEPHONE 111692 DARE TELEPHONE 11/16/92 $3,307.66 US WEST COMM. TELEPHONE 111692 CENT SVC GENER TELEPHONE 11/16/92 $151.98 US WEST COMM. TELEPHONE 111692 ART CENTER BLD TELEPHONE 11/16/92 $88.53 US WEST COMM. TELEPHONE 111692 SKATING & HOCK TELEPHONE 11/16/92 $510.95 US WEST COMM. TELEPHONE 111692 CLUB HOUSE TELEPHONE 11/16/92 $58.47 US WEST COMM. TELEPHONE 111692 MAINT OF COURS TELEPHONE 11/16/92 $52.26 US WEST COMM. TELEPHONE 111692 POOL OPERATION TELEPHONE 11/16/92 $230.49 US WEST COMM. TELEPHONE 111692 ARENA BLDG /GRO TELEPHONE 11/16/92 $114.44 US WEST COMM. TELEPHONE 111692 GUN RANGE TELEPHONE 11/16/92 $101.20 US WEST COMM. TELEPHONE 111692 CENTENNIAL LAK TELEPHONE 11/16/92 $142.51 US WEST COMM. TELEPHONE 11.1692 PUMP & LIFT ST TELEPHONE 11/16/92 $121.05 US WEST COMM. TELEPHONE 111692 VERNON OCCUPAN TELEPHONE < *> $4,931.97* 131738 11/16/92 $900.00 VER PLOEG CHRISTINE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 071992 ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES < *> $900.00* 131739 11/16/92 $31.95 VIDEO DUPLICATION IN CONTRACTED REPAIRS 7738 SEWER TREATMEN CONTR REPAIRS 4524 < *> $31.95* 131740 11/16/92 $109.50 VIKING SAFETY PRODUC GENERAL SUPPLIES 442173 MAINT OF COURS GENERAL SUPPL 3434 < *> $109.50* 131741 11/16/92 $108.55 W W GRAINGER REPAIR PARTS 498 -6704 BUILDING MAINT REPAIR PARTS 4352 11/16/92 $285.14 W W GRAINGER GENERAL SUPPLIES 495 -2971 MAINT OF COURS GENERAL SUPPL 4400 < *> $393.69* 131742 11/16/92 $1,857.08 WALDOR PUMP & EQUIP CONTRACTED REPAIRS 22318 PUMP & LIFT ST CONTR REPAIRS 4187 <*> $1,857.08* 131743 11/16/92 $191.03 WALSER FORD REPAIR PARTS 180647 EQUIPMENT OPER REPAIR PARTS 4502 < *> $191.03* 131744 11/16/92 $100.00 WALSH WILLIAM PERSONAL SERVICES DECEMBER RESERVE PROGRA PERS SERVICES < *> $100.00* 131745 11/16/92 $85.00 WATCZAK, JEFFREY J PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 090992 ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES 11/16/92 $85.00 WATCZAK, JEFFREY J PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 101592 ADMINISTRATION PROF SERVICES < *> $170.00* 131746 11/16/92 $90.00 WEINBERGER, ADRIENNE AC INSTRUCTOR 110292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES < *> $90.00* 131747 11/16/92 $92.08 WENZEL HEATING & AIR MECHANICAL PERMITS 110992 GENERAL FD PRO MECHAN PERMIT < *> $92.08* 131748 11/16/92 $217.79 WEST PHOTO PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 85021 POLICE DEPT. G PHOTO SUPPLIE 4677 < *> 5217.79* 131749 11/16/92 $121.57 WEST WELD SUPPLY CO. WELDING SUPPLIES 98743 EQUIPMENT OPER WELDING SUPPL 4344 < *> $121.57* 131750 11/16/92 $88.20 WESTPHAL,ANITA MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 110692 FINANCE MILEAGE < *> $88.20* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, NOV 11, 1992, 12:59 AM page 24 CHECK# DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT P.O. # ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 131751 11/16/92 $288.00 WICKER, CYD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 110292 ART CENTER ADM PROF SERVICES <*> $288.00* 131752 11/16/92 $269.26 WORLD -WIDE SIGN COMP < *> $269.26* 131753 11/16/92 $100.00 WROBLESKI -HENRY < *> $100.00* $1,170,441.98* GENERAL SUPPLIES 92 -15064 PUMP & LIFT ST GENERAL SUPPL 4172 PERSONAL SERVICES DECEMBER RESERVE PROGRA PERS SERVICES COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY WED, NaV 11, 1992, 1:07 AM page 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ FUND # 10 $542,095.51 FUND # 11 $34.00 FUND # 12 $368.83 FUND # 15 $6,704.90 FUND # 23 $11,649.41 FUND # 26 $2,080.16 FUND # 27 $352,410.72 FUND # 28 $5,465.09 FUND # 29 $1,316.12 FUND # 30 $18,629.32 FUND # 40 $54,443.33 FUND # 41 $6,308.90 FUND # 50 $100,093.51 FUND # 60 $68,842.18 $1,170,441.98• • DATE: November 10, 1992 TO: Commissioners HENNEPIN FROM: Judy Chumley, Deputy Clerk of the Board rlr� SUBJECT: MEMBER AT LARGE APPOINTMENTS - 1993 (ANNUAL LIST) As required under the open appointments policy, attached is the Annual List of all Member -At -Large Appointments that are due to expire in 1993. Attach: cc: Douglas Bryant Chuck Sprafka Bob Rohlf David Sanders Ruth Davini, Co -Chair Peggy Meyer, Co -Chair Gary Macomber, attorney for M'haha Creek W/S Dist. Bill Brumfield Patty Susick Ray Haik, Attorny for Nine Mile Creek W/S Dist. /Riley - Purgatory -Bluff Phil Weber Phil Eckhert Sharon Johnson, Executive Director CASH Dorene Roeglin, Director, Commitment Defense Project Monica Sausen Sue Zuidema Mel Sinn - Soil & Water Various Municipalities (Judy Nally, City of Golden Valley) (City of Eden Prairie City Mgr.) Bob Hanson Dennis Craff Kay Mitchell 1993 S(;HEIMI.E FOR Cr.)Mt1 1'I" 1 EE APPOI H'I'MENTS HEN IIERS AT LARGE `PERM ENDING COMM IT "1'EE /130AR1) 1NCl1MBENT LENGTH OF TERM 01/01/93 SUBURBAN HENN. REGIONAL PARE: DISTRICT Nicholas Eoloff 4 years 01/02/93 PERSONNEL BOARD Jerome Coughlin 4 years 3 years 12/11/93 'iZ731%93- Tim Lovaasen -'L'7I 7t;i�fiTTJi; - TiC�K- FTTIZP. F—`— - -' J aT m e s -K r a F, e r %9 LIBRARY BOARD Christopher Bates 3 years !c aayylP iiaMIn 2 years Edward L1(:Gl ynn ,)tarry Dulgar 02/27/93 CHILDREN'S MI:N'L'A1, HEAI,'t'll AIiV ISOItY BOARD -- An i to Se 1 in 3 years Carol Kaste Douglas Sch.imelpfenig Eve Elliot Kathryn Rennie ft:iry Magnuson Mary Peacock flichael Gallagher Rita Warren Riil h Davini Susan Brown Tim Moriarty 03/08/93 MINNEHAHA CREEK W S DIS'TRIC'T' Imes Spens I e 3 years I�ohert D. Erickson 1FTVICTF 7�iSiTETTFY- i`i5[1F1I`T , 15ii-u T s T� lV years R=- r;i1Fr=,Rrr':K W /S -DI-ST Ferry Fors er 3 years Susan Scribner HENNEPIN TEA PRIVA`T'E INDUSTRY COUNCIL James McDonough, Jr. 3 years ra rolansK1 3 yea vjy/Zy/y.s NINE MILE CREEK W/S D16TRICT Ed SrFiiick 3 years Larry Madden _ _ _ _ 09/30/93 COMMUNITY A( ;'I .I UN E'OR SI1RURf3J1N I1f P711EP1N HI) t1 :3 r. ti.n K1rsc i 1 year _ Ted Mondale 11/20/93 HENNEPIN TEA PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL --R'ENTAL Lisa Zawtoc 1 3 years 12/11/93 'iZ731%93- 2 years -'L'7I 7t;i�fiTTJi; - TiC�K- FTTIZP. F—`— - -' J aT m e s -K r a F, e r 4 years Robert Reznick c: M.7NTlY- WC'I:fii1l E<1VTi�F` '- 7�i3V.T��)�tY -c T'i'Flam— !c aayylP iiaMIn 2 years ,)tarry Dulgar Jerry Thelen Joy Frestedt: Laurel Deloria Mary Tambornino COUNTY EXTENSION COMMI`T'TEE Marvin Johnson 3 years Sever. Peterson • F � �41RPORT FACTSHE�' i06 The Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council The purpose of this pamphlet is to provide background information and.a description of-the functions and activities of the Metropolitan Aircraff-Sound Abatement Council (MASAC). Introduction The Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council ( MASAC) is a pri- vate, nonprofit organization, made up of an equal number of citizens and airline industry representatives, dedi- cated to the control and alleviation of aircraft noise at and around the 'Minneapolis /St. Paul International Airport (MSP). Since its inception in 1969, MASAC has served in many capacities, including advising the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC), evaluating established noise _policies, recommending and instituting -- History of`' ` NIASAC Aircraft noise is not new. In the earliest days of the airport, neighbor- hoods nearby were not greatly affect- ed by the occasional planes overhead. But by the mid- 1960s, as communities expanded and air travel increased,.aircraftnoise surfaced as a major community concem. Public dis- content increased, and the cities adja- cent to MSP began to take action against the MAC. In:1968, 400 peo- ple crowded into a Minneapolis City new policies, and studying noise abatement programs in- use around the world. The effectiveness of MASAC is due primarily to the composition of its membership. The problem of aircraft noise is approached from all view- points by combining the technical expertise and aviation experience of airline industry personnel, with the firsthand knowledge and concern of* community members. MASAC was the first noise abatement program in the country to bring together these diverse Council meeting to demand passage of a proposed ordinance which would prohibit aircraft-from flying over the city. Other communities held public hearings and threatened the MAC with lawsuits if the issue of aircraft - noise was not immediately addressed. Amid growing public pressure, the MAC began to realize that successful noise abatement required the efforts of many people both inside and outside the aviation industry. The creation of interests, and its unique format has served as a model for other noise con- trol groups around the world. - There are no simple answers to the problem of aircraft noise.: MASAC believes that continued communication and cooperation is the key-to increased understanding.among all those concerned with noise -. control. Innovations in the area of noise abatement and improvements to existing noise relief policiesare the result of this continuing-cooperative effort. MASAC was a direct result of commu- nity frustration and the need :for. a group to provide the MAC '-with addi- tional advice and support far noise abatement programs.. -. The first members of - MASAC, both citizens and aviation_ industry rep- resentatives, were familiar -with the - problems of aircraft noise -The board was composed of 26 representatives, equally divided between members of the aviation industry and-individuals MASAC MAC: Metropolitan- Metropolitan: Aircraft Sound P►hpo Abatement Council;_ Commisstoir, - - representing the communities sur- rounding the airport. Mayor Stan Olson of Richfield was appointed as the first chairman of MASAC and Lloyd Hinton, formerly head of the National Aircraft Noise Abatement Council, was hired as the first execu- tive director. The council immediately began to review and evaluate abatement poli- cies, as well as new programs and techniques to aid in noise relief. One of its tirst actions was to request the Structure and Function addition of a noise abatement special- ist to the staff of the MAC, a position which was created the following year. MASAC established a complaint line to handle calls and to provide informa- tion to the community. The first of 21 noise abatement policies was estab- lished in 1969, and plans were made for an extensive study on the effects of aircraft noise pollution.- As MASAC matured, its influence and reputation grew. It joined national noise abate- ment organizations and served as an advisory board to other groups - around the country. The success of MASAC can be measured in its uni- versally recognized noise abatement efforts and its structure as a model used by other airports around the world. Through the cooperation and the commitment of many dedicated individuals, MASAC continues to . effect changes and improvements in the area of aircraft noise relief. MASAC was formally incorporat- regional noise abatement organiza- ed as a nonprofit organization tions. The council also.sponsors its February 25,1969. Its commitment to own research and study programs and community service is clearly outlined sends MASAC representatives to noise in both the articles of incorporation abatement conferences -..The MASAC . and the bylaws. With the goal of remains one of the few noise abate - reducing aircraft noise, as well as ment groups in the country to take increasing public knowledge and such an active role in initiating and awareness surrounding the issue, there t, coordinating airport programs. The are three general objectives of purpose of MASAC,: as stipulated in MASAC: its bylaws, is to continue this role and „ • The first objective of MASAC. to ensure that every possible measure regards the study and evaluation of is taken towards the,reduction of air_- _ complaints from neighboring resi- `'' craft noise. =' dents. This is accomplished through a �"ss� • A final objective of MASAC is complaint phone line which is in oper- `��� to conduct a program- of public educa- ation 24 hours a day. Each complaint 6. tion. MASAC sponsors public meet -" is recorded and filed by the MAC MASAC Chairman Scott Bunin ings and informational sessions to noise staff. At the end of each month, and Bloomington representa- explain current noise. abatement poll= the file is reviewed and statistics are Live Mark Mahon discuss a pro- cies and to discuss the.possibilities for compiled as to the number and loca- posed runway construction future programs. Topical= publications, tion of all complaints received. The . project and its noise impact on media releases, and-paid advertise - -. results are then presented at the - surrounding communities. ments are also used-to-,aid in public monthly MASAC meeting. The full - education regarding.the more specific-. Commission also receives copies of ble for. the study and evaluation of . --aspects of noise control. Considering- the report: Thin process allows the existing noise abatement policies and the importance and economic necessi- MAC and.MASACao ascertain the the. proposal and initiation of new pro- ty of MSP, MASAC. believes that an extent of the noise problem in specific grams. This requires that all council understanding must be-established areas. It also provides. the community members be well informed on a wide urround - . between the airport and.the surround-.' " with direct access to the MAC and range of noise abatement procedures ing communities. While. the aviation MASAC. and plans. In order to keep abreast of industry must be sensitized to the The second objective is the real - the most recent technical innovations importance of noise. abatement, the, ization of an effective noise abatement and noise relief programs, MASAC community also must-be willing to program at MSP. MASAC is responsi- holds memberships in national and cooperate in noise - control efforts. It is; .( F ` - the responsibility of MASAC to inform `he public on the variety of noise abatement techniques, methods, pro- cedures, and regulations which exist or which are being considered by the MAC and the FAA. MASAC also pro- vides information regarding zoning proposals and other land use regula- tions which keep future residential developments from noise sensitive areas and which offer alternatives for more compatible land uses. In addi- tion, national and worldwide noise abatement programs are presented and discussed with city governments and civic groups in order to provide the public with a wide range of possi- bilities for reducing noise in their com- munities. The MASAC board now is com- posed of 32 members, divided equal- Actions Noise abatement is the primary �oal of all MASAC activity. MASAC nos established a number of programs and policies, in coordination with the MAC, aimed at reducing or alleviat- ing aircraft noise both on the ground and in the air. Noise control is gener- ally accomplished in three ways: • Development of operational policies and regulations designed to alleviate or lessen noise from approaching and departing aircraft. • Development of compatible land uses planned for the areas immediate- ly surrounding the airport. MASAC works with city officials and communi- ty organizations to develop plans for alternative land uses in areas most affected by aircraft noise. Special zon- ing regulations ensure that residential development is kept to a minimum in noise sensitive areas. In addition, plans to relocate maintenance work and to lessen other sources of ground noise have been formulated. • 'Continued research and devel- opment in aviation technology made ossible a new generation of quieter ly between representatives from the aviation industry, or user groups, and private citizens, the public group. The user group includes 11 representatives from airlines serving MSP, and one representative from each of the follow- ing: The Minnesota Business Aircraft Association, the Air Line Pilots Association, the MAC, the St. Paul Chamber of Commerce, and the Greater Minneapolis Area Chamber of Commerce. The public group is made up of four representatives from Minneapolis, three from St. Paul, two each from Richfield and Bloomington, and one each from Burnsville, Eagan, Inver Grove Heights, Mendota Heights and St. Louis Park. The number of represen- tatives from each city is based on pop- ulation and the size of the area and more fuel efficient aircraft. MASAC works with the airlines to encourage the use of these new jets. Retrofitting, a process which works .to muffle the engine noise of older jets, is a second alternative in use for lessen- ing aircraft noise at the source. The MAC and MASAC have developed and instituted a wide vari- ety of noise abatement policies since 1969. MASAC has also sponsored numerous public information sessions and has acted as an advisor to many community and governmental groups. An extensive MAC study on noise abatement, completed in 1981, was the result of a MASAC proposal, and the members contributed greatly to its development. The organization has made many other contributions to the alleviation of aircraft noise. • As a result of a MASAC propos- al, all airline training flights have been eliminated at the Minneapolis /St. Paul airport. • Under the guidance of MASAC and the MAC, MSP was the first air- affected by aircraft noise. Industry rep- resentatives are appointed by agen- cies, corporations, associations, and governmental bodies which have a direct interest in the operation of the Minneapolis /St. Paul airport. The pub- lic representatives are appointed by their local governments. MASAC board members -serve on a voluntary basis and are uncompen- sated by the organization. Funding for research, staff work, travel, equipment and supplies is provided by the Metropolitan Airports Commission. A detailed description of the .-- MASAC organization and its specific functions is included in the articles of incorporation and the MASAC­ bylaws. Both are available upon request. port to implement a workable Preferential Runway System (PRS). The PRS was modified in -1990 to allow greater use of Runway 422 in off-peak traffic periods to provide increased noise relief for South.-, Minneapolis residents. _ • Through an agreement with all scheduled airlines, a voluntary night- time flight restriction has been institut- ed from 1 1 pm -6am. • Home-based carriers developed procedures to keep planes achigher glide slope altitudes on approach over residential areas. • An earth -berm noise barrier-was constructed to decrease noise -for a residenfial area which borders the air- port. • Engine run -ups and other main- tenance procedures are now restricted to only daytime hours and -:are con- ducted in a special run -up pad area to help contain jet noise. -Procedures were established with the FAA to disperse air traffic over a wider area to avoid a heavy concentration of noise over any one particular area. • Several arrival and departure routes, or tracks, have been devel- oped to ensure that aircraft operations are conducted over the least populat- ed areas whenever possible. • Signs have been placed on all runways to remind pilots to utilize noise abatement procedures. • Automated Terminal Information System (ATIS) radio broadcasts inform pilots of noise sensitive areas. • Special instrument landing equipment has been installed to ensure a more stabilized approach over residential areas. • An extensive program for moni- toring and evaluating aircraft noise is done by the MAC and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The list of MASAC accomplish- ments is extensive. MASAC is regard- ed as a leader in noise abatement and community service and the Minneapolis /St. Paul International Airport is recognized as a model for other airports attempting to institute noise control programs. The key to success is that MASAC efforts are ongoing. The commitment of those both inside and outside the aviation industry, including the FAA, the MAC, airline industry personnel, and a num- ber of private citizens and public offi- t cials, have helped to make MASAC an effective organization. MASAC meetings, which are open to the public, are generally held on the fourth Tuesday of each month at 7:30 pm in the Metropolitan Airports Commission General Offices building, located at 6040 28th Avenue South in Minneapolis. If you have questions or would like additional information, please call the MASAC office at 726-9411. n