Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2001-03-06_COUNCIL PACKET
AGENDA EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EDINA CITY COUNCIL MARCH 6, 2001 7:00 P.M. 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 ( *) in bold print are Consent Agenda items and are considered routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of such items unless a Commissioner, Council Member or citizen so requests it. In such cases the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the Agenda. * I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF HRA - Regular Meeting of Februray 20, 2001 II. BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO 50TH AND EDINBOROUGH TIF DISTRICTS * III. CONFIRMATION OF PAYMENT OF CLAIMS - As per Pre -List Dated 2/22/01 TOTAL: $479,058.89 IV. ADTOURNMENT EDINA CITY COUNCIL * I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of February 20, 2001 and Special Meeting of February 15, 2001 and Special Meeting of February 26, 2001 II. PUBLIC HEARING OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS - Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by Engineer. Public comment heard. Motion to close hearing. If Council wishes to proceed, action by resolution. 3/5 favorable rollcall vote of all members of the Council required to pass if improvement is petitioned for; 4/5 favorable rollcall vote required if no petition Roll Call A. STREET IMPROVEMENT BA -304 West 65th Street from Valley View Road to France Avenue B. STREET IMPROVEMENT BA -322 Drew Avenue from West 66th Street to West 65th III. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REPORTS ON PLANNING MATTERS - Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by Planner Public Comment heard. Motion to close hearing. Zoning Ordinances: First and Second Reading require 4/5 favorable rollcall of all members of Council to pass. Waiver of Second Reading: 4/5 favorable rollcall of all members of Council to pass. Final Development Plan Approval of Property Zoned Planned District: 3/5 favorable rollcall vote required to pass. Conditional Use Permit: 3/5 favorable rollcall vote required to pass. Roll Call A. 2001 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM Agenda/ Edina City Council March 6, 2001 Page 2 IV. AWARD OF BID * A. 2001 Police Uniform Purchase * B. Two Dump Truck Bodies * C. Dodge 4 x 4 Pickup Truck - Police V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS A. Park Referendum B. On -Sale Intoxicating, Club On -sale, and Sunday Sale Liquor License Renewals C. Wine License Renewals D. Beer License Renewals * E. Fountain Woods Noise Deadline Extension to July 1, 2001 F. Two Guys From Italy Dance Permit Renewal. VI. COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITIONS VII. CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS VIII. INTERGOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES IX. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF MAYOR AND COUNCIL X. MANAGER'S MISCELLANEOUS ITEM A. Council /Staff Workshop XI. FINANCE * A. CONFIRMATION OF PAYMENT OF CLAIMS as per Pre -List dated 2/22/01 TOTAL: $1,405,612.24 and as per Pre -List dated 2/28/01 TOTAL: $486,951.87 SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS Tues Mar 20 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Mar 27 Annual Meeting 5:00 P.M. CENTENNIAL LAKES Tues Apr 3 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Apr 17 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Apr 24 Volunteer Recognition Reception 5:00 P.M. EDINBOROUGH PARK Tues May 1 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues May 15 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mon May 28 MEMORIAL DAY OBSERVED - City Hall Closed MINUTES OF THE EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HELD AT CITY HALL FEBRUARY 20, 2001 - 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Commissioners Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica and Chair Maetzold. CONSENT AGENDA APPROVED Motion made by seconded by Commissioner Housh approving Redevelopment Authority Agenda as presented. Rollcall: Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold Motion carried. Commissioner Hovland and the Edina Housing and *MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 6, 2001, APPROVED Motion made by Commissioner Hovland and seconded by Commissioner Housh approving the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority for February 6, 2001. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *CONFIRMATION OF CLAIMS PAID Motion made by Commissioner Hovland and seconded by Commissioner Housh approving the payment of claims dated February 8, 2001, and consisting of one page totaling $170,898.54; and for payment of claims per pre list dated February 14, 2001, and consisting of one page totaling $170,898.54. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. There being no further business on the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Agenda, Chair Maetzold declared the meeting adjourned. Executive Director R55CKREQ LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation 13635 2/20101 100049 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 165.00 TIF SEMINAR 165.00 13636 2/20/01 104222 SHENEHON COMPANY 3,004.75 APPRAISAL FEES 3,004.75 13637 2120/01 104223 UNITED PROPERTIES INVESTMENT L 475,719.14 TIF ASSISTANCE 13638 2/20/01 102090 URBAN LAND INSTITUTE 170.00 ULI DUES 170.00 479,058.89 Grand Total CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/20/01 --2/20/01 PO # Doc No Inv No 13446 021401 Account No Account Description 9131.6106 MEETING EXPENSE 13447 020701 9135.1710 LAND 2/22/01 11:01:48 Page - 1 Business Unit 50TH STREET TAX DISTRICT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TAX C 13450 022001 9132.8225 INTEREST OTHER FUNDS CENTENNIAL LAKE TAX DISTRICT 13449 020201 Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 479,058.89 Total Payments 479,058.89 9133.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINBOROUGH TAX DISTRICT R55CKSUU LOG20000 — Company Amount 09000 HRA FUND 479,058.89 Report Totals 479,058.89 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Summary 2120/01 - 2/20/01 We confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these claims comply in all material respects with the requirements of the City of Edina purchasing pojicies and procedures Manager , to .2 1 2/22/01 11:05:38 Page - 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL FEBRUARY 20, 2001 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica and Mayor Maetzold. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Member Hovland, and seconded by Member Housh approving the Council Consent Agenda as presented. Rollcall: Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold KATHLEEN ANDERSON OF CONGRESSMAN SABO'S OFFICE INTRODUCED Kathleen Anderson explained she visits City's in the 5th Congressional District in off - election years. She reminded the Council Congressman Sabo maintains an office in downtown Minneapolis and told that he welcomes contact with his constituents for help with a variety of concerns. *MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 6, 2001,_ APPROVED Motion made by Member Hovland, and seconded by Member Housh approving the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 6, 2001. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, ISD 273, HIGHLANDS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (5505 DONCASTER WAY) Affidavits of Notice were presented and ordered placed on file. Presentation by Planner Planner Larsen explained the Edina School District applied for a conditional use permit to allow an addition to Highlands Elementary School. The addition would house three new classrooms, and would be added to the southeast corner of the building. The District would not make other changes to the building or site. The total floor area of the addition would be 4,850 square feet. Mr. Larsen stated the proposed addition complies with all Edina zoning ordinance requirements for an elementary school, including parking. Edina code would require 53 parking spaces and the site holds 83 spaces currently. Exterior materials would match the existing building. Public Comment Gail Gulber, 5209 Lochloy Drive, stated she heard that landscaping was proposed to be changed and also asked how may additional students the addition would house. Mr. Larsen said he was not aware of any changes to landscaping proposed. He added each new classroom would house approximately 20 -25 students. Member Masica made a motion to close the public hearing. Member Housh seconded the motion. Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold Motion carried Member Hovland introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 2001-12 Page 1 Minutes/Edina City Council/February 20, 2001 GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO EDINA SCHOOL DISTRICT 273 WHEREAS, the procedural requirements of Code Section 850 (the Zoning Ordinance) have been met; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that the Findings as required by Code Section No. 850.04 Subd. 4 have been satisfied: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City . Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit to Edina School District 273, to allow the addition of three additional classrooms to Highlands Elementary School,. 5505 Doncaster Way. Passed and adopted this 20th day of February, 2001. Motion seconded by Member House Rollcall: Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica and Maetzold. Resolution adopted. *BID AWARDED FOR TWO 4X4,1/2 TON PICKUPS FOR UTILITY DEPARTMENT Motion made by Member Hovland, and seconded by Member Housh for award of bid for two 4X4 1/2 ton pickups for the Utility Department to Grossman Chevrolet, Inc., under State of Minnesota Contract No. 426207, at $40,228.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR EMERGENCY SANITARY SEWER REPAIR AT ARDEN AVENUE Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by Member Housh for award of bid for emergency sanitary sewer repair at Arden Avenue to sole bidder, Valley -Rich Company, Inc., at $15,149.25. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR 3/4 TON CARGO VAN FOR PARK MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by Member Housh for award of bid for 3/4 ton cargo van for Park Maintenance Department to Falls Automotive, Inc., under Hennepin County Bid Contract #0543A0, at $16,426.56. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR ICE - RESURFACING MACHINE FOR BRAEMAR ARENA Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by Member Housh for award of bid for ice - resurfacing machine for Braemar Arena to recommended low bidder, Frank J. Zamboni I Co., Inc., at $70,600.00 plus sales tax. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR ONE ARTICULATED SIDEWALK PLOW Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by Member Housh for award of bid for one articulated sidewalk plow to MacQueen Equipment under State. Contract #426354 at $76,590.54. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW OF FEBRUARY 20, 2001, APPROVED Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by Member Housh approving the Traffic Safety Staff Review of February 20, 2001, Section A, Section B, and Section C. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. Page 2 Minutes/Edina City Council/February 20, 2001 APPOINTMENT MADE TO RESEARCH PLANNING AND COORDINATION COMMITTEE (HENNEPIN SOUTH SERVICES COLLABORATIVE) Manager Hughes indicated the willingness of Member Masica to serve on the Research, Planning and Coordination Committee (Hennepin South Services Collaborative) for a term to February 1, 2003. Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold Motion carried. APPOINTMENT MADE TO BOARD, COMMISSION, COMMITTEE (EDINA COMMUNITY HEALTH COMMITTEE) Mayor Maetzold asked endorsement of his recommendation to appoint Idelle Longman to the Edina Community Health Committee for a term ending February 1/2003. Mayor Maetzold made a motion approving the appointment of Idelle Longman to the Edina Community Health Committee for term ending February 1, 2001 Member Housh seconded the motion. Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold Motion carried. LEGISLATIVE BILLS REGARDING CROSSTOWN HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION; OPEN HOUSE NOTED Manager Hughes presented two Legislative Bills and their authors. Other bills are expected to be submitted shortly that will impact I-494 construction. Information regarding these bills will be provided to the Council in a timely fashion for its dissemination at the March 6, 2001, Council meeting. Manager Hughes noted that staff has encouraged Mn/ DOT to develop a better construction by- pass /detour system if the crosstown highway construction goes forward. No Council action was taken. *RESOLUTION NO. 2000-87 TECHNICAL CORRECTION TO MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 5, 2000, APPROVED Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by Member Housh correcting the Minutes of September 5, 2000, as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 2000-87 APPROVING A LOT DIVISION FOR 3205/3219 WEST 60TH STREET WHEREAS, the following three properties are described as separate parcels at present: PARCEL A: Lot 2, Loken's Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota. PARCEL B: Commencing at a point 586.674 feet West of the Northeast corner of the South 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4; thence South 161 feet; thence East 55 feet, thence North 161 feet; thence West 55 feet to the point of beginning. Combined with platted Torrens property not adjacent to divided parcel): The North 128 feet of Outlot 1, Loken's 3rd addition. PARCEL C: The West 11.94 feet of the East 531.674 feet of the North 161 feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 20, Township 28, Range. 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the owner of Parcel A has requested the lot division as follows: PARCEL A: Lot 2, Loken's Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota will now include the West 5.747 feet of the East 525.927 feet of the North 161 feet of the Southeast Page 3 Minutes/Edina City Council/February 20, 2001 Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 20, Township 28, Range 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota and WHEREAS, the owner of Parcel B has requested the lot division as follows: PARCEL B: Commencing at a point 586.674 feet West of the Northeast corner of the South 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4; thence South 161 feet; thence East 55 feet, thence North 161 feet; thence West 55 feet to the point of beginning and will now include the West 5.747 feet of the East 531.674 feet of the North 161 feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 20, Township 28, Range 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota and Combined with platted Torrens property (not adjacent to divided parcel): the North 128 feet of Outlot 1, Loken's 3rd addition. WHEREAS, the requested subdivision is authorized under Code Section 810 and it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and said newly created Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purpose of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Code Sections 810 and 850; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina that the conveyance and ownership of the above described tracts of land (PARCEL A and PARCEL B) as separate tracts of land are hereby approved and the requirements and provisions of Code Sections 850 and 810 are hereby waived to allow said division and conveyance there of as separate tracts of land but only to the extent permitted under Code Sections 810 and 850 subject to the limitations set out in Code Section 850 and said Ordinances are now waived for any other purpose or as to any other provisions thereof, and further subject, however, to the provision that no further subdivision be made of said Parcels unless made in compliance with the pertinent Ordinances of the City of Edina or with the prior approval of this Council as may be provided for by those Ordinances. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *CLAIMS PAID Member Hovland, made a motion and Member Housh seconded the motion approving payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated February 8, 2001, and consisting of 24 pages: General Fund $216,553.09; Communications Fund $5,862.34; Working Capital ' Fund $7,599.59; Construction Fund $304.10; Art Center Fund $5,317.65; Golf Dome Fund $12,331.78; Aquatic Center Fund $266.25; Golf Course Fund $5,800.39; Ice Arena Fund $12,217.85; Edinborough/Centennial Lakes Fund $7,014.98; Liquor Fund $73,611.45; Utility Fund $32,221.02; Storm Sewer Fund $1,176.87; HRA Fund $345,000.00; Payroll Fund $415,000.00; TOTAL $1,140,277.36; and for claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated February 14, 2001, and consisting of 33 pages: General Fund $228,577.87; Communications Fund $959.81; Working Capital Fund $5,373.88; Construction Fund $43,520.05; Art Center Fund $1,173.54; Golf Dome Fund $6,257.72; Aquatic Center Fund $450.97; Golf Course Fund $34,584.88; Ice Arena Fund $18,256.87; Edinborough/Centennial Lakes Fund $22,962.13; Liquor Fund $140,546.20; Utility Fund $514,335.33; Storm Sewer Fund $176,228.25; Recycling Fund $29,618.50; HRA Fund $270,000.00; TOTAL $1,492,846.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Maetzold declared the meeting adjourned at 7:40 P.M.. City Clerk Page 4 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL FEBRUARY 15, 2001 6:30 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Hovland, Housh, Masica, and Mayor Maetzold. Member Kelly entered the meeting at 6:40 p.m. Mayor Maetzold stated the purpose of the special meeting was to hold a public hearing on the proposed referendum for the potential joint park improvement with the School District. Mayor Maetzold explained that about three years ago, various constituents requesting additional gymnasiums, fields and swimming pools had approached the City. The City Council studied the requests and considered options available. One option suggested was to build on School property. This concept was studied with the School District and seemed viable bringing the City to the point of considering a referendum. Based upon constituent's concern the City appointed a Blue Ribbon Committee charged with studying the needs and options. The Committee began their work in September finishing in January with a report to the City Council. The City Council must decide whether to hold a referendum. Mayor Maetzold said that the voters would ultimately make the decision of whether the project goes forward or would be dropped. He added the purpose of the public hearing was to gather input from the citizens. Park Director Presentation Park Director John Keprios outlined the Blue Ribbon Committee's work as follows: BACKGROUND • Fall of 1999 City and School District staff determined that they should work together to provide public recreational facilities for community use • 5Rring of 2000 - Decision Resources conducted a telephone survey, the survey determined that the community does support improving current recreation facilities • August 2000 - Eleven - member Blue Ribbon Committee formed by City Council MISSION The City Council asked the Blue Ribbon Committee to answer the following questions: • What is the need for additional gymnasiums, soccer fields, and auditoriums in the City? • What other needs should be addressed? • Is there an opportunity to work with Edina Public Schools to meet the City's recreational needs? If so, how should such an arrangement be structured? • Are there other partnerships that should be made to provide recreational facilities? • Is it appropriate for some or all of the facilities to be located on School District property? • Will the recommended package of facilities and improvements be acceptable to the community? PROCESS Committee Meetings • The process consisted of 13 meetings and a park tour (13 parks and both School campus sites) • The meetings began on Thursday, September 14, 2000 with the last meeting on January 4, 2001 • The committee met for over 60 hours in a span of only seventeen weeks • The committee heard over 30 presentations Page 1 Minutes /Special Edina City Council/February 15, 2001 I • The Committee presented recommendations to City Council on January 16, 2001 • Public Hearing on Feb. 15, 2001 • March 6 - Council approves date, amount and scope of referendum • April 23 - Public information mailed to all residents • Wednesday, May 16, referendum date RECOMMENDED PROJECTS West Campus Field Improvements • Re- orient baseball field • Two new softball fields • Two new soccer fields - lower level • Renovate two soccer fields - upper level • Renovate main lower level field within track Edina High School • Black Box Theater Valley View Middle School • 25 meter x 25 yard pool and diving well • 2 gymnasiums • Concession stand • Locker rooms Creek Valley Elementary • Soccer Field (330' long and 180' wide) East Campus Site Improvements • Parking lot expansion (81 new stalls between South View Middle School and ECC) • Pedestrian access path • Resilient turf for middle football/ soccer field Concord Elementary School • Gymnasium and classroom addition Southview Middle School • Gymnasium Addition • Gymnasium Improvements • Pool Improvements Edina Commun-ft Center • Large gym improvements • Small gym improvements • Gym lobby and concession renovation • Auditorium and lobby renovations Kuhlman Stadium Renovation • New bleachers and press box (current bleacher capacity is 5,600; new bleacher capacity is 6,500) • Renovate track • Resilient turf on varsity field • New concession building • Lighting improvements • Bubble structure Page 2 Minutes /Special Edina City Council/ February 15, 2001 Indoor Athletic Field (Bubble) • Air- supported white colored fabric that covers the artificial turf field inside the new expanded track at Kuhlman Stadium • 210' wide, 380' long, and 65 feet high (37' higher than the press box and 13' lower than existing light standards) • Bubble goes up in November and comes down in March • Potential revenue generating facility • Reduces the need for additional gyms (need only 4 vs. 5 or 6 additional gyms) WHY LOCATE AT KUHLMAN STADIUM? • Kuhlman Field must have artificial turf to allow community access • Adjacent to schools (maximize use) • Storage available under bleachers for fabric • Security fencing already in place • Least expensive site vs. alternative sites OTHER POTENTIAL LOCATIONS FOR BUBBLE • ECC Middle Field • Too close to residents, field is too small, needs higher fencing • Limited space for mechanical plant • Lewis Park • Needs security fencing • Needs artificial turf • Not close to a school • EHS Lower Field • Needs new road & parking lot • Needs artificial turf • Needs security fencing • Potential damage from flooding • Valley View Middle School (next to tennis courts) • Needs new road & parking lot. • Needs artificial turf. • Needs security fencing. • Field is too small. • Braemar Park (formerly &um ran ge) • Needs extensive grading • Needs artificial turf • Needs additional parking and security fencing • Not close to a school • Site currently planned for Police and Fire Training Facility • Braemar Arena Field North of East Arena • Existing field would have to be narrowed at least 40' for Fire Department access. • Field grade is below parking lot grade and Arena • Grade (requires retaining walls) • Needs artificial turf Page 3 Minutes /Special Edina City Council/February 15, 2001 • Costs $1.3 -$2.1 million more than Kuhlman • . Needs additional security fencing • Not close to a school PROJECTED USE OF BUBBLE • Monday- Friday, 6:00 p.m. -10:00 p.m., approximately 20 hours per week during weekdays (40 -60 parking stalls needed during the week) • Saturday and Sunday 8:00 a.m. -10:00 p.m., approximately 26 hours per week during weekends (up to 100 parking stalls needed during weekends) EDINA PARK AND ENTERPRISE FACILITY IMPROVEMENT Activities Center (Senior Center) • Furnishings (chairs, tables, computers, sound system, kitchen equipment, pool tables etc.) Edina Park Improvements • General infrastructure improvements at 29 park sites • Pathways • Playground equipment • Ball field renovations • Replace Courtney Field concessions building • Fire protection (Tupa Park) • Completion of Van Valkenburg Park • Keyless entry system • Tri -City skate park • Roof replacements (Arneson Acres & Bredesen Parks) • Lift station at Arneson Acres Park • Parking lot repairs (Arneson Acres, Rosland and Weber Parks) • Tennis court renovation Edina Aquatic Center • Master Plan Renovation • Replace worn slide with two new flumes (separate plunge pool) • Replace a one -meter diving board with a cable ride • Raise the depth of the lap pool to five feet • Provide better user access to main pool • New deck showers and deck expansion Edina Art Center • Pottery room expansion • Fire protection system • Clark gift shop expansion Braemar Arena • Fire Protection System • Ice resurfacing room relocation • Mechanical upgrades at East Arena (heating and dehumidification system) Miscellaneous • Replace Showmobile • Registration/ scheduling software COST ESTIMATES Page 4 Minutes /Special Edina City Council/ February 15, 2001 Revised Cost Estimates • Preliminary estimates $37,121,600 • New estimates $43,620,439 • Senior Center furnishings from $225,000 to $400,000 • Added elevator at South View • Snow load requirements (additional structural reinforcements) • 6.5% sales tax • 5% contingencies Proiected Cost Breakdown (not listed in order of priori • Gymnasiums $11,795,162 • Athletic Fields $ 5,201,301 • Indoor Athletic Facility (bubble) $1,010,000 • Kuhlman Stadium $ 6,659,262 • Competition Swimming Pools $ 7,063,086 • General Park Infrastructure $ 5,759,017 • Performing/ Visual Arts $ 3,716,611 • Enterprise Facilities $2,416,000 • Total Cost of Recommended Projects $43,620,439 TAX IMPACT $35,000,000 REFERENDUM ASSESSED ANNUAL PROPERTY VALUE TAX IMPACT $120,000 $65.94 $180,000 $98.91 $255,000 $140.12 $300,000 $164.85 $500,000 $274.75 $1,000,000 $549.50 $40,000,000 REFERENDUM ASSESSED ANNUAL PROPERTY VALUE TAX IMPACT $120,000 $75.36 $180,000 $113.04 $255,000 $160.14 $300,000 $188.40 $500,000 $314.00 $1,000,000 $628.00 The Council discussed the various components of the proposed referendum, asking why some costs had increased, if adequate safety measures were incorporated for the ECC, the importance of developing a Capital Improvement Plan, if the proposed projects had been prioritized, did the projects meet Edina Code requirements, how the proposed artificial turf would differ from what people see at the Metrodome, and timing of a spring referendum. Page 5 Minutes /Special Edina City Council/February 15, 2001 B Doug Johnson spoke on behalf of the Edina School District and thanked the Council for the opportunity to comment on the proposed facility plan. He said the proposal was an exciting opportunity to better our facilities and improve our infrastructure. The partnership between the City and School District would be one where all benefit. It would be a win -win situation. By attaching gyms to schools, it would be possible to accomplish needed community use in the evening while providing Edina students the opportunity to use these same facilities during the day. Not only would there be many athletic facility improvements, field renovation and additions, the performing arts also would be recognized. The remodeling of the Edina Community Center /Normandale Elementary School auditorium and creation of the more intimate black box theater at Edina High School would offer wonderful opportunities for our students and the community. The City referendum would also be combined with the District adding a number of academic classrooms that would be done at District expense as part of this project. Examples of how the partnership between the City and District would be valuable can be seen in three of the projects. At Concord Elementary, a new gym would be built over new classrooms. This provides much - needed classrooms and a much - needed adequate elementary gymnasium. At Valley View Middle School, where the area vacated by the existing pool would be reconstructed to add classrooms we are able to accomplish the objective of more academic space along with the need for more and better athletic facilities. At Edina High School, the addition of the black box theater would be in conjunction with adding new classrooms for the District's orchestra, choir, and band classes. This would be also a great match. Working in partnership, staff at the City and School have created a joint powers operating agreement that specifically guarantees community access while providing daytime access, safety and security for pre K -12 students. The School portion of the referendum proposal has undergone a stringent review and comment by the state of Minnesota. The State has provided their stamp of approval to the project. Each building principal has reviewed and discussed the plans related to their building in detail. They are all in support of the proposal. School site councils have also endorsed the recommendations. Since the Blue Ribbon Report has been released, District staff has had the opportunity to dialogue with parents, students, staff, and community members. Mr. Johnson stated two items he would like to specifically address included the operational costs of the facilities added to School property that would be paid for by the organizations using them. He noted that Board of Education Chair, Frank Bennett has stated publicly that the District will maintain fiscal integrity with any renovation or building additions. Second, many questions have been raised about the proposed bubble on Kuhlman Field. Mr. Johnson said that while the District would certainly use the bubble for many activities, they do not see the bubble as a need for the District. The Blue Ribbon Committee has strongly endorsed the concept for community use. The District would accept the responsibility to manage the bubble should it be built. However, their official position as a District continues to be that they are neutral related to the bubble. Page 6 A Minutes /Special Edina City Council/ February 15, 2001 Mr. Johnson concluded stating that District staff has discussed the recommendations with building administrators, teachers, support staff, students, parents and many community members, and found there would be a great deal of support. They believe that this project would be in the best interest of our children and would serve our community well into the future. They stand ready to assist with the support of the proposed referendum and look forward to February 26th when the Edina Board of Education will have an opportunity to dialogue with you about this plan. Mayor Maetzold thanked Mr. Johnson for his comments and stated the public comment period would begin with a presentation by the ECC Neighborhood Association. Following their presentation, other individuals would be allowed to speak. Public Comment Ryan Langsev, 5801 Concord Avenue, gave an overview of the ECC Neighborhood Association. Mr. Langsev said he supported the referendum, but objected to Kuhlman Field as the site of a bubble. He also stated he thought other locations in Edina could better support a temporary dome. Laura Nelson, 5603 Dalrymple Road objected to the dome proposed placement at Kuhlman Field because of increased traffic, parking problems and potential safety concerns. Ms. Nelson stated she did not want teens racing through her neighborhood driving recklessly. Jeri Albrecht, 5615 Sherwood Avenue, stated she represented the ECC Neighborhood Association opposed to the bubble at Kuhlman. Ms. Albrecht stated that presently crime and vandalism are occurring during High School athletic events. Ms. Albrecht expressed her fear over the potential for increased underage drinking and vandalism to homes and cars in the neighborhood if the dome were built. John Feld, 4909 Lakeview Drive, stated he opposed the proposed dome at Kuhlman Field because of the previously stated negative impact, but also because it will affect both property values and increase taxes. Mr. Feld asked that the dome be deleted from the referendum. Ron Fresquez, stated he opposed the dome at Kuhlman Field because of noise debris and decreased air quality. Mr. Fresquez stated that with the existing facility there are problems with PA noise. The proposed dome would be in conflict with Edina's mission statement. Maria Fesenmaier, 5713 Concord Avenue, stated she opposed the dome's proposed location of Kuhlman Field and asked that other locations be investigated. She presented a petition of citizens opposed to the dome at Kuhlman Field. Dan Rectenwald, 5611 Sherwood Avenue, stated he was a five -year resident of Edina and a member of the Blue Ribbon Committee. Mr. Rectenwald said traffic was already an issue in the ECC neighborhood and a dome will only exacerbate the problem. He suggested the dome be located at Braemar. Mr. Rectenwald stated that he and other members of the ECC Neighborhood Associaton support the referendum without the dome at Kuhlman. Sue Covnick, 4508 Lakeview Drive, presented graphic depictions of the neighborhood illustrating the traffic issues and asked that their neighborhood not be asked to bear the burden of the dome. Page 7 Minutes /Special Edina City Council/February 15, 2001 Jim Hield, 4712 Aspasia Circle, Soccer Club President stated the Club supported the referendum. Mr. Hield said that with 3,000 children between 8 and 18 participating in soccer programs he had great concern over field use. He supported the dome because the Club currently spends approximately $15,000 to rent the Holy Angels Dome. Mr. Hield felt that the dome would produce revenue and have broad public use. He added he would not be location specific, but urged a dome be included somewhere in the City. Mr. Hield concluded that he considered the increased taxes an acceptable trade off for increased values that would come from the park system improvements. John Beuerleine, 6209 Balder Lane, Soccer Association President, stated his organization serves younger children 5 to 15 years of age and currently has over 2,500 youth in program. There would be a huge need for more and better fields. Mr. Beuerleine urged the Council to go forward with the referendum. Gene Walden, 5805 Dale Avenue stated he supported the proposed referendum. In his opinion, the proposed projects would be tremendous for the community. Mr. Walden said he has coached basketball seven years and has struggled to find practice facilities using area churches and outside hoops in parks. Brad Hanson, 4619 Browndale, said the swim club wholeheartedly supported the referendum, but would also like to increase the 25 -meter pool slated for Valley View Middle School with a 50- meter pool. He asked the possibility of this addition be investigated. Tim Mooty, 5809 Sun Road, added the Edina Swim Club supported all of the proposed referendum improvements. He also asked.that the addition of a 50 -meter pool be investigated. Michael Sebek, 4401 Fondell Drive, asked that if the referendum goes to the voters it be divided into several questions so it does not either all fail or pass. He expressed concern over ongoing costs of maintenance. Neil Weikart, 4835 Maple Road, Edina Basketball Association President, stated the Association supported the referendum and commended the City and School District for working together on the proposal. Mr. Weikart stated Edina needs improved athletic facilities. With 1200 children involved in their programs they have had to cut events to accommodate the huge demands. Kathy Cella, 7121 Tupa, Drive, Edina Girls Athletic Association, stated they have about 1300 girls involved in flag football, basketball, volleyball and team tennis. Programs suffer because of lack of gym space. Ms. Cella stated she also supported the referendum. Catherine Mulholland, 6228 Oriole Lane, Secretary of Edina Senior Center asked the support of the Council in including the senior center facility furnishings in the referendum. Simon Whitehead, 5126 Roberts Place, Soccer Club and Edina High School Soccer Coach, stated he supported the proposed dome. Mr. Whitehead stated he disagreed with the ECC Neighborhood Association about rowdy behaviors. He added that Edina needs a domed facility. Page 8 Minutes /Special Edina City Council/ February 15, 2001 Dan Akins, 5610 St. Andrews Avenue, stated he opposed the referendum. Mr. Akins said the government should not be in the business of sports and the needs stated were a result of poor planning. Doreen. Frankel, Concord Site Council and PTO, endorsed the Blue Ribbon Committee's proposal. Ms. Frankel stated they were excited about the new gymnasium at Concord. David Kranso, 5607 Dalrymple Road, stated he opposed a dome at Kuhlman, but supported improved facilities. Mr. Kranso suggested the bubble be located elsewhere and urged a compromise be found. Richard Novack, 5202 Grandview Lane, stated he supported the Blue Ribbon Committee's recommendation. He cautioned that he would not want to see the proposed improvements lost in controversy over the dome. Move the dome if necessary, but proceed with the project. Bob Krengel, 405 Blake Road, stated he supported $12,000,000 in park and recreation improvements, but would not support items on School properties. He urged the Council not to mix School and City projects adding that the Edina School District should do their own work. Bridget Collard, 4725 School Road, asked when TSP Architects were hired and stated that a traffic study should have been completed. Mr. Hughes stated that TSP began working with the City in 1999 and then has continued working with the Blue Ribbon Committee. Chris Hayes, 5604 Highwood Drive, Normandale Site Council, gave support to the gym and auditorium at Normandale Elementary. Anne Cronin, 23 Cooper Circle, stated her support of the ECC improvement and the referendum. John Weddle, 5900 Arbour Avenue, generally stated his support of the proposed referendum, but asked for additional swimming facilities. Mr. Weddle asked for a 50 -meter pool and additional spectator seats to be included in the referendum. Lee McGrath, 4614 Moorland Avenue, said that during his campaign he found 5,000 voters who agreed with him that the proposed referendum was fiscally irresponsible. He asked the Council to reject the referendum and put the responsibility for improved facilities on the School District. Ted Volk, 6301 Belmore Lane, voiced opposition to the proposed referendum. The items included are too costly. Edina has multiple School Districts and residents of Districts other than the Edina District are already paying taxes for such facilities. Dan Atkins, 6812 Chapel Lane, Acting Director of the Edina Chess Association, expressed concern about traffic at all facilities. He added his limited support of the referendum, but asked that traffic be looked at for all the improved sites. Dick Ward, 6809 Galway Drive, Edina Basketball Association, stated the facilities are needed. Mr. Ward said he believed the facilities could be supported by the community. He told the Council that the negative comments heard were the same as when any issue must be decided. Mr. Ward urged support of the referendum. Page 9 Minutes /Special Edina City Council/February 15, 2001 Kathy Christiansen, 6841 Oaklawn Avenue, parent of Normandale School child, expressed concern about auditorium use during the day. She also asked that security during construction be adequate and that funding sources be identified for protection systems. Ms. Christiansen suggested that before month end representatives of the City and School meet to discuss her concerns. Ms. Christiansen expressed her support of the referendum if the security issues were addressed adequately. Ann Sullivan, 5845 Brookview Avenue, Principle of Valley View Middle School, and resident of Pamela Park expressed her support for the referendum. Link Shey, 4815 Lakeview Drive stated his support of the referendum. Conner Mannix, 4511 Arden Avenue, requested that the Council add $250,000 to the proposed referendum to put the skateboard park that would be being built with the Southdale YMCA indoors. Mr. Mannix stated that teens his age that like skateboarding need a safe place to practice their sport. Ted Brinkman, 7017 Kerry Road, stated he was a member of the Blue Ribbon Committee. Mr. Brinkman gave his support to the referendum and noted the proposed increased cost would be equivalent to a bottle of water each day. Member Masica expressed her concern that the neighborhood concern over the location of the dome be listened to by the Council. She said it was apparent through the testimony that the Kuhlman Field Dome needs further review. Member Kelly made a motion, seconded by Member Hovland to close the public hearing at 9:45 P.M. Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold Motion carried. There being no further business on the Council. Agenda, Mayor Maetzold declared the 'meeting adjourned at 9:50 P.M. City Clerk Page 10 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT EDINA SCHOOL DISTRICT OFFICES, 5701 NORMANDALE ROAD FEBRUARY 26, 2001 5:30 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Member Housh and Mayor Maetzold. Member Kelly entered the meeting at 5:40 p.m. Member Kelly left the meeting at 6:40 p.m. Mayor Maetzold stated the purpose of the special meeting was to allow the City Council to discuss the potential referendum and the joint agreement with the School District concerning the proposed park improvements. He noted that on February 15, 2001, a public hearing was held allowing testimony and that numerous letters have been received from residents. He said that Art Downey, would make a presentation regarding the new swimming pools, the new referendum dollar amounts would be discussed, and then the Council would like the School Board's priorities and comments relative to the proposed referendum to assist the Council in their deliberations. Art Downey presented the Edina Swim Club's request for a 50 -meter pool to be built at Valley View Middle School instead of the proposed 25 -meter pool. The Council and School Board thanked Mr. Downey, but suggested that if the Swim Club was serious in their desire for a 50- meter pool they present to the Council and Board concrete methods of their intent to fund the $100,000 plus annual operating costs for a 50 -meter pool. The Council and School Board discussed whether changes to the proposed project would necessitate resubmission to the Department of Children and Families at the State. The Board indicated they would support the 50 -meter pool if the operating costs were guaranteed, they would suggest the Kuhlman Field bubble be moved elsewhere or deleted and that they would still support artificial turf on Kuhlman without the bubble. The Board also indicated that perhaps there could be community use of the Southview "Middle" field if it were limited to younger participants. It was suggested that the City concentrate on the public informational mailer, but that the School District's staff could work with a citizens committee if one formed. There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Maetzold declared the meeting adjourned at 6:55 P.M. City Clerk Page 1 Oe� Cr 0 REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Counc' From: Wayne Houle - Assist. Public Works Director Date: March 6, 2001 Subject: Public Hearing for: Street Improvement No. BA304 West 65th Street from Valley View Road to France Avenue. Recommendation: Agenda Item # Consent Information Only Mgr. Recommends Action II. A. ❑ To H RA ® To Council ® Motion ® Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion W If the Council determines the pro ct to be warranted and necessary, Council shall adopt a resolution approving West 65t Street Improvements BA -304, authorize plans and specifications to be completed and bids taken. Info /Background: This project was initiated by the Development Plan for Fairview Southdale Hospital as approved by the Edina City Council on May 2, 2000. The Feasibility Study was submitted to Council on February 6. 1 have attached a copy of this Feasibility Study along with Notice of Public Hearing to this report. -The estimated project cost is $107,800. Funding for this project would be from a special assessment, based on the gross floor area of the assessable properties. have received three phone calls regarding this project. We have also received the attached letter supporting the project. Staff analyzed the project and feels that the project is feasible from an engineering standpoint. , le� ok a H O .ay •n, a �6Q• STREET IMPROVEMENTS WEST 65" STREET February 6, 2001 LOCATION: FEASIBILITY STUDY - BA304 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA West 65th Street from Valley View Road to France Avenue. LOCATION MAP N E S INITIATION & ISSUES: This project was initiated by the Development Plan for Fairview Southdale Hospital as approved by the Edina City Council on May 2, 2000. Attached is an agreement between Fairview Health Services, Fairview Southdale Physicians Building Limited and the City of Edina supporting the public improvements to this area. This phase of these projects is one part of a two phase approach to the roadway improvements in this area. Phase One originally included the Drew Avenue expansion. Phase Two originally included the Valley View Road and TH62 interchange along with the resurfacing of West 65th Street between France Avenue and Valley View Road. Phase One is currently proposed to include Drew Avenue from West 66th Street to West 65th Street and also West 65th Street from Valley View Road to France Avenue. This feasibility report only includes West 65th Street due to a different special assessment area than the Drew Avenue project. The Public Hearing for Phase Two, the interchange at Valley View Road and TH62, will be requested after Staff has acquired preliminary approval from Minnesota Department of Transportation. Staff is anticipating this Public Feasibility Study BA304 West 65th Street - from Valley View Road to France Avenue February 6, 2001 Page 2 Hearing to be held mid -2001 with a potential construction start in late 2001. Staff has initiated discussion with the Minnesota Department of Transportation to acquire these approvals for modifications to this interchange. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The existing streetscape consists of a 44 foot wide bituminous roadway with a bulkhead concrete curb and gutter flanking both sides. The roadway is 38 years old and the pavement is in relatively poor condition. Portions of the concrete curb and gutter are also in poor condition. IMPROVEMENT: This project involves milling 4'/2 inches of the pavement, replacing portions of the concrete curb and gutter and repaving the roadway, see plan below. The existing sidewalk that is located along the Southdale Hospital Parking Ramp property is proposed to be extended to Valley View Road. The proposed sidewalk would be a 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk. PROPOSED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS RIGHT -OF -WAY: Adequate right -of -way exists for the roadway work, however a sidewalk easement will be required along the north right -of -way line. FEASIBILITY: This project is feasible from an Engineering / City standpoint. EASEMENTS: A sidewalk easement will be required along the north right -of -way line for the properties located at 4010 and 4018 West 65th Street. If these sidewalk easements cannot be acquired prior to award of bid then the sidewalk portion of the project will be delayed until these properties redevelop. Feasibility Study BA304 West 651h Street - from Valley View Road to France Avenue February 6, 2001 Page 3 COMPLETION: 2001 Construction Season ASSESSMENTS: A special assessment of approximately $0.11 per square foot of gross floor area include the properties listed in the following preliminary assessment: IMPROVEMENT BA304: WEST 65TH STREET PID PROPERTY ADDRESS OWNERNAME GROSS FLOOR AREA SF COST PER BUILDING 3002824140160 4015 65th St W Rovick Realty Company 36000 $ 4,035.03 3002824140004 4010 65th St W 4010 Corporation 26640 $ 2,985.92 3002824140003 4018 65th St W John O Murrin 12900 $ 1,445.88 3002824140001 6400 France Ave S Fairview Hosp & Health Car 0 0 3002824140007 4005 65th St W 4005 Partnership 18694 $ 2,095.30 3002824140008 6500 France Ave S Robert J Milavetz 12504 $ 1,401.50 2902824230006 6545 France Ave S Ncsm Building Management 193222 $ 21,657.11 2902824230166 6363 France Ave S Bto Development 64344 $ 7,211.94 2902824230165 16401 France Ave S Fairview Hosp & Health Car 597474 $ 66,967.32 TOTAL AREA 961778 $107,800.00 PROJECT COSTS: The total estimated project cost is $107,800 and includes indirect costs of 22.5 %, which includes engineering, clerical, and finance costs. Funding for the project will - be from special assessments. See summary of the Project Cost Estimate below. TOTAL CONSTRUCITON COST: $ 87,200 15% ENGINEERING & CLERICAL. $ 131100 SUBTOTAL PROJECT COST: $ 100,300 7.5% FINANCE COST: $ 7,500 TOTAL PROJECT COST: $ 107,800 Feasibility Study BA304 West 65th Street - from Valley View Road to France Avenue February 6, 2001 Page 4 PROJECT SCHEDULE: The following schedule is feasible from an Engineering standpoint: Council Orders Public Hearing .................................. February 6, 2001 Receive Feasibility Report .......................................... February 6, 2001 Public Hearing ........................................................... March 6, 2001 Bid Opening ............................................................. April 12, 2001 Award Contract ......................................................... April 17, 2001 Begin Construction ..................................................... May 8, 2001 Complete Construction ................... .........................August 17, 2001 !03/01/2001 THU 12:11 FAX �O Development Corporation March 1, 2001 Wayne D. Houle, P.E. Assistant Director of Public Works City of Edina 4801 West 50th Strcct Edina, MN 55424 -1394 Re: Notice of Public Hearing Street Improvements Drew Avenue Improvement B.A. — 322 and West 65th Street Improvement B.A. — 304 Dear Mr. Houle: BTO Development Corporation through* its affiliated partnership, France Avenue Medical Building LLP, is the developer of the Integrated Care Facility (ICF) as part of the current construction project at Fairview Southdale Hospital and is also the managing, general partner of the 6363 Southdale Physicians Building. On behalf of both projects, we strongly endorse the proposed improvements to Drew Avenue and West 65th Street to improve the area wide traffic circulation and accessibility to the entire Southdale area and particularly the Fairview Southdale Hospital campus. We are, however, concerned the Phase One improvements do not currently include the Val ley View Road interchange and exit ramp improvements at TH62 or the proposed improvements to the intersection at Valley View Road and West 651h Street. We understood as part of the development approval process for the Fairview Southdale Hospital expansion and the ICF that the Valley View Road exit ramp from TH62 and the improvement of the Valley View and West 65th Street intersection were essential parts of the traffic management and accessibility plan to help mitigate traffic congestion along France Avenue and in particular to improve the accessibility to the Fairview Southdale Hospital campus. It was our understanding this was one of the primary thrusts of the traffic engineering study performed on behalf of the City by BRW. It would seem to be of vital importance to have the direct access off of TH62 to the new parking ramp located at 6400 France Avenue available upon the opening of the hospital and ICF expansion later this fall rather than continuing to divert traffic dowel Valley View Road and back north to France Avenue or to create further congestion at the TH62 exit southbound to France Avenue. We would like to encourage the City of Edina to IE 002/003 5700 Smetana Drive, Suite 210 Minnetonka, Minnesota 55343 (952) 938 -9490 Fax: (952) 938 -9414 ,.03/01/2001 THU 12 -12 FK.X Page Two Wayne D. Houle, P.E. March 1, 2001 expedite its planning and construction efforts for the Valley View Road exit from TH62 and the intersection improvements at Valley View Road and 65`h Street to dovetail with the completion of the parking ramp, skyway, hospital expansion and the ICF by October 2001. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the public improvement projects. We appreciate the support and cooperation we have received from the City staff and City Council on this project, Sincerely, C /PAW Allen R. Hill Vice President o --% M. CC: Dottie Jung Ray Piirainen 16003/003 (OFFICIAL PUBLICATION) CITY OF EDINA 4801 W. 50TH STREET EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING STREETIMPROVEMENTS WEST 65 STREET IMPROVEMENT BA -304 The Edina City Council will meet in the council chambers at the Edina City Hall on Tuesday, March 6, 2001 at 7:00 PM to consider the proposed street improvements on WEST 65TH STREET: FROM VALLEY VIEW ROAD TO FRANCE AVENUE to be constructed under the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. The area proposed to be assessed for a portion of the cost of proposed improvements includes: Property Identification Number 3002824140160 3002824140004 3002824140003 3002824140001 3002824140007 3002824140008 2902824230006 2902824230166 2902824230165 Property Address 4015 65th St W 4010 65th St W 4018 65th St W 6400 France Ave S 4005 65th St W 6500 France Ave S 6545 France Ave S 6363 France Ave S 6401 France Ave S The estimated cost of Improvement BA -304 is $107,800. Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the proposed improvement will be heard at this meeting. Debra Mangen City Clerk PLEASE PUBLISH IN THE EDINA SUN ON FEBRUARY 21 AND FEBRUARY 28, 2001. PLEASE SEND TWO (2) AFFIDAVITS OF PUBLICATION. BILL TO CITY OF EDINA. REPORURECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council From: Wayne Houle Information Only Assist. Public Works Director Date: March 6, 2001 Subject: Public Hearing for: Street Improvement No. BA322 Drew Avenue from West 66th Street to West 65th Street. Recommendation: Agenda Item # II. B. Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Action ® Motion ® Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion If the Council determines the project to be warranted and necessary, Council shall adopt a resolution approving Drew Avenue Street Improvements BA -322, authorize plans and specifications to be completed and bids taken. Info /Background: This project was initiated by the Development Plan for Fairview Southdale Hospital as approved by the Edina City Council on May 2, 2000. The Feasibility Study was submitted to Council on February 6. 1 have attached a copy of this Feasibility Study along with Notice of Public Hearing to this report. The estimated project cost is $155,000. Funding for this project would be from a special assessment, based on the gross floor area of the assessable properties. Staff has received the attached letter supporting the project. Staff analyzed the project and feels. that the project is feasible from an engineering standpoint. o e Cn o � ay a STREET IMPROVEMENTS DREW AVENUE February 6, 2001 LOCATION: FEASIBILITY STUDY - BA322 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA Drew Avenue from .West 66th Street to West 65th Street. LOCATION MAP N �E S INITIATION & ISSUES: This project was initiated by the Development Plan for Fairview Southdale Hospital as approved by the Edina City Council on May 2, 2000. Attached is an agreement between Fairview Health Services, Fairview Southdale Physicians Building Limited and the City of Edina supporting the public improvements to this area. This phase of these projects is one part of a two phase approach to the roadway improvements in this area. Phase One originally included the Drew Avenue expansion. Phase Two originally included the Valley View Road and TH62 interchange along with the resurfacing of West 65th Street between France Avenue and Valley View Road. Phase One is currently proposed to include Drew Avenue from West 66th Street to West 65th Street and also West 65th Street from Valley View Road to France Avenue. This feasibility only includes Drew Avenue due to different special assessment area than the West 65th Street project. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The existing streetscape consists of 36 foot wide bituminous roadway with a bulkhead concrete curb and gutter flanking both sides. The westerly Feasibility Study BA322 Drew Avenue - West 66th Street to West 65th Street February 6, 2001 Page 2 boulevard contains small berms with landscaping that includes small to large trees. The roadway pavement is 35 to 38 years old and is in good condition with no drainage concerns. The commercial buildings located to the east constructed in the mid- 1960's have not been redeveloped. IMPROVEMENT: Paver sidewalk & pedestrian lights PROPOSED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS Feasibility Study BA322 Drew Avenue - West 66th Street to West 65th Street February 6, 2001 Page 3 RIGHT -OF -WAY: Adequate right -of -way exists for the roadway. The new paver sidewalk will require a sidewalk easement, see easements below. FEASIBILITY: This project is feasible from an Engineering / City standpoint. EASEMENTS: A sidewalk easement will be required along the westerly side of Drew Avenue. Attached you will find a letter from Bruce Carlson of Northco Real Estate Services representing NCSM Ltd. Partnership, the owner of Southdale Medical Center stating that they will grant the City a sidewalk easement. COMPLETION: 2001 Construction Season ASSESSMENTS: A special assessment of approximately $0.18 per square foot of gross floor area includes the properties of 6401, 6363, and 6545 France Avenue. See preliminary assessment role below: PROJECT COSTS: PROJECT SCHEDULE: IMPROVEMENT BA322: DREW AVENUE EXPANSION PROPERTY ID PROPERTY OWNERNAME GROSS COST PER Bid Opening ............................... ............................... ADDRESS Award Contract ........................... ...........................:... FLOOR BUILDING May 8, 2001 Complete Construction ..................... .........................August 17, 2001 AREA SF Ncsm Building 2902824230006 6545 France Ave S Management 193222 $ 35,026.91 2902824230166 6363 France Ave S Bto Development 64344 $ 11,664.16 Fairview Hosp & France Ave S Health Car 597474 $ 108,308.93 rLL2423016516401 TOTAL AREA 895028 $ 155,000.00 The total estimated project cost is $155,000 and includes indirect costs of 22.5 %, which includes engineering, clerical, and finance costs. Funding for the project will be from special assessments. See summary of the Project Cost Estimate below. TOTAL CONSTRUCITON COST: $ 125,400 15% ENGINEERING & CLERICAL: $ 18,800 SUBTOTAL PROJECT COST: $ 144,200 7.5% FINANCE COST: $ 10,800 TOTAL PROJECT COST: $ 155,000 The following schedule is feasible from an Engineering standpoint: Council Orders Public Hearing ... ............................... February 6, 2001 Receive Feasibility Report ......... ............................... February 6, 2001 Public Hearing ............................. ............................... March 6, 2001 Bid Opening ............................... ............................... April 12, 2001 Award Contract ........................... ...........................:... April 17, 2001 Begin Construction ........................ ............................... May 8, 2001 Complete Construction ..................... .........................August 17, 2001 03/01/2001 THU 12:11 FAX �O Development Corporation March 11 2001 Wayne D. Houle, P.E. Assistant Director of Public Works City of Edina 4801 West 50t'' Strcet Edina, MN 55424 -1394 Re: Notice of Public Hearing Street Improvements Drew Avenue Improvement B.A. — 322 and West 65 "' Street Improvement B.A. — 304 Dear Mr. Houle BTO Development Corporation through'its affiliated partnership, France Avenue Medical Building LLP, is the developer of the Integrated Care Facility (ICF) as part of the current construction project at Fairview Southdale Hospital and is also the managing general partner of the 6363 Southdale Physicians Building. On behalf of both projects, we strongly endorse the proposed improvements to Drew Avenuc and West 65th Street to improve the area wide traffic circulation and accessibility to the entire Southdale area and particularly the Fairview Southdale Hospital campus. We are, however, concerned the Phase One improvements do not currently include the Valley View Road interchange and exit ramp improvements at TH62 or the proposed improvements to the intersection at Valley View Road and West 65th Street. We understood as part of the development approval process for the Fairview Southdale Hospital expansion and the ICF that the Valley View Road exit ramp from TH62 and the improvement of the Valley View and West 65`h Street intersection were essential parts of the traffic management and accessibility plan to help mitigate traffic congestion along France Avenue and in particular to improve the accessibility to the Fairview Southdale Hospital campus. It was our understanding this was one of the primary thrusts of the traffic engineering study performed on behalf of the City by BRW. It would seem to be of vital importance to have the direct access off of TH62 to the new parking ramp located at 6400 France Avenue available upon the opening of the hospital and ICF expansion later this fall rather than continuing to divcrt traffic down Valley View Road and back north to France Avenue or to create further congestion at'the TH62 exit southbound to France Avenue. We would like to encourage the City of Edina to Q002/003 5700 Smetana Drive, Suite 210 Minnetonka, Minnesota 55343 (952) 938 -9490 Fax: (952) 938 -9414 '.03/01/2001 THU 12.12 FAX Page Two Wayne D. Houle, P,E. March 1, 2001 expedite its planning and construction efforts for the Valley View Road exit from TH62 "`. and the intersection improvements at Valley View Road and 65`h Street to dovetail with the completion of the parking ramp, skyway, hospital expansion and the ICF by October 2001. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the public improvement projects. We appreciate the support and cooperation we have received from the City staff and City Council on this project, Sincerely, ,'0000e Allen R. Hill Vice President ARH:mpg CC: Dottie Jung Ray Piirainen 16003/003 ,04/27/2000 THtI 13:05 FAX NORTHCO t A COU Network banner April 27, 2000 Mr, Wayne Houle Assistant City Engineer City of Edina 4801 West 50`n Street Edina, MN 55424 Q001/001 4 . r ` �J Dear Wayne: hip, the owner of Southdale Medical Center, will cooperate with the NCSM Ltd Partners City of Edina for the construction of a sidewalk on Drew Avenue. Accordingly, we will agree to dedicate an easement for sidewalk construction subject to two conditions: a) that none of our setbacks, floor area ratios or other code enforcement issues are compromised by the dedication, and b) review and approval of the easement by our legal counsel. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, NORTHCO CORPORATION ruc4ar' Managing Partner BC/if 4900 vuaNC Dr.[vE Mc,,,IEApous. MN 55435 -5314 TEI.: 952.520.1 600 AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, is made and entered into this day of April, 2000, by and between FAIRVIEW HEALTH SERVICES, LE PHYSICIANS BUILDING LIMITED corporation (AFairview @), FAIRVIEW SOUTHD A PARTNERSHIP, a Minnesota limited partnership (the APartnership @), and the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the ACity @). RECITALS: A. Fairview is the fee owner of certain real property located in the City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota, at 6400 and 6401 France Avenue South on which there is presently located an existing hospital building (the ABuilding @), and Fairview is planning an expansion of the Building (the AExpansion @). B. Fairview has applied to the. City for approval pursuant to Section 850 of the City Code of the Final Development Plan for the Expansion and a Conditional Use Permit for a parking structure to be constructed in connection with the Expansion at 6400 France Avenue South. C. The Partnership is the owner of a medical office building located at 6363 France Avenue South on certain real property owned by Fairview and leased to the Partnership. D. The City is considering undertaking two separate public improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 in the vicinity of 6400 and 6401 France Avenue South consisting of (i) improvements to Drew Avenue South between West 651" Street and West 66' Street as further described on.Exhibit A hereto (the ADrew Avenue Improvement @), and (ii) improvements to the Valley View Road and Highway 62 interchange and the reclaiming of West 65' Street from France Avenue to Valley View Road as further described on Exhibit B hereto (the AValley View Improvement@ and together with the Drew Avenue Improvement, the AImprovements @). E. The City proposes to specially assess all of the costs of the Drew Avenue Improvement against property in the area identified in Exhibit A hereto, which area includes 6363 and 6401 France Avenue South, and to assess 25% of the costs of the portion of the Valley View Improvement related to the improvements to the Valley View and Highway 62 interchange and 100% of the costs of the portion of the Valley View Improvement related to reclaiming of West 65' Street from France Avenue to e includes 6363, 6400 and property located in Avenue South. identified in Exhibit B hereto, which area F. The City has conditioned its approval of the Final Development Plan for the Expansion and of the Conditional Use Permit for the parking structure to be constructed at 6400 France Avenue South on the execution and delivery of this Agreement by Fairview and the Partnership. G. Fairview and the Partnership are desirous of the City approving the Final Development Plan for the Expansion and the Conditional Use Permit for the parking structure to be constructed at 6400 France Avenue South and the City undertaking the Improvements and believe the Improvements benefit their respective properties. Agreement. H. Fairview warrants that it has the power and authority to enter into this I. The Partnership warrants that it has the power and authority to enter into this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City approving the Final Development Plan for the Expansion and the Conditional Use Permit for the parking structure to be constructed at 6400 France Avenue South and for the City undertaking the Improvements, Fairview, the Partnership and the City agree as follows: 1. Assessment of Costs of Improvements Against Fairview Pro e . If the Drew Avenue Improvement is constructed by the City, Fairview agrees that up to $108,000 of the cost thereof may be specially assessed against 6401 France Avenue South (PID #2902824230165) in the manner provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chap any right o airview waives any appeal the amount of efects such or irregularities in connection with such assessment assessment pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.081. If the Valley View Improvement is constructed by the City Fairview agrees that up to $268,000 of the cost thereof may be specially assessed against 6401 France Avenue South (PID #2902824230165) in the manner provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and Fairview waives any defects or irregularities in connection with such assessment and any right to appeal the amount of such assessment pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.081. 2. Assessment of Costs of Improvements Against Partnership Pro g . If the Drew Avenue Improvement is constructed by the City, the Partnership agrees that up to $122000 of the cost thereof may be specially assessed against 6363 France Avenue South (PID #2902824230166) in the manner provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and the Partnership waives any defects or irregularities in t Section 429.08 1. right to appeal the amount of such assessment pursuant o Minnesota Statutes If the Valley View Improvement is constructed by the City the Partnership agrees that up to $29,000 of the cost thereof may be specially assessed against 6363 France Avenue South (PID #2902824230166) in the manner provided by Minnesota Statutes, ass Chapter 429, and any the partnership waives any defects uch assessment pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.081. right to appeal the amount 3. No Obligation to Undertake Improvements. construct the Drew Avenues Agreement does not in any manner obligate or commit the City to Improvement or the Valley View Improvety c construct the other Improvement. by the City does not obligate or commit th e City to 4. City Retains Authority to Assess Hieher Amount. The execution and delivery of this Agreement does not in any manner prevent or limit the City from assessing a higher amount of the cost of the Improvements against 6363, 6400 or 6401 France Avenue South than as set forth herein, provided that the waivers of Fairview and the Partnership contained in Sections 1 and 2 hereof do not apply to any such higher amount. 5. Counterparts. This Agreement is executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be duly executed the date and year first above written. -3- FAIRA HEALTTI", VICES By . Its r FAIRVIEW SOUTHDALE PHYSICIANS BUILDING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP BTO DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, its General Partner Drafted by: Dorsey & Whitney LLP (JPG) 220 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 -4- CITY OF EDINA By r4 -4 1e9 Exhibit A Drew Avenue Improvement The Drew Avenue Improvement consists of improvements to Drew Avenue South between W. 651h and W. 66`h Street including the widening of the lro don of Chelaneexisting s, the gutter in a atithe of on a 6 foot wide paver sidewalk o of the parking on the east side of the street. west side of the street and the r emoval of on-street I Par 1 YY.r r� ~ I. a rm . v w. The proposed assessment area for the Drew Avenue Improvement is as follows: t ST w PROPOSED ASSESSMENT AREA -5- Exhibit BB Valley View Improvement The Valley View Improvement consists of reconstruction ramf ,�nstallaton of traffic signals 62 ramp intersection at Valley View Road and thelrec'laiming of the pavement on West 65`h Street from and reconstruction of the intersection, France Avenue South to Valley View Road. The proposed assessment area for the Valley View Improvement is as follows: r .w w 04 4M YON 41"a an YM 4M YY Yq'Y Y7. Y! oar YY.M Yi.w \-aa I I a } YKM Y� ♦��j��j Yq + ((( YR a1tM Y„ W F n eff C oirM OM w Ya � an w Ys r .w w 04 4M YON 41"a an YM 4M YY Yq'Y Y7. Y! oar YY.M Yi.w \-aa I I a PROPOSED ASSESSMENT AREA n } .aw � } PROPOSED ASSESSMENT AREA n (OFFICIAL PUBLICATION) CITY OF EDINA 4801 W. 50TH STREET EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING STREETIMPROVEMENTS DREW AVENUE IMPROVEMENT BA -322 The Edina City Council will meet in the council chambers at the Edina City Hall on Tuesday, March 6, 2001 at 7:00 PM to consider the proposed street improvements on DREW AVENUE: FROM WEST 66TH STREET TO WEST 65TH STREET to be constructed under the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. The area proposed to be assessed for a portion of the cost of proposed improvements includes: Property Identification Number Property Address 2902824230006 6545 France Ave S 2902824230166 6363 France Ave S 2902824230165 6401 France Ave S The estimated cost of Improvement BA -322 is $155,000. Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the proposed improvement will be heard at this meeting. Debra Mangen City Clerk PLEASE PUBLISH IN THE EDINA SUN ON FEBRUARY 21 AND FEBRUARY 28, 2001. PLEASE SEND TWO (2) AFFIDAVITS OF PUBLICATION. BILL TO CITY OF EDINA. f I /-k 0I t TZA. REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council From: Craig Larsen City Planner Date: March 6, 2001 Subject: 2001 CDBG Community Development Block Grant. Recommendation: Agenda Item: III. A Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Action: ❑ Motion ® Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Approve recommended budget for submission to Hennepin County. Info /Background: Edina's 2001 CDBG entitlement of $182,331 reflects a $1,070 increase over the 2000 entitlement of $181,261. HUD regulations require that the public service portion of the budget may not exceed 15% of the total budget. That being the case, Edina's 2001 budget for public services may not exceed $27,350, with the remaining $154,981 to be directed toward community development. Public Services The 2001 requests for public service funding have come from the following agencies Edina has supported in the past: 1. Senior Community Services, H.O.M.E. Program, providing Housing and Outdoor Maintenance for the Elderly. 2. Greater Minneapolis's Daycare Association, G.M.D.C.A. providing daycare subsidy, and o 3. Community Action for Suburban Hennepin , CASH, providing housing programs for low and moderate income homebuyers, homeowners and tenants. For the first year a funding request has also been received from: 4. Resource Center for Fathers and Families, providing funds to support programs enhancing the health and welfare of families. The requests from these agencies total $34,600, exceeding the maximum $27,350, allowed by $6,850. The Human Relations Commission has reviewed the requests for funding, and recommends the following budget: Community Development After the $27,350 distribution for public services, $154,981 remains to be directed toward community development projects. Since the inception of the CDBG program in the mid- 1970's, Edina has directed funds toward Rehabilitation of Private Property, making improvements to over 200 homes. This year, staff recommends $54,981 be directed toward this project with the anticipation that four or more eligible homeowners will make structural improvements to their homes. Staff further recommends the remaining $100,000 of community development funds to be directed toward Affordable Housing Assistance, in keeping with Edina's commitment to the Minnesota Livable Communities Act. These funds will be directed toward projects that will assist in housing opportunities for persons of low or moderate incomes. 2000 2001 2001 Budget Requests Proposed H.O.M.E. $ 9,189 $13,100 $ 9,350 G.M.D.C.A. $17,000 $18,000 $15,000 C.A.S.H. $ 1,000 $ 1,500 $ 1,000 Fathers & Families -0- $1,500 $1,000 $27,189 $34,600 $27,350 Community Development After the $27,350 distribution for public services, $154,981 remains to be directed toward community development projects. Since the inception of the CDBG program in the mid- 1970's, Edina has directed funds toward Rehabilitation of Private Property, making improvements to over 200 homes. This year, staff recommends $54,981 be directed toward this project with the anticipation that four or more eligible homeowners will make structural improvements to their homes. Staff further recommends the remaining $100,000 of community development funds to be directed toward Affordable Housing Assistance, in keeping with Edina's commitment to the Minnesota Livable Communities Act. These funds will be directed toward projects that will assist in housing opportunities for persons of low or moderate incomes. PROPOSED 2001 CDBG BUDGET Community Development: Rehabilitation of Private Property Affordable Housing Assistance Public Services: Housing & Outdoor Maintenance For the Elderly GMDCA — Daycare Subsidy Community Action for Suburban Hennepin Resources for Fathers & Families $ 54,981 $100,000 $ 9,350 $15,000 $ 2,000 $ 1,000 $182,331 • FROM : SEN I OR COMMUN I TY SERV I CES PHONE NO. : 541 1019 Jan. 19 2001 02: 26PM P2 SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES 10709 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 111, Minnetonka, MN 55305 Phone: (952) 541 -1019 FAX: (952) 541 -0841 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Dr. Chinyere (Ike) Njaka January 19, 2001 President Francis Hagen ist Vice President Susan Heiberg g Marty Guritz City of Edina Mary Henning 4801 West 50th Street 2nd Vice President Edina, MN 55424 Scott Brandt Programs' cost. GMCC funding, utilizing Federal Title III monies, Treasurer bear Ms. Heiberg: Bob Bean organization that solicits private donations, contributes as well. Secretary Senior Community Services is requesting that the City of Edina Laurie LaFontaine allocate $13,100 from it's share of Community Development Block Past President Grant (CDBG) Year XXVII funds to support the HOME Program. In John C. Boeder addition we plan to make a request to the East Edina Housing Member -ar -Large Foundation (EEHF) for $12,900. Enclosed is a Hennepin County Gordon Hughes Request for Funding application filled out for the City to facilitate Member -ar -Large our request. Senator Rudy Bosehwitz Peter Coyle Edina's CDBG and EEHF funds will be leveraged from client fees, 9 Marty Guritz funding from the Greater Minneapolis Council of Churches Aiko Higuchl (GMCC) and from donations. The HOME Program operates on a Dwight Johnson Gloria Johnson sliding fee scale. Clients cover approximately one-quarter of the 9 PP Y q Kevin Krueger Programs' cost. GMCC funding, utilizing Federal Title III monies, Rep. Ann Lenczewski helps to subsidize chore services. Friends of HOME, an Dotty O'Brien Senator Gen Olson organization that solicits private donations, contributes as well. Curtis A. Pearson Mary Tambornino If you have any questions, or if the Human Relations Commission Leonard J. Thiel members would like to have an informational presentation, please Thomas Thorfinnson Tom Ticen let me know. Benjamin F. Withhert , Sincere) Executive Director 8 C. E. 0. y PROGRAMS 75A-1- • Multi- Purpose Ron Bloch Senior Centers • Senior Outreach Program Administrator • H.O.M.E. • Transportation A Founding Member of Eldercare Partners 0-far A United Way ea....,. FROM SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES PHONE NO. : 541 1019 Jan. 19 2001 02:27PM P3 2001 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY CDBG PROGRAM REQUEST FOR FUNDING (Use one form per project) A. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Community: Edina 2. Project Name: HOME (Household & Outside Maintenance for Elderly) 3. Contact Person /Phone No. Ron Bloch (j 52) 541 -1019 B. PROJECT DATA 1. Funding Request $13.100 2. Is this an existing CDBG- FUNDED Project? _2i_ Yes _ No 3. Leveraged Funds: (What other public or private funds does project include ?) Amount $ See # 10 Source See # 10 r 4. Project Location: Address Citywide S. Project Description: (Describe the project in as much detail as possible, including the local need(s) the project will address) See Attached Program Summary 6. Consolidated Plan Priorities: Using the list provided identify what priority(les) the project will meet. (Note: If proposed project is a low Urban County priority you must explain why it has a higher priority in your community) Priority(les) Public Service Needs: Senior Services - Benefiting low and moderate income persons - High Priority FROM SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES PHONS NO. : 541 1019 Jan. 19 2001 02:27PM P4 7. Describe anticipated results /accomplishments project will have. (number of persons /households to be assisted /served, number of housing units to be rehabbed/built, etc.) In 2000 the project served 161 Edina residents (126 households). It is anticipated that approximately the same number will be served in CDBG Year XXVII. 8. Describe how project will assist community In achieving your Livable Communities Act goals (if applicable). 9. implementation .Schedule: (For the time period 7 -1 -00 to 6- 30 -02, identify the major project tasks to be performed and when they will occur) 0 mow ►,. -19 - vacuumipq. dusting. shopping. doing wash. etc. _ 10. Budget: (Specify total project budget by major project component -i.e., administration, planning, construction, acquisition, direct grants, public service.) BUDGE /SOURCE OF FUNDS Component QD8Sa Other(identify) ntify) Public Services /Eden Prairie $ 12.885 595.000 Client fees /Edina S13,100 $ 12.904 Edina/EEHF /Richfield $ 22.700 $ 46.950 United Way /Minnetonka $17800, $ 58.574 GMCC /Brooklyn Center $ 22.500 $ 14.000 Friends of HM $ 84,592 Hen County Project Totals $ 88.985 $312.016 NOTE: A copy of the HOME Program Budget is attached showing all anticipated expenses and revenues for the Program areas of Maintenance - Includes minor regairgi in the in season Also includes lawn rnowina and snow removal HD_uermakina - Includes-window 4%o vacuumipq. dusting. shopping. doing wash. etc. _ 10. Budget: (Specify total project budget by major project component -i.e., administration, planning, construction, acquisition, direct grants, public service.) BUDGE /SOURCE OF FUNDS Component QD8Sa Other(identify) ntify) Public Services /Eden Prairie $ 12.885 595.000 Client fees /Edina S13,100 $ 12.904 Edina/EEHF /Richfield $ 22.700 $ 46.950 United Way /Minnetonka $17800, $ 58.574 GMCC /Brooklyn Center $ 22.500 $ 14.000 Friends of HM $ 84,592 Hen County Project Totals $ 88.985 $312.016 NOTE: A copy of the HOME Program Budget is attached showing all anticipated expenses and revenues for the Program FROM SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES PHONE NO. : 541 1019 Jan. 19 2001 02:28PM P5 Attachment H.O.M.E. (Household & Outside Maintenance for Elderly) Program Summary SUMMARY PARAGRAPH - The H.O.M.E. Program is a homemaker, maintenance, and chore program designed as a cost - effective alternative to long term care for the elderly operating in the cities of Bloomington, Eden Prairie, Edina, Richfield, Minnetonka, Brooklyn Center, St. Louis Park, Robbinsdale, Crystal, Plymouth, New Hope and Golden Valley. Persons with disabilities are also eligible for the services. The project maintains a core staff of trained individuals to assure prompt, quality service and a skills bank component. Clients are asked to contribute according to their ability to pay, based on a sliding scale. TARGET POPULATION - Consumers of H.O.M.E. services are residents age 60+ or people with disabilities who live independently and need some affordable in -home services in order to maintain their residence. The Program serves clients who need assistance but are not financially able to pay the full cost of service as well as frail older adults who require services designed to meet the needs of vulnerable elderly. SERVICES - The philosophy of the H.O.M.E. Program is to maintain independence for elders and avoid premature placement in nursing homes by providing homemaker, maintenance, and chore services. Clients are asked to contribute based on a sliding - fee scale. Homemaker services include housecleaning, food preparation, grocery shopping, non - medical personal care, and laundry. Assessments are made and services provided according to the specific needs of each client for type of service, time and frequency. Chore /home maintenance services include snow removal, lawn care, installation of security features, carpentry, minor plumbing, window washing, painting, weatherization, minor roof repair and other maintenance jobs needed to enable elderly residents to remain . in their homes, as well as maintaining their homes in an acceptable manner. 1 STAFF - Home maintenance and homemaker services are provided by workers who are trained in the necessary skill areas and techniques for working with older persons. Skills Bank Workers are also utilized to provide chore services. Staff report to a Program Director, who is responsible for the management and supervision of H.O.M.E. Other staff and volunteers provide administrative and clerical support. FACILITY - Services are provided in the homes of elderly residents. Offices are located at Creekside Community Center, 9801 Penn Ave. South, Bloomington 55431, and 7940 55th Ave North, New Hope, a satellite office is located at the Minnetonka Center. PLACEMENT PROCEDURE - Clients gain access to the program either by a referral from an area agency or by calling the H.O.M.E. office and requesting service. FUNDING SOURCES, Revenues are derived from client Fees, Hennepin County, the Greater Minneapolis Council of Churches (GMCC), municipalities in which the program operates, the United Way, and contributions from clients and the community through an associated organization called Friends of. HOME. FROM : SENIOR COMMUNITY SERUICES PHONE NO. : 541 1019 ' Jan. 19 2001 02:28PM P6 A HOME Program 2001 Operating Budget w/ Gov't Revenue Detail REVENUE Contributions /friends of HOME 14,000 United Way 46,950 Govemment Revenue Bloomington (CDBG) 20,000 Blooms ton (HRA) 17,000 Brooklyn Center 22,500 Crystal 1,500 Eden Prairie 12,885 Edina (CDBG & EEHF) 26,000 Golden Valley 1,500 _ Greater Mpis Council of Churches 58,574 Hennepin County 84,592 Minnetonka 17,800 Plymouth 5,000 Richfield 22,700 School District 281 28,000 Sub -total Gov't Revenue 318,051 Client Fees 95,000 Total 474,001 EXPENSES Salaries & Wages 351,224 Benefits & Taxes 91,681 Office Rent 2,942. Equipment Repair /Maint. 1,879 Telephone -- 4,413 -� Postage 2,379 Printing & Publications 4,663 Supplies 12,522 Professional Fees 13,650 Mileage 7,612 Conferences & Meetings 3,124 Insurance 2,874 Membershie & Subscriptions 1,356 Miscellaneous 182 Depreciation 5,056 _ Allocation of Admin. 20,442 Total 525,999 Net Excess (Deficit) &4114 GMDCA. Child Care Leadership and Services January 19, 2001 Ms. Joyce Repya Ms. Susan Heiberg City of Edina 4801 West 501h Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Ms. Repya and Ms. Heiberg: GREATER MINNEAPOLIS DAY CARE ASSOCIATION Tel. (612) 341-1177 Email: gmdca @gmdca.org Voice /TDD (612) 341 -2066 We are writing to apply for CDBG funds for the year 2001 from the City of Edina. We are requesting funds for the purpose of assisting families from your community with their child care costs. The families we serve represent lower income families working toward self - sufficiency. The need for stable, reliable childcare while parents pursue their goals is vital to the well -being of families. Helping families to pay for the cost of that care will add to the strength of your community. The City of Edina can make a difference in the lives of families from your community who are presently on the waiting list. We are requesting that the City of Edina consider an $18,000 request for the year 2001. I look forward to meeting you at your hearing scheduled for Tuesday, March 6`h at 7:00 p.m.. Should you have any questions, or need further information before that time, please give me a call at (612) 349 -0550. Thank you for allowing us this opportunity to apply. Sincerely, Carla Jacobs Community Support Department Manager PUBLIC EDUCATION AND ADVOCACY REFERRALS • CAREGIVER TRAINING • FEE SUBSIDIES 1628 Elliot Avenue South 2518 2nd Street North, Suite B Minneapolis, MN 55404 -1657 Minneapolis, MN 55411 -2211 Fax(612)341 -4356 Fax(612)349 -0508 Update: From June - December 2000, there was not a waiting list for the State Sliding Fee program serving Hennepin County. Because of this, GMDCA only accessed the city CDBG funds for emergency or short-term situations that are not covered by County and State funds. We try to reserve the CDBG funds to fill the waiting list gaps, which explains why there are current unspent balances. The waiting list began again in December and since that time applications have been sent to families who live in cities where CDBG funds are available. Those expenses will not show up until our March 2001 billing. Year 1999 fund balances will be spent by May, 2001 and in many cities we expect for the 2000 balances to be spent by July, 2001. We expect that the Governor's budget will not include an increase for childcare subsidies. There is projected to be a waiting list throughout 2001. Unduplicated Families #Applications Children Served # On 1999 2000 CSC Currently Served Pending 1/1/00 - 12/31/00 Waiting List Fund Bal. Fund Bal. Crystal 1 8 7 1 6343 7,508 Eden Prairie 1 8 8 0 4102 22,588 Edina 0 2 8 0 5158 17,000 Golden Valley 0 4 5 2 2189 6,405 Maple Grove 0 8 0 2 0 10,000 Minnetonka 0 4 8 2 819 8,253 New Hope 1 4 3 5 0 7,031 Plymouth 1 8 7 0 4946 16,000 Richfield 0 8 3 8 0 10,534 Prepared by: Laurie Possin Director, Family and Community Support Greater Minneapolis Day Care Association sub /mem /su bu /cdbg rept 2001 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY CDBG PROGRAM REQUEST FOR FUNDING A. GENERAL INFORMATION Community: City of Edina 2. Project Name: Parent's Child Care Assistance Fund 3. Contact Person/Phone No: Carla Jacobson (612) 349 -0550 B. PROJECT DATA Funding Request: $18,000 2. Is this request to fund an existing CDBG - FUNDED project? Yes 3. Leveraged Funds: (What other public or private funds does project include? If none, indicate w /check here — None: ) Amount: Approximately $8 million Source: State of Minnesota (To what extent does project leverage additional public or private funds /firm commitment ?) GMDCA administers an approximate total of $8,000,000 per year to help meet the childcare needs of low - income families. This money is committed by the Federal Government, State of Minnesota and Hennepin County to help low to moderate income families meet their child care costs. 4. Project Location: Address: 1628 Elliot Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55404 Citywide: Countywide — we serve all of Hennepin County 5. Project Description: (Describe the project in as much detail as possible and identify what, if any, alternative funding sources have been considered for this project). GMDCA is requesting $18,000 to serve families who are eligible for Child Care Assistance through our Parent's Assistance Fund. The Parent's Assistance Fund is set up to supplement the State Sliding Fee program also administered by GMDCA but funded through Hennepin County and State and Federal dollars. Due to the inadequacy of the State fund to meet the need, we use the Parent's Assistance Fund to try to fill the gap in cities where CDBG funds are allocated. The Parent's Assistance Fund is supported by eight other communities within Hennepin County. 2001 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY CDBG PROGRAM Page Two REQUEST FOR FUNDING Edina The steps involved to receive services are: 1. Parents are referred to GMDCA by childcare providers, community agencies and Hennepin County Children and Family Services, or by word of mouth and the yellow pages. 2. Callers are screened for eligibility. They must be working, in school, or have a short -term emergency need (such as a medical crisis) and their income needs to be below Section 8 housing guidelines. If eligible, their name is placed on the joint waiting list that we share with Hennepin County. MFIP families are immediately referred to Hennepin County because there is a priority to serve all eligible MFIP families with State and Federal funds. 3. As City CDBG: and /or State Sliding Fee funds become available, parents on the list are sent an application for services. At this time, they supply wage and other income documentation to establish eligibility and the level of subsidy they will receive. 4. If found eligible, a co- payment is assessed based on family size and income. The average family has 1.6 children, pays a co- payment of $86.00 per month and receives a subsidy of $550.00 per month, depending on type of care and age of children. 5. If a child care provider has not already been chosen, the family chooses any legally operating provider. We can provide them with a referral listing to assist them in making a good choice for their family. 6. Once a provider is chosen, the family begins on the program and pays their family co- payment directly to their provider. The provider bills GMDCA for the balance of the monthly costs. 7. A family who receives GMDCA funds remains on the county -wide waiting list. When their name reaches the top, their funding comes from the State Sliding Fee fund and the next family from the Edina waiting list is contacted to apply for services. 6. Consolidated Plan Priorities: Using the Priority Summary and HUD Table 2A -B identify what priority(ies) the project will meet. (Note: If a proposed project is a low urban county priority, you must explain why it has a higher priority in your community.) Within the Priority Summary from the Five -Year Consolidated Plan (2000- 2004) it states: HUD resources will be used to target public service funding to activities that reduce barriers for self - sufficiency by families, foster and maintain self - sufficiency by the elderly, and meet the needs of youth. 2001 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY CDBG PROGRAM REQUEST FOR FUNDING Edina Page Three Under the Housing and Community Development Goals 2000 -2004 under Community Development and Public Services indicates Family Services/Facilities is ranked as a HIGH priority. Finally, on HUD Table 2B under Priority Community Development Needs and Public Service Needs, Child Care Services is ranked as a HIGH priority. 7. Describe anticipated results /accomplishments the project will have. (number of persons/households to be assisted/served, number of housing units to be rehabbedibuilt, etc.) Drawing upon past experience, we would anticipate that we would be able to serve seven to nine families with $18,000 in funding. This would mean providing quality childcare services for ten to eighteen children. It is important to recognize that from June- December of 2000 there was no waiting list for the State Sliding Fee program serving Hennepin County families. The waiting list began again in December. We expect that the Governor's budget will not include an increase for childcare subsidies. 8. Describe how project will assist the community in achieving your Livable Communities Act goals (if applicable). We do not believe this project would be applicable to the goals of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. 9. Implementation Schedule: (For the time period 7 -1 -01 to 6- 30 -03, identify major project tasks to be performed and when they will occur). Please see the project description for a detailed list of steps in serving families through the Parent's Child Care Assistance Fund. These steps are ongoing and implementation for individual families is based on a first -come, first- served basis. 10. Budget: (Specify total project budget by major program component — i.e.; administration, planning, construction, acquisition, direct grants, public service.) Component Program direct service funds Administration Project Budget Total Project Budget BUDGET SOURCE OF FUNDS CDBG OTHER (identify) $16,380.00 $7,280,000 (approx.) $ 1,620.00 $ 720,000 $18,000.00 $8,000,000 ** Same Same * This figure represents an average administration fee. Actual amount is based upon number of units actually used. ** This represents GMDCA's portion of Hennepin County's Basic Sliding Fee Program dollars. This money is committed by the Federal Government, State of Minnesota and Hennepin County to help low to moderate income families meet their child care costs. Community AcItion for Suburban Hennepin Home Rehab Counseling Welfare- to-Wing As you know, suburban Hennepin County has a critical shortage of decent, safe affordable housing. Over the last 10 years, CASH has developed programs that help low- income families become successful long -term tenants and homeowners. Homeownership is often referred to as the "American Dream" and the first step to homeownership is becoming a successful tenant. As the prices of homes in suburban Hennepin County continue to soar, the dream of homeownership for working families becomes even further out of reach. CASH has developed programs to help bridge the gap between the homes that people need and the homes they can afford. The foundation of our programs is education and counseling. January 19, 2001 Community Services continuum of comprehensive housing counseling services to the residents of your Emergency Assistance Ms. Joyce Repya Homeless Family Support City of Edina 33 10th Avenue South 4801 W. 50`h Street Transitional Housing Edina, MN 55424 Energy Assistance dollars and allows residents of your city and other funders the opportunity to Tenant Hotline Dear Ms. Repya: Center for Homeownership Enclosed is our Community Development Block Grant application. Home Buyer Education The funding will be used to support housing programs for low- and moderate - Homeowner Counseling income homebuyers, homeowners, and tenants. Home Rehab Counseling Welfare- to-Wing As you know, suburban Hennepin County has a critical shortage of decent, safe affordable housing. Over the last 10 years, CASH has developed programs that help low- income families become successful long -term tenants and homeowners. Homeownership is often referred to as the "American Dream" and the first step to homeownership is becoming a successful tenant. As the prices of homes in suburban Hennepin County continue to soar, the dream of homeownership for working families becomes even further out of reach. CASH has developed programs to help bridge the gap between the homes that people need and the homes they can afford. The foundation of our programs is education and counseling. With this funding, we are able to continue to provide quality service with our full continuum of comprehensive housing counseling services to the residents of your city. In addition to our appreciation of CDBG support and the direct services it helps us 33 10th Avenue South to provide, other funders like to see that there is widespread community support Suite 150 of our services. In this way CDBG funds leverage and support other program Hopkins, MN 55343 dollars and allows residents of your city and other funders the opportunity to Tel 952- 933 -9639 witness firsthand what can be accomplished through partnerships. Fax 952- 933 -8016 TDD 952 - 935 -4011 Thank you for considering CASH in your CDBG allocations. If you need further information, please contact myself at (952) 933 -9639 ext 203 or Sherry Coates at ext 222. Investing in People, Building Community Ve truly yours, ich Zi rdt Execu ' Director EQUAL MOUSING OPPORTUNITY RZ1sc Enclosure- CDBG grant application CDBG Grant Application Date of Application: January 16, 2001 Name of Organization: Community Action for Suburban Hennepin Address: 33 Tenth Avenue South, Suite 150 Hopkins, MN 55343 Executive Director: Richard Zierdt Phone: (952) 933 -9639 ext. 203 Primary Contact: Sherry Coates Phone: (952) 933 -9639 ext. 222 Summary Community Action for Suburban Hennepin requests $2,000 to support its housing programs for low - and moderate - income homebuyers, homeowners, and tenants. Organizational Information Community Action for Suburban Hennepin was established in 1985 as a private, nonprofit organization. It is the designated "community action agency" for suburban Hennepin County. Community action agencies were created as part of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964. In 1991, the agency decided to shift the focus of its programs to affordable housing and the resulting impacts on family and community stability. The agency now provides a range of housing programs that serve tenants, homebuyers, and homeowners. Description of Need It is no secret that suburban Hennepin County is experiencing its worst long -term, affordable housing crisis to date. Because of the scarcity of affordable housing, it is extremely important for families to successfully remain in their homes. The affect of losing housing is most alarming for low -to- moderate income families with children. Studies have shown that a high percentage of children who are failing in school, or who do not graduate, have not had stable housing. Through education on how to obtain housing, counseling on to maintain housing, and intervention to keep housing, we can help to stabilize families within their communities. Households Served and Program Costs Number of Edina Homebuyers and Homeowners Served During 2000 and Program Costs Homeb:.uyer Foreclosure: Horne Repair, Reverse Total Average Total Cost Educction Prevention Maintenance, Mortgage Edina Program to S..erve & Rehabilitati:on Counseling Households Cost Per Edinn s. Counseling for Served xx Household ;Households 5eniors _.. 10 7 4 7 28 $367 $10,276 Please note: $9,021 in financial assistance for down payments and closing costs, delinquent mortgage payments, and /or home rehabilitation was mobilized /leveraged for Edina homebuyers and homeowners. Page 1 of 3 Household Demographics During 2000, approximately 92% of the households served by CASH earned less than 80% of the area median income adjusted for household size. Staff Information CASH employees a team of housing specialists who have over 150 years of combined experience in homeownership and rental counseling, mortgage banking, real estate, and home remodeling. Proposed Activities Pre - Purchase Home Buyer Education and Counseling CASH conducts monthly homebuyer workshops that provide information on each step of the home buying process. The curriculum meets or exceeds FHA, MHFA, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac guidelines. We also offer individual homebuyer counseling to assist potential homebuyers in developing an action plan to overcome barriers to homeownership. The most common barrier is the high cost of homes in suburban Hennepin. Other barriers are lack of down payment and closing costs, and credit problems. Affordable Mortgage Programs CASH has established numerous partnerships with the lenders, government agencies, and other service providers. As a result, our clients have access to over a dozen first -time homebuyer and community lending programs that feature below market interest rates, down payment and closing cost assistance, affordability gap assistance, and/or assistance for home rehabilitation. Home Maintenance Repair and Rehab Programs CASH assists homeowners who have home maintenance, repair or rehab needs. Our staff can provide technical assistance in identifying needed repairs, writing scopes of work, finding qualified contractors, evaluating bids, and. working with contractors until job completion. Foreclosure Prevention/Post- Purchase Counseling Technical assistance and emergency loans are available to homeowners facing a distressed financial situation caused by circumstances beyond their control that may lead to the loss of their home. The main reason for mortgage default is a loss or reduction of income. Reverse Mortgage Counseling for Seniors The State of Minnesota requires homeowners receive counseling from a HUD- approved Housing Counseling Agency before they apply for a reverse mortgage. Homeowners do not need an income to qualify for a reverse mortgage and it allows them to retain title and stay in their homes for as long as they choose. A reverse mortgage is a loan against home equity that provides the homeowner with cash advances and most reverse mortgages require no repayment until homeowner no longer resides in the home. Most senior homeowners use the cash advances for health care costs, home improvements, property taxes, and daily living expenses. Tenant Support Services For the past 10 years, CASH has been recognized as a leader in providing education and counseling to tenants in suburban Hennepin County. It is our belief that if renters are aware of their responsibilities as well as their rights regarding rental property, they will be better tenants. CASH has developed "A Guide to Renting in Minnesota" handbook with an accompanying curriculum which is designed in an easy to use format that enables high schools, community education programs, and landlords to teach renters on how to become successful tenants. CASH will continue to provide support for tenant services involving rental issues. Page 2 of 3 CASH Programs and Services During 2000 the following services were provided to low and moderate - income households in suburban Hennepin County. - -4, 678 households received energy assistance; --545 households received emergency grant/loan assistance to avoid evictions; --86 families were placed in rental housing, of which 53% were previously homeless; - -14 families received transitional housing assistance and moved from shelter to apartments. 100% of these families were placed in stable housing within 16 days or less; --474 households attended a three -part homebuyer workshop of which 159 purchased homes; - -199 households received assistance with home maintenance, repair or rehab; - -299 households received foreclosure prevention services; - -218 households received reverse mortgage counseling; - 4,701 households received counseling on landlord/tenant issues; --66 high school presentations were given to 1,570 students on renter rights and responsibilities; --551 MFIP families were served in Welfare to Work initiatives with 56% finding substantial employment enabling them to exit MFIP, 2% received cars that had been donated and refurbished; --385 households received financial counseling and debt services. We invite you to visit our user - friendly web site, at www.cashenn.or('. We would greatly appreciate your publicizing this site, and providing a link from your web site. It is an easy way for your residents to access information regarding a wide variety of programs designed to assist low- income individuals and families. Page 3 of 3 Hope for the Future ... Aesource Center for Fathers & Families Blaine, Burnsville, Crystal, Hopkins, Minneapolis, St. Paul r-luman Services Bldg. .te 305 1201 89th Avenue NE Blaine, Minnesota 55434 Phone: 612 - 783 -4938 Fax: 612 - 783 -4900 CDBG FUNDING EDINA MN January 30, 2001 Dear Craig Larsen, Thank you for the interest in funding the services provided by the Resource Center for Fathers & Families. Our mission is to help parents overcome the barriers in their parenting roles. See attachments. We help both moms and dads, many of our calls come from: mothers, stepmothers, grandmothers, asking, "what can we do to help them ?" RCFF is requesting a grant of $1,500 each city in a collaborative request from Communities in the Hennepin County CDBG funding, used to provide services to the Edina/ Hennepin County population. These services are available at all our locations. We anticipate up to 100 clients from your community. If you need more information or have any questions please call me. Thank you, Arnie Engelby Director Resource Center for Fathers & Families Blaine — Main Office Hopkins Office Human Services Building Hopkins Area Resource Ctr. Suite 305 915 Mainstreet 1201 89th Avenue NE Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 Blaine, Minnesota 55434 Phone: 952-988-5357 Phone: 763-783-4938 Fax: 952-988-5358 Fax: 763-783-4900 1 :'b :.E Minneapolis Office Burnsville Office 430 Oak Grove Street CAP Agency Minneapolis, Minn. 55403 14551 County Road 11 612 - 874 -1509 Suite 100 612 - 843 -1023 (one mile east of 35E on 42) y t € Burnsville, Minnesota 55337 St. Paul Office Phone: 952 - 997 -4816 In collaboration with: Fax: 952-432-5855 St. Paul Urban League . Clarence Jones Crystal Office St. Paul, Minn. 55101 Thorson Family Resource Rm. Phone: 651 - 228 -3292 7323 58th Avenue No. Suite 113 The Resource Center for Fathers & Crystal, Minnesota 55428 Families is a member of the Phone: 763 - 504 -7680 Minnesota Council of Nonprofits Photocopy and distribution permission granted. 11 /00 1201 89th Avenue NE Suite 305 Blaine, Minnesota 55434 Phone 763 - 783 -4938 •, 763-783-4900 1 C W 4 E Center for J . t :'b :.E Fathers } TM ` Families,F y t € .dope for the Future.... f 3 a 1201 89th Avenue NE Suite 305 Blaine, Minnesota 55434 Phone 763 - 783 -4938 •, 763-783-4900 Moving into the new millennium ... The Resource Center for Fathers & Families' programs are designed to create and enhance the role of father in full parenthood and full partnership in parenting their children. The Vision of the Resource Center for Fathers & Families is children with both fathers and mothers active in their lives as parents and as partners in parenting. The Mission of the Resource Center for Fathers & Families is to provide resources that will help men become better parents and better parenting partners regardless of marital status, to prevent violence, and to provide the model that all children deserve. As a result, communities, families, the family's economy and society in general will benefit. PROGRAMS AND SERVICE S ANGER MANAGEMENT COURSES are 16 -week, open courses designed to help men who are struggling to understand and deal effectively with anger, rage, intimidation and control issues. It is a teaching and group process of helping men learn to harness the energy of anger in a constructive way in order to engage positively in the challenges and conflicts of their lives. SUPPORT GROUPS FOR FATHERS are lead by facilitators who aid single, married, and divorced fathers who want to meet with other men in discussing the issues related to parenting and partnering in raising their children. INFORMATIONAL FAMILY LAw SEMINARS are hosted by a facilitator and conducted by a family law attorney who advises fathers in their concerns regarding divorce, paternity, custody, child support and related issues. PARENTING CLASSES take two forms, and each is an eight -week course. One form is based on Erik Erikson's eight stages of human development, and teaches parents to relate to their children, not just to manage their behavior. The other course, "It Takes More Than Love," is based on Search Institute's 40 Development Assets, with a special focus on supporting fathers in their role as meaningful, involved parents. The course includes topics such as behavior management and developmental stages of children. STEP PARENTING COURSE is for couples. It is a 10- session course, 1' /2 hours per session, covering how 3 relationships work, the pitfalls and perils of step parenting, the rules of engagement, conflict, and working together. Maximum six couples, minimum three. THE RELATIONSHIP COURSE is based on Erik Erikson's eight stages of human development and teaches both men and women, married and single, with or without a partner, how human development ` and relationships work, their purpose, their form, and how to create healthy relationships. Y to FATHERS' CRISIS LINE (612 -874 -1509) is a telephone crisis response program from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., el' five days a week, to aid in getting help to fathers in crisis. The service will make referrals to The Center is anon- profit 501(c)3 family service programs of the Resource Center for Fathers & Families as well as appropriate outside services. agency that believes strongly that win /win in the parenting partnership is the only way that Funding in part comes to the Resource Center for Fathers & Families from: McKnight Foundation, Medtronic, Allina Health children and the entire family, no matter its Systems, Nash Foundation, Budget Computer, Clark Frame, Sam's Club, Target of Blaine, Barnes & Noble, ECM Publishing Inc., The John Roberts Company, Born Information Services, Connexus, Spring Lake Park Lions, and private donations both form, can thrive. monetary and in -kind. ri./I - THE EFFECTS OF FATHERFUMESS • According to a Gallup Poll, 90.3% of Americans agree that "fathers make a unique contribution to their children's lives." Source. Gallup Poll, 1996. National Center for Fathering. "Father Figures "Today's Father 4.1 (1996):8 • A study assessing the level of adaptation of one -year olds found that, when left with a stranger, children whose fathers were highly involvedwere less likely to cry,,worry, or disrupt play than other one -year olds whose fathers were less involved. Source: Kotelchuk, M. "The Infant's Relationship to His Father. Experimental Evidence. " fie Role of the Father in Child Development. Michael Lamb. 2- ed.- 1981. • Father =child interaction has been shown to promote a child's physical well- being, perceptual abilities, and competency for relatedness with others, even at a young age. Source. Krampe, E.M. and P. D. Fairweather 'Father Presence in Family Formation: A theoretical Reformulation. "Journal of Family Issues 14.4 (Dec 1993); 572 -591. • A survey of over 20,000 parents found that when fathers are more involved in their children's education including attending school meeting and volunteering at school,' children were more likely to get-A's, enjoy school; and participate in extracurricular activities and less likely to have repeated a grade. Source: Faffier's Involvement in Their Children's Schools National Center for Education Statistics Wash D. C: GPO, 1997. • Using nationally representative data on over 2,600 adults born in the inner city, it was found that children who lived with both parents were more likely to have finished high school, be economically self - sufficient, and to have a healthier lifestyle than their peers who grew up in broken homes. Source. Hardy, Janet B. ' Self -suf riency at ages 27 to 33: Factors present between Birth and 18 years that Predict Educational Attainment Among children Born to Inner -city Families "Pediatrics 99 (1997): 80 -87 In a 26 year study on 379 individuals, researchers found that the. single most important childhood factor in developing empathy is paternal involvement. Fathers who spent time alone with their .kids performing routine childcare at least two times a week, raised children who were the most compassionate adults. Source: Koestner, Rivard, Cam& Franz, and Joel Weinberger. The Family Origins of Empathic Concem: A Twenty Six Year Longitudinal Study. '7oumal of Personality and Soaal Psycology 58 (1990) 709 -717 • Generally, a father has a special impact on his child(ren), distinct from the mother, in the areas of cognitive capacities, capacity for attachment, absence of gender role stereotyping, self- control, moral sensitivity, and physical development. Source: Pruett, Kyle, Fathemeed; The Free Press, (2000); 35 -57. elope for the Future ... Re s ours � a Center Fades Blaine, Burnsville, Crystal, Hopkins, Minneapolis, St. Paul Human Services Bldg.. Suite 306 1201 89th Avenue NE Blaine, Minnesota 56434 Phone: 612- 783 -4938 -Fax: 612- 783 -4900 January 17, 2001 Dear Grant. Coordinator, Thank you for your interest in funding the Resource Center for Fathers & Families. Our agency is dedicated to service of families of the seven county area.. Our experiences working with this population is that family friendly services are limited` One of our goals is to help parents look at the needs of their children. Many of the clients we serve do not see the child's view. For example: demeaning the other parent has major long -term consequences for the child. Another example: a father may look at his situation as hopeless and express quitting his job and just moving away from it all. We let him know what the consequences are for such behavior. We also share some of -our success stories with him to give him hope, as these things he is experiencing seem so hopeless and if handled in a positive respectful manner, will soon be a pleasant memory. Our crisis line is one of seven services we provide and has proven to be a fine line of hope for the low income and underprivileged. Many callers do not have any idea how to go .about resolving issues such as visitation, drivers license revocation for nonpayment of child,support or dealing with an order for protection. Comments we might -hear "They -'re my kids and I do not care. I just want to see them". We help them to. see the possible outcomes should they not obey a court order. -One caller this past month exemplifies the kinds of situational stress men_ experience. This father got a call, from his ex -wife saying "I have had it with these kids. Send me money for tickets and I will send them to you." He did, and -when he got them, his three -year old son's toenails were missing, and his feet were black and blue. His thirteen and fifteen year old daughters were talking of suicide, as their mom's boyfriend had been doing some disturbing things. Soon after the children arrived here, the mom changed her mind. This father was stressed. Vie helped him prioritize his needs such as, getting his son to.the doctor; getting his daughters to a therapist; getting an order for protection; letting his employer know what is going on so he would not lose his job; and getting the kids in school. Along with the other services, we provide that would help him. All of our site locations operate with funds from the community that each site serves. All sites do serve families from outside the site location to accommodate times and dates of services. This helps the families we serve. .411 funding requests are generated out of our Blaine off ce; all accounting and tracking of services are at our Minneapolis office. All staff are professionals MSW, LSW, MA, BSW, and are contracted for services, this allows us to run with a more responsible overhead. If you have any questions please call or e -mail Thank you, Arnie Engelby Director M 'MPA's —r" L. STEMN RICHARD .k MERRILL DAMELL.S, MNSEN T. FI,? EY S. )o[ MSGN RUSSIF;I I-L CROVDEt joy. F. ERICXSOXI �.,gYC�RE�IC�'c R. lOHlv� J, l DA M A. CWN41 THCMAS F. MALONE MIQlAEL F. HURLEY HEFWAN L. TALLE CHAPIE,S M. SMORR DANIEL D. GANM1 IR. BEVffUK DODGE September 6, 2000 Rama, Guzy & Steffen; Ltd. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 400 Norditow-n. Financial Plaza 200. Coon Rapids Boulevard Minneapolis, NN, 55433 -5394 (763) 780 -8500 RAX (763) 780 -1777 Writer's Direct Lime: (763) 783 -5144 Internet 1711fV Address: eschading@a bgsdaw.co ?n FE: Resource Center for Fathers and Families Dear To Whom It May Concern: MES D. HORPT )OAN M QUADE SC0 f M. MAK ST' M4 G. THORSON BMAB£T'Ii A. SCHA'r3:JG V"ILUAM R HMFNER BKAML FY A. Y i t im MALCOLM P. TERRY MIM R. RILEY ClThls iOPW DBE L4 FOR T \2ATTHE \T"M QUI:JN CHER:41 A. )OP.GEVSEN Of Cr'Ur„gl ROBERT A, GUZY I have been a volunteer attorney for the Resource Center (and its predecessor) for many years. Once a month, I conduct a :free legal clinic for the men and women who attend. W spend a couple of hours discussing - as a Vroup - each person's particular need for legal advice /services. As far as I can tell, the need for low -cost legal aid is great. It appears that people earring in the X10.00 per hour range do not qualify for any legal aid, but in no way can they afford legal representation. Thus, if an organization, such as the Resource Center for Fathers and Families, was able to provide some type of low -cost legal assistance, the community would benefit. The benefit to the community would result from parents being able to afford some type of legal representation or aid, which would result in an opportunity to be heard in court. Them—is much anger out there because people believe their voice Mll not be heard. Ultimately, children benefit when the court has an opportunity to hear both sides of a. case, and can make a decision based on all the facts. There is also an obligation_ I believe, to attempt to help fiamiiies settle their issues through mediation first, and litigation second. This can also be aided with the representation of an attorney. If you have any questions or would like further input from me, please contact me at the above address/telephone number, Sincerely, BA,RNA, GUZY & STEFFEN, LTD. Elizabeth A. Schading cc: Resource Center for ]Fathers and Families d NZ!;'ON An Equal Oppoinmtry Empbver U FROM : koh ?OR FAX TO 763 753 4500 i °51.07 -11 4 P_j C 0 g 7 M Comamnh;: ! h!�mravioi;9 N(, :w*iWng (:(amnps510nn:ch� `iog leer Monday, Jamiary 22, 2001 To Whont )i may Concern, OS:36AM #040 P.02 %03 j /u CONECT Collaborative, l'lyinouth, Minnesota, has successfully engapd- in a working relationship with Jerome Schoeneckcr and flit Resource Center for Fatlrers c�C Firrrrllies, Hopkins branch, since 1998. The Resource Cemer jbr Fathai- • 4 ,f'rrrrailies is -u) invaluribie community resource. As the coordinator of flee grass -roots organization CONEY 7, whie.h brings resources and services to low income families living, in apartment. complexes in Plymouth, Minnesota, I rely heavily oil being able to collaborate with the professional strtff at the Rcuource Center for Pallten & .Fvnt?llles. Jerome has facilitated on -site relationship /parenting workshr,ps and inowhily seminars for residents of the five Plymouth apart.n,ent complexes (over 500+ family units) served by CONFCT. I lis dynl+mic prvgr,rins are beneficial in helping at -risk individuals and families build successful parenting skills and personal relationships. In addition to the CONECI' wol'ksllol)s, .lerriiiie and the Resource C enter free r,albers & Farrdlies collaborates with the Wayzata Public Schools and Community In Collaboration Council by participating, in the annual parenting f(rrum, as a pre.seaiter fo.r one of the workshops, or as an exhibiter in the Marketplace, which features community resources for families. This forum is a FREE ?:all -day community event that addrosses a wide range of pureiiting Nsues. ) commend Jerome Schoenecker and the Resource Center fi>r FaMem & Families for the excellent scivice they provide to fathers and families, and loot: forward to their 5�?port aad leadership in 2001. Si) cly, Kristina Korsmo Coordinator CONECT Collaborative 15215 1811 Nverur North, Nlymc)uth, NIN LUM 17 6 '(nlnphonu- (761) 476.8477 i, ZSD Z) o c. s xv o q Al ; ":R 7 s-T qj jU e 7T C:,Ij p :T.T a T I P. E7 = mu s, yk a. �_T L U L ,;nom 7noA To uoL_, -a snas s U 0 7 n T "D e ul 7 j �E sw S)m LT S :P":, Soli - qun LTOTI� L - pu, n q, -1 .7, 1 0 j c. ITT _fZ) L p u -c-? S 9. 0 P -7. CD. 6 -U-1 :E7 9Uq ST I 1pluas' *po-cz--,4d BUTTrIJ A;�,TTs A -u -a ta p s-i12P C,16 r zq Tjo-, q PuTuiae.n 7 I T 10 u C'. T + szrj;nq� T _Z nL 0 T P. q TO 'Ot6t p U =z V A. L 1 V T r, p T -0 C� .2 nn L T 7 E�pr_l T 9M. L V. L n, a d s rioiz� SS=T� ✓ 7'r T Ali -d 5 T u em e. u L L 7 v - n - e",di e -n. Da o ddn. s. . T Odf7n C� 'i Z_ 9w n-.Ou :M r'Or -rT L E. Tq 2 e L"T =n-.UTaU'C)Z) rl0A, SS j57-707L SS U 0 11, T- U P D 7SEPID 7 7 TA GY, T-T P, G; iL :P U -l? C, f5U 7 11, 2 -auj-, ..7� nOA L_' I- I-- - 4 N c,, d F 7 C, d L =�p _qTTnbqa -ua i ew ez;�s,, n,,-,, 1, 7 7. a s., n pc E:,, z- 7 T T S C!, '_L T 7- T-, 7 �1= pLjr a - - ... -1 , T :, , 1.1 T.) L� Ti 0 rl, Uri 0 e a 7 L S P T Al r!:) A- 7T 0 -"o L L 7 Tj C- 2 -U D E, e n a 'd r 7 7 T 7 T :1 L z) T cynd ra D&C".K.9 TUT Pt 'I C-� I fqj T Al 12H PSUL , F, I , 6 C) S: Tu 0 T -1 .7 TTri Q 4 p P e 3L!." -zr s w m o Tu q o T: E,� z, s q yv; u qa ut re_!, e E� - - Z% -------------- L! T n U 7. 'D.. 7 Ci 1 p w �)Z�,Tl T S. g u0z; n. du :F, p! 7, 17 LU 7nL e -1 _C C - 2 -C r -2 -)Z L S �p e q T T 7 tA U', 0 T IR -5 L7 -L tu n s s 'e C. I D-!D 7 A TA n- TU L T T %L Sq-, dcTv t- L Te azoqwe 70i 0 7 :SpLT21 poT✓--ad 5UTT7,,V cn,UVAPW T 266T pc-ae,7 7, I� IOU nc T_TOTl?OTTTsSPTD snlllla!�S TP _TeqwqDacl :fUTPUS POT:19a SUTlun000-tr 7 0099-6zs (Lills) V P � a Iii :_7.eq-wnjj euoqdeT8,l. I-OP2uOD r 'il.ge TOZT :,Wt LL H 1,,t E p, --,Zl ;Uos�a,:71 Ios;uoz) do'ET Es7i;E:/ 6CO6ZDSZOCSOL7l, 28LS-76 ✓ -` 7 s., r' L5' .2- 9c U; rt t,T T-T 0 t::- I T T T 0 Z, S t� HO J. LU 30t-7 V n E A ii Sl V 2: El H.H1 dO DIAZIES EnHaAEU /° OF PUBLIC S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: REHAB. OF PRIVATE PROPERTY $40,000 REMOVAL OF ARCH. BARRIERS $77,731 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AFFORDABLE HOUSING $40,000 $40,000 $80,000 $100,000 $116,757 $83,661 $80,000 $60,409 $71,732 - $20,000 $71,732 $80,000 $80,000 $54,072 $54,981 CDBG $65,854 $100,000 $100,000 BUDGET 1992 - PRESENT 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 CDBG BUDGET .$150,913 $178,458 $197,821 $204,554 $189,665 $188,842 $181,842 $182,318 $181,261 $182,331 PUBLIC SERVICES: $30,183 ( 20 %) $35,692 (20 %) $39,564 (20 %) $40,911 (20 %) $37,933 (20 %) $37,602 (20 %) $36,368 (20 %) $36,463 (20 %; $27,189 (15 %) $27,350 (15 9/6) H.O.M.E. $22,000 $24,074 $24,074 $24,893 $17,433 $18,000 $17,400 $17,400 $9,1.89 $9,350 % OF PUBLIC SERVICES 73% 67% 61% 61% 46% 48% 48% 48% 34% 34% GMDCA CHILD CARE $8,182 $10,000 $13,490 $13,000 $18,000 $18,000 $17,400 $17,448 $17,000 $15,000 % OF PUBLIC SERVICES 27% 28% 34% 32% 47% 48% 48% 48% 63% 55% COMM. ACTION FOR SUB. HENN. - $1,168 $2,000 $3,000 $2,500 $1,602 $1,568 $1,616 $1,000 $2,000 % OF PUBLIC SERVICES 5% 5% 7% 7% 4% 4% 4% 3% 7% FATHERS & FAMILIES - - - - - - - - - $1,000 ° ERVICES 4% /° OF PUBLIC S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: REHAB. OF PRIVATE PROPERTY $40,000 REMOVAL OF ARCH. BARRIERS $77,731 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AFFORDABLE HOUSING $40,000 $40,000 $80,000 $100,000 $116,757 $83,661 $80,000 $60,409 $71,732 - $20,000 $71,732 $80,000 $80,000 $54,072 $54,981 $65,474 $65,854 $100,000 $100,000 As e AGENDA ITEM: IV. A N p DATE: 3/2/01 • l�,COliPORP'� • less REQUEST FOR PURCHASE TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: MICHAEL J. SIITARI, CHIEF OF POLICE VIA: GORDON L. HUGHES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $15,000 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Annual Purchase - Police Uniforms .and Equipment COMPANY BID AMOUNT L Uniforms Unlimited 1. $ 945.20 2. Cy's Uniforms 2. $ 1012.60 3. Streichers 1 Did not offer all 4 4 uniform components on list of authorized RECOMMENDED BID• uniforms and equipment 1. Uniforms Unlimited GENERAL INFORMATION: This request is for an open purchase order to supply police uniforms and equipment for one (1) year beginning 03/01/2001. The total purchases are not expected to.exceed $30,000. Bids were taken on a complete. list of authorized uniform and equipment items. A comparison was made of a rep- resentative sample of common items expected to be purchased in an average year. Uniforms Unlimited is our present supplier and has been for many years. Streichers selection is somewhat limited and they do not stock several key'items on the uniform list. Signature V Department The Rvon mende d is (within budget) (not within budget) t Gordon L. Hu es, Ck Manager John Wallin, Finance Director REPRESENTATIVE UNIFORM COST COMPARISON 2001 UNIFORM BID PROCESS CY'S UNIFORMS STREICHERS UNLIMITED Uniform Pants (3 pair) 174.60 163.20 106.50 Uniform Shirts, Short (3) 111.00 99:00 95.85 Uniform Shirts, Long (3) 117.00 90.00 101.85 Uniform Belt 15.00 16.00 13.95 Utility Belt 26.00 32.00 29.95 Boots 130.00 135.00 129.00 Shoes 70.00 65.00 64.00 Winter Hat 27.00 27.00 N/A Rain-Coat 42.00 28.00 49.00 Leather Jacket 300.00 300.00 N/A TOTAL 1012.60 945.20 (e ,V BBB TO: FROM: VIA: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE Mayor & City Council Francis Hoffman, Director of Public Works Gordon Hughes, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $15,000 DATE: March 6, 2001 AGENDA ITEM IV. s. ITEM DESCRIPTION: Two Dump Truck Bodies with Appropriate Snow Attachments for Truck. Company 1. J. Craft, Inc. State of MN Contract Number 425125 2. 3. 4. 5. RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: J. Craft, Inc. GENERAL INFORMATION: Amount of Quote or Bid 1. $ 99,562.00 2. 3. 4. 5. $ 99,562.00 This requisition is for the purchase of two dump truck bodies with reversible front plows and underbody plows with wing attachments. Purchase price includes installation on two new 2001 truck chassis. This purchase is funded by the Equipment Replacement Fund. Sign re De a m t The Recommended Bid is ✓� ` within budget not within budget J Ofin Ilin, Finance Director Gordon Hughes, City M ger TO: FROM. VIA: SUBJECT. AGENDA ITEM DA TE: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL CHIEF MICHAEL SIITARI GORDONHUGHES, CITYMANAGER 11MAK0 7/7 71n I REQUEST FOR PURCHASE INEXCESS OF $15,000 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Dodge Ram Truck COMPANY BID AMOUNT 1. Falls Automotive Inc. $19,597.00 2. 3. RECOMMENDED BID: Falls Automotive Inc. ( Hennepin County Purchasing Contract #0543BO) GENERAL INFORMATION: One White Dodge Ram 1/2 ton Truck with Extended, Cab 4 x 4, 4 door to replace Community Service Vehicle 26 -200 per Replacement Schedule Chief of Police Signature Department The re nde i is: X (within budget) (not within budget) G rdon Hughes, i Manager hn Wallin, Finance Director ,`b eee REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item V.A. From: GORDON L. HUGHES Consent ❑ CITY MANAGER Information Only ❑ Date: MARCH 6, 2001 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Subject: PARK REFERENDUM ❑ Motion ® Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion RECOMMENDATION: Consider referendum projects and adopt resolution calling for election subject to approval from the Minnesota Department of Children, Families and Learning. INFO/BACKGROUND: On March 6, the City Council will consider calling for a special election requesting authority to issue general obligation bonds for park and recreation improvements. If so ordered, staff has previously recommended that the election be held on Wednesday, May 16, 2001. State law requires that a resolution calling the election and specifying ballot question(s) must be submitted to the County at least 49 days prior to the election. Therefore, the County must receive such a resolution by March 27, 2001. The attached memorandum, from Mr. Gilligan addresses various legal issues with respect to the election. The memorandum also includes proposed language for the referendum question. On February 15, 2001, the City Council conducted a public hearing concerning proposed referendum projects. In the days following the hearing, we have received numerous letters and e- REPORT/RECOMMENDATION - PARK REFERENDUM March 6, 2001 Page two mails concerning the projects. This correspondence has been copied and is included in your packet. Also, since the public hearing, city staff, school district staff and project architects and engineers have again scrutinized the proposed projects with special attention given to cost estimates and project design. I'm pleased to report that this review has yielded our conclusion that the total referendum amount can be reduced to less than $38,000,000 rather than the $43;000,000+ discussed at the public hearing without significantly reducing the scope of the improvements. The attached schedule summarizes the project costs. If the Council wishes to reduce the scope of the project, further savings could be obtained. The reasons for the reduction in the estimated referendum costs are primarily attributable to the following: SALES TAX. Previous estimates including sales taxes on materials purchased by project contractors. Our legal counsel has advised that the State has opined that the joint powers organization established by the city and school district will be sales tax exempt. COMPUTATION ERROR. The spreadsheets that summarized project costs inadvertently "double counted" certain facility costs for the Valley View Gym/Pool project. KUHLMAN FIELD STORAGE BUILDINGS. The school district has concluded that the storage building proposed for beneath the Kuhlman bleachers may be significantly reduced in size. These building had been a holdover from an earlier proposal that eliminated existing storage buildings to allow the construction of a field house. In that this concept was abandoned, the existing storage buildings need not be replaced. OWNER'S CONTINGENCY. Previous estimates.i included an "owner's contingency" of five percent of total project costs. After evaluation, staff has determined that such a contingency can be provided through interest earnings on unspent bond proceeds. No additional contingency is needed in our opinion. SOUTHVIEW SCHOOLS GYMNASIUM. Previous designs provided for the construction of the new gym at the second level of the school. After analyzing this design, the school district has recommended that it be provided at the ground level thus significantly reducing construction costs. CONCORD ADDITION. Further evaluation of the estimate of the Concord gym /classroom addition yielded cost reductions. REPORT/RECOMMENDATION - PARK REFERENDUM March 6, 2001 Page three RECOMMENDED SCOPE CHANGES After evaluating the projects, I recommend the Council consider a number of project scope changes. If the Council agreed with these changes, the total bond issue amount would be reduced to $35,746,598. The changes are as follows: ELIMINATE KUHLMAN BUBBLE. I recommend that the bubble be eliminated from this referendum. (Estimate savings - $1,522,574) If the Council wishes to consider this facility at a later date,. a more detailed study could be undertaken and the dome could be reconsidered at an alternate location with less neighborhood impact. Alternate bonding sources are available for such facilities if they are deemed to be revenue generating. ELIMINATE ARTIFICIAL TURF FROM MIDDLE FIELD. After further discussions with the school district, I recommend that the artificial turf be eliminated from the "middle field at the, Community Center. This field has historically been unavailable for community use. The district, however, will now consider use of this field by the "under nine years of age" programs which will not cause undue wear. The use by this age group will serve to free up other fields in the city for older participants. If the resilient turf is eliminated, a reconstruction of the natural turf is recommended. (Estimated net savings - $1,014,042) ADD EXPANDED BACKSTAGE FACILITIES AT ECC AUDITORIUM. Further review of the ECC- Auditorium renovation suggests a need for expanded backstage facilities such as restrooms, set storage etc. so as to reduce the need for ° performers /participants to use other ECC facilities. (Estimated additional cost - $357,042) SWIMMING POOL The joint Council /School Board work session on .February 26, 2001, focused in part on the possibility of expanding the proposed Valley View pool to 50 meters. This concept was discussed in more detail with representatives of the Edina Swim Club, following the joint meeting. As a result of these discussions, the School Board has reaffirmed its support of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool with diving well as currently proposed due to operational costs associated with a 50 meter pool. I have been advised that the Swim Club concurs with the School Board's position. REPORT/RECOMMENDATION - PARK REFERENDUM March 6, 2001 Page four REVIEW BY MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN, FAMILIES AND LEARNING CFL The proposed referendum requires approval from CFL. This approval was granted on February 5, 2001, based upon preliminary cost estimates for the projects. Due to cost estimate revisions, CFL needs to amend its approval. The transmittal of the resolution calling for the referendum to the County should be conditioned upon the CFL amended approval. REFERENDUM ESTIMATES - NET OF SCHOOL DISTRICT CONTRIBUTIONS($5,235,476) COMMUNITY /SCHOOL IMPROVEMENTS $ 27,433,012 CITY PARK IMPROVEMENTS $ 9,388,514 Cost of bond issuance /capitalized interest (3 %) $ 1,104,646 TOTAL $ 37,926,172 RECOMMENDED ADJUSTMENTS ELIMINATE BUBBLE $ (1,522,574) ELIMINATE MIDDLE FIELD TURF - NET $ (1,014,042) ADD TO ECC AUDITORIUM $ 357,042 REVISED TOTAL $ 35,746,598 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Gordon L. Hughes, City Manager FROM: Jerry Gilligan DATE: March 2, 2001 RE: Referendum for Social, Recreational and Cultural Facilities To call for a special election on the proposed construction, equipping and improvement of social, recreational and cultural facilities to be located on property of the City and Edina School District, the City Council will need to adopt a resolution calling for the election and setting forth the question or questions to be submitted to the voters. The present proposed schedule calls for the special election to be held on May 161i. Minnesota Statutes, Section 205.16 sets forth the requirements for the giving of notice of the election. This statute requires the City Clerk to give the following notices of the special election: (i) published notice at least two weeks before the election and posted notice at least 10 days before the election, stating the time of the election, the location of each polling place, and the question or questions to be voted upon at the election; (ii) publish the sample ballot at least one week before the election and post the sample ballot at least four days before the election on the Clerk's office and on the election day at each polling place; and (iii) give notice to the County Auditor at least 49 days prior to the election of the date of the election and the questions to be voted upon at the election. If the special election is called for May 16`n, the notice to the County Auditor will be required to be given on or before March 28cn Attached is a form of a resolution for consideration by the Council at its March 6`n meeting calling for the special election. Section 4 of the resolution sets forth the form of question to be submitted to the voters. In reviewing Section 4 of the resolution you will note that in addition to the question the ballot will contain notices concerning property tax increases resulting from the bond issue. These statements are required to be placed on the ballot by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 275.60 and 61. The blanks in the statements will be completed based upon the projections prepared by the City Finance Department. The resolution provides for a single question to be submitted to the voters and provides that the facilities to be financed with the bonds are "social, recreational and cultural facilities to be located in the City of Edina." If it wishes, the Council could separate out one or more of the proposed facilities and provide for a separate question to be submitted to the voters with respect to such facility or facilities. This was what was done by the City in the 1996 special election when the City submitted two separate questions to the voters, one question relating to DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP improvements to public parks and the second question relating to the construction of the third ice rink at Braemar Arena. If additional questions are submitted to the voters, it is possible to have approval to the additional question be contingent upon the approval of the first question by the voters. An example of this is to state the second question as follows: "If the voters approve question 1, shall the City of Edina be authorized to borrow an additional amount of money by the issuance of general obligation bonds of the City of Edina in an amount not to exceed $ to construct, equip and improve [insert facility or facilities to be financed]? The use of a contingent question can sometimes create confusion to the voters so it needs to be carefully worded and clearly explained to the voters. The attached resolution provides for a question which provides a broad authorization to the City. It has been my experience that it is preferable to keep the question as broad as possible. In this case because of the different proposed facilities a broad authorization is clearly appropriate. If the City Council would like to have mention in the question of the School District involvement in the proposed facilities the phrase "on land owned by the City of Edina or Independent School District No. 273" could be added at the end of the question. DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP RESOLUTION DETERMINING THE NECESSITY OF ISSUING GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AND CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION THEREON BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota (the "City "), as follows: 1. This Council has investigated the facts necessary to ascertain and does hereby find, determine and declare that it is necessary and expedient for the City to borrow money by the issuance of its general obligation bonds in the amount of $ to provide funds to construct, equip and improve social, recreational and cultural facilities in the City. 2. The questions of issuing bonds in such amount and for such purposes shall be submitted to the vote of the qualified electors of the City at a special election to be held on May 16, 2001. 3. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to cause notice of the special election to be given as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 205.16. 4. The ballot for the special election shall be in substantially the following form: CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA SPECIAL ELECTION Held May 16, 2001 ❑ YES Shall the City of Edina, Minnesota, be authorized to borrow money by the issuance of general obligation bonds of the City of Edina in an amount not to exceed $ to construct, equip and improve social, recreational and cultural facilities in the City ❑ NO of Edina? BY VOTING "YES "ON THIS BALLOT QUESTION, YOU ARE VOTING FOR A PROPERTY TAX INCREASE. The maximum amount of the increased tax levy as a percentage of market value is and the amount that will be raised by the new tax rate in the first year to be levied is INSTRUCTIONS TO VOTERS: If you wish to vote in favor of the above proposition, mark a cross (X) in the square preceding the word "YES ". If you wish to vote against the above proposition, mark a cross (X) in the square preceding the word "NO" next to the proposition. -2- i To: Mayor & City Council From: • ��Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: March 6, 2001 Subject: 3.2 BEER LICENSE RENEWALS REPORT/RECOMMENDATION Agenda Item V. D. Consent ❑ Information Only Mgr. Recommends F] To HRA ® To Council Action ® Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Recommendation: Council approve issuance of 3.2 Beer licenses as listed below: Info/Background: City Code Section 900 requires the City Council approve beer licenses before issuance. The following applications have submitted the necessary documentation for renewal, paid the applicable fees, and been approved by the Police Department. Staff submits these licenses for Council consideration: On -Sale 3.2 Licenses Braemar Golf Course Braemar Golf Dome Davanni s Pizza /Hoagies Fred Richards Golf Course New Hong Kong Kitchen TJ's Family Restaurant Off -Sale 3.2 Licenses Holiday Stationstore #217 Jerry's Foods Speedway Superamerica LLC 0 0 Memo To: Chief of Police Mike Siitari " From: Sergeant Steve Stroh 5�jl •� Date: March 2, 2001 Re: Liquor License Renewals Background checks have been completed for the 2001 -2002 licensing period for the following liquor licenses; On -sale Intoxicating and Sunday, Club on Sale and Sunday Sale, Wine and 3.2 Beer, 3.2 Beer On- Sale and 3.2 Beer Off -Sale The following restaurants and country clubs are in compliance with state statutes and City code. An unqualified recommendation for approval of these renewal applications is warranted. ON-SALE INTOXICATING AND SUNDAY SALE • Big Bowl Cafe • Daniel's Italian Restaurant • Eden Avenue Grill • Romano's Macaroni Grill • Ruby Tuesday • Two Guy's from Italy • Sidney's Pizza Caf6 • Tejas WINE AND 3.2 BEER ONSALE • Boundary Waters Restaurant • Chuck E. Cheese ■ D'Amico & Sons ■ Edina Grill ■ Good Earth Restaurant ■ Hawthorn Suites Edina ■ Locanda Inc. ■ Pizzeria Uno ■ Szechuan Star Restaurant ■ Yorktown Cinema Grill e Page 1 BEER 3.2 ON-SALE • Braemar Golf Course • Braemar Golf Dome • Davanni's Pizza/Hoagie • New Hong Kong Kitchen • Fred Richards Golf Club • T J's Family Restaurant BEER 3.2 OFF-SALE • Holiday Stationstore #217 • Jerry Foods • Speedway Superamerica, LLC CLUB ON-SALE AND SUNDAY SALE • Edina Country Club • Interlachen Country Club • Page 2 9 r�. KEYUK*11KhLU1V1MhN VA 11UN To: Mayor & City Council Agenda Item V.C. From: Debra Mangen Consent ❑ City Clerk Information Only FI Date: March 6, 2001 Mgr. Recommends F To HRA ® To Council Subject: ON -SALE WINE LICENSE RENEWALS Action ® Motion Resolution Ordinance F] Discussion Recommendation: Council approval of On -Sale Wine and On -Sale 3.2 Beer License renewals for the following restaurants: Chuck E. Cheese's Hawthorn Suites Edina Daytoris Boundary Waters Restaurant Locanda De Giorgio, Inc. D'Amico & Sons Pizzeria Uno Edina Grill Szechuan Star Restaurant Good Earth Restaurant Yorktown Cinema Grill Info/Background: The City received applications for On -Sale Wine and 3.2 On -Sale Beer Liquor Licenses from the above listed establishments. Approval of both the above mentioned licenses allows these establishments to also sell strong beer in their restaurants. Attached please find a memo reporting the results of the Police Department's investigation and review. The necessary Manager's Licenses applications have been received from each restaurant. All applicants submitted their renewal documentation pursuant to Edina's Code and State Statute,. and paid their license fees. Our renewal date is April 1, 2001. Once Council approves the licenses, staff will forward them to the Minnesota Liquor Control for state approval. P 1 Memo To: Chief of Police Mike Siitari "' � From: Sergeant Steve Stroh Date: March 2, 2001 Re: Liquor License Renewals Background checks have been completed for the 2001 -2002 licensing period for the following liquor licenses; On -sale Intoxicating and Sunday, Club on Sale and Sunday Sale, Wine and 3.2 Beer, 3.2 Beer On- Sale and 3.2 Beer Off -Sale The following restaurants and country clubs are in compliance with state statutes and City code. An unqualified recommendation for approval of these renewal applications is warranted. ON-SALE INTOXICATING AND SUNDAY SALE • Big Bowl Cafe • Daniel's Italian Restaurant • Eden Avenue Grill • Romano's Macaroni Grill • Ruby Tuesday • Two Guy's from Italy • Sidney's Pizza Cafe • Tejas WINE AND 3.2 BEER ON-SALE • Boundary Waters Restaurant • Chuck E. Cheese • D'Amico & Sons • Edina Grill • Good Earth Restaurant • Hawthorn Suites Edina • Locanda Inc. • Pizzeria Uno • Szechuan Star Restaurant • Yorktown Cinema Grill • Page 1 BEER 3.2 ON-SALE • Braemar Golf Course • Braemar Golf Dome • Davanni's Pizza/Hoagie • New Hong Kong Kitchen • Fred Richards Golf Club • T J's Family Restaurant BEER 3.2 OFF-SALE • Holiday Stationstore #217 • Jerry Foods • Speedway Superamerica, LLC CLUB ON-SALE AND SUNDAY SALE • Edina Country Club • Interlachen Country Club • Page 2 I • r�ro ,ass To: Mayor & City Council From: % -Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: March 6,2001 Subject: ON -SALE INTOXICATING, CLUB ON -SALE AND SUNDAY SALE LIQUOR LICENSES REPORPRECOMMENDATION Agenda Item V.B. Consent Information Only Mgr. Recommends To HRA ® To Council Action ® Motion Resolution ❑ Ordinance Discussion Recommendation: Council approval of Club On -Sale and Sunday Liquor License renewals for: On -Sale Intoxicating & Sundav Sale Big Bowl Cafe Daniels Italian Restaurant Eden Avenue Grill Macaroni Grill Ruby Tuesday Sidney's Pizza Cafe Tejas Two Guys From Italy Club & Sunday Sale Edina Country Club Interlachen Country Club Info/Background: Applications for renewal of On -Sale Intoxicating, Club On -sale and Sunday On -Sale Liquor Licenses for the above listed establishment have been reviewed by the Edina Police Department and renewals are recommended per the attached memo. The required managers licenses have been received from each establishment. All applicants submitted all required paperwork in accordance with the City's ordinance and State Statutes, and paid their license fees. Once Council approves the licenses, staff will forward them to the Minnesota Liquor Control for state approval. r 4 Memo To: Chief of Police Mike Siitari (�,p%� From: Sergeant Steve Stroh 15� ��"" Date: March 2, 2001 Re. Liquor License Renewals Background checks have been completed for the 2001 -2002 licensing period for the following liquor licenses; On -sale Intoxicating and Sunday, Club on Sale and Sunday Sale, Wine and 3.2 Beer, 3.2 Beer On- Sale and 3.2 Beer Off -Sale The following restaurants and country clubs are in compliance with state statutes and City code. An unqualified recommendation for approval of these renewal applications is warranted. ON-SALE INTOXICATING AND SUNDAY SALE • Big Bowl Caf6 • Daniel's Italian Restaurant • Eden Avenue Grill • Romano's Macaroni Grill • Ruby Tuesday • Two Guy's from Italy • Sidney's Pizza Caf6 • Tejas WINE AND 3.2 BEER ON-SALE • Boundary Waters Restaurant • Chuck E. Cheese • D'Amico & Sons • Edina Grill • Good Earth Restaurant • Hawthorn Suites Edina • Locanda Inc. • Pizzeria Uno • Szechuan Star Restaurant • Yorktown Cinema Grill • Page 1 i BEER 3.2 ON-SALE • Braemar Golf Course • Braemar Golf Dome • Davanni's Pizza/Hoagie • New Hong Kong Kitchen • Fred Richards Golf Club • T J's Family Restaurant BEER 3.2 OFF-SALE • Holiday Stationstore #217 • Jerry Foods • Speedway Superamerica, LLC CLUB ON-SALE AND SUNDAY SALE • Edina Country Club • Interlachen Country Club • Page 2 REPORT /RECOMMENDATION TO: Mayor & City Council From: David Velde City Sanitarian Date: March 6, 2001 Subject: Fountain Woods Noise Deadline Extension. Recommendation: Agenda Item: V. E. Consent Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Action: ❑ Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Staff recommends granting the extension of time for compliance with the night time noise standard for the Fountain Woods Condominiums until July 1, 2001. Info /Background: The City Council heard the request for a variance from the nighttime noise standard for the Fountain Woods Condominiums on August 15, 2000. At that time, the Council denied the request and informed the proponent that they must correct the violation by May 1, 2001. The sound barriers that are being proposed for the air conditioning, equipment are being manufactured at the present time. Once the barriers arrive on site, the installation will require additional time to complete and it appears that the installation and testing can be completed by July.1, 2001. As indicated in the attached letter, if the barriers fail to meet the nighttime standard, Fountain Woods Condominiums can comply by operating the equipment with timers which will allow the equipment to operate 50% of the time during each one hour period at night. ROCKFORD, INC. Real Estate Management 7025 France Ave. S. Edina, MN 55435 Peter L. Rocheford John L. Rocheford, Jr. February 28, 2001 Edina City Council Edina City Hall 4801 West 50" Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: Fountain Woods I & II Condominium Associations Dear Council Members: Office (612) 929 -5154 Fax (612) 925-4841 Late last summer you denied our request to exempt the nighttime only noise from the standard for the air conditioning at the Fountain Woods I & H Condominium Associations. Part of that action established May 1, 2001 as a date for corrective action. Both Associations meet the daytime standard, but do not meet the nighttime standard. I have since worked with many sound experts in order to guarantee corrective action. Unfortunately, I have not been able to find anyone in the field who will guarantee corrective action that will comply with the ordinance levels. A potential solution requires installing additional sound walls. The sound walls cannot be delivered until mid May after which we will need time to construct and install the supporting structures. I met with Gordon Hughes and David Velde on February 6, 2001 in effort to resolve this problem. One solution I proposed was the installation of 30- minute timers on each cooling tower so they would each be limited in run time at night to comply with the ordinance. The City has since received a legal opinion from the Edina City Attorney that this option would comply with the ordinance. We are willing to install the additional sound walls to Fountain Woods I (6710 Vernon), and replacing the existing sound barriers at Fountain Woods II (6730 Vernon) with the understanding that should the sound levels after this work not meet the ordinance we will only be required to install timers to meet the night time standard. If the council agrees with this we request an extension of time for construction to July 1, 2001. Your consideration in this matter is greatly appreciated. L1 G� Jelin ` Roch ord, res. Rockford, Inc. Managing Agent for Associations Z.IA, �o Le Yo .�0 —ORM lase REPORUREC OMMENDATION - -Mayor and- City - Council - -- - - - Agenda Item V:F. From: Michael Siitari, Chief of Police Consent ❑ TInformation Only ❑ Date: March 2, 2001 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Subject: Two Guys From Italy Dance ® Motion Permit Renewal ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion RECOMMENDATION: Renew the Dance Permit issued to Two Guys From Italy. INFO /BACKGROUND: A 30 -day dance permit was approved for Two .Guys From Italy effective February 2, 2001. City Code mandates that an initial permit shall be for not more than 30 days. The renewal of a permit, after the initial 30 days, shall be for a term of not more than one year. Two guys From Italy has applied for a renewal of their permit. The Police Department has monitored Two Guys From Italy during the initial permit stage. There have been no calls for service or complaints generated by the dance permit. I find no basis to deny the renewal of the permit at this time. If renewed, I recommend that the Council continue the requirement that the applicant provide policing of the area by security personnel approved by the Chief of Police. R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF L_ .n Council Check Register 2/16/01 - 2/20/01 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description 218620 2116101 100686 CITY OF EDINA PAYROLL ACCOUNT 455 000 00 13164 2/16 PAYROLL 9900.1010 CASH TREASURER'S 2/22/0. 10:49:57 Page - 1 Business Unit PAYROLL CLEARING 13263 340741 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 13140 00033576 455,000.00 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 218621 2120/01 5822.5514 100614 ACE SUPPLY 13193 00033722 21.14 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER HARDWARE 13352 00033828 21.14 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 218622 2/20/01 5862.5515 102609 ALL SAINTS BRANDS 13353 00033834 635.16 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 751.00 531.50 13309 021601 237.25 391.00 2/20/01 104219 ALUMINUM LADDER COMPANY 15.95 159.14 240.70 13412 1001693 2,051.56 218623 2/20/01 218628 100575 ALL -SAFE DIV. OF ALL FIRE TEST 103285 AMEM 223.37 EXTINGUISHER MAINTENANCE 20.00 223.37 2001 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 13264 218624 2/20101 104191 ALLIANCE ENERGY SERVICES INC. 245.55 SERVICE CALL, MATERIALS 2/22/0. 10:49:57 Page - 1 Business Unit PAYROLL CLEARING 13263 340741 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 13140 00033576 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 13192 00033382 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 13193 00033722 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 13352 00033828 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 13352 00033828 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 13353 00033834 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 13411 36413 13040 30995 218625 2/20/01 104190 ALLINA HOSPICE 1,3_68.00 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT- ELLIOT 13041 021201 1,368.00 218626 2/20/01 100867 ALSTAD, MARIAN 751.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 13309 021601 751.00 218627 2/20/01 104219 ALUMINUM LADDER COMPANY 159.14 LADDER REPAIRS 13412 1001693 159.14 218628 2/20/01 103285 AMEM 20.00 2001 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 13264 021301 20.00 1470.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1001.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL FUND REVENUES 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 1470.6530 REPAIR PARTS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1460.6105 DUES 8 SUBSCRIPTIONS CIVILIAN DEFENSE R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/22/01 10:49:57 Council Check Register Page - 2 2116/01 -2/20/01 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Unit 218629 2/20/01 101601 AMUNDSON, ERIK 28.40 CONT. ED. (MEALS) RIED SCHOOL 13265 021501 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 28.40 218630 2/20/01 101874 ANCOM COMMUNICATIONS INC. 47.57 ANTENNA WHIPS 13165 26380 1553.6237 RADIO SERVICE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 47.57 218631 2120/01 101611 ANOKA - HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLE 240.00 FIRE FIGHTER TRAINING 13414 00011660 1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 240.00 218632 2120/01 101977 ARCH PAGING -- 18.09 13354 K6123972B 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 18.09 218633 2/20/01 101168 BACON'S ELECTRIC CO. 506.64 REPAIR VFD 13109 0024525 -IN 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 506.64 218634 2/20/01 104192 BAG BOY CO. 452.76 PULL CART PARTS 13110 67668 5423.6530 REPAIR PARTS GOLF CARS 95.05 13355 67869 5423.6530 REPAIR PARTS GOLF CARS 547.81 218635 2/20/01 100640 BAKER POOLS 318.65 FILTER ELEMENTS 13166 43803 5620.6530 REPAIR PARTS EDINBOROUGH PARK 318.65 218636 2/20101 103937 BAKER, ELIZABETH 250.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 13042 021201 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 250.00 218637 2/20/01 102346 BEARCOM 224.90 RADIO REPAIRS 13415 1797435 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 215.00 RADIO REPAIRS 13416 1797436 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 215.00 RADIO REPAIRS 13417 179434 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 654.90 218638 2/20/01 100661 BENN, BRADLEY 68.05 REIMBURSE GEN. SUPPLIES 13310 021601 5110.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation 59.80 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 127.85 CM8456620 218639 2/20/01 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 123.56 PAPER, CORK BOARD 9.28- OFFICE SUPPLIES 29.82- OFFICE SUPPLIES 177.67 FOLDER, FILE, PAD 14.31 OFFICE SUPPLIES 23.32 OFFICE SUPPLIES 31.51 OFFICE SUPPLIES 23.96 OFFICE SUPPLIES 18.15 OFFICE SUPPLIES 6.93 OFFICE SUPPLIES 9.53 DYMO WHEEL 132.74 OFFICE SUPPLIES 89.27 RECORDER CASSETTE 196.69 OFFICE SUPPLIES 12.78- OFFICE SUPPLIES 9.76 PEN REFILLS 219.58 OFFICE SUPPLIES CITY OF Eu...A Council Check Register 2/16/01 - 2120101 PO_ # Doc No Inv No 13311 02/16 218640 2/20/01 5210.6513 104200 BJORKMAN, CATHERINE CM8456620 1495.6406 GENERAL 349.75 13112 CM8406350 -1 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT GENERAL SUPPLIES 349.75 8481860 1552.6406 GENERAL 218641 2/20/01 R290830 103879 BLOOMINGTON RENTAL CENTER SUPPLIES 13168 8498870 89.80 GENERAL SUPPLIES PARTS FOR PROPANE TANKS 8498870 1120.6406 89.80 SUPPLIES 13168 8498870 218642 2120/01 SUPPLIES 102276 BLUHM, KIMBERLEE 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES _ 65.26 8498870 1140.6406 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC SUPPLIES 13266 65.26 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 218643 2/20/01 1400.6406 104202 BOW, LOIS 13268 8485021 - 212.51 -_- SUPPLIES 13269 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 1400.6406 GENERAL 212.51 13270 CM8458580 1400.6406 218644 2/20/01 13418 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS OFFICE SUPPLIES 13419 8494100 13.59 OFFICE SUPPLIES BOLTS Account No Account Description 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 13043 8478040 5210.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES 13111 CM8456620 1495.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13112 CM8406350 -1 1190.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13113 8481860 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13167 R290830 1600.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13168 8498870 1160.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13168 8498870 1120.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13168 8498870 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13168 8498870 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13168 8498870 1140.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13266 R329980 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13267 8491850 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13268 8485021 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13269 8485020 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13270 CM8458580 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13418 8498240 1470.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES 13419 8494100 1470.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES 13114 021301 1001.4329 AMBULANCE FEES 13044 PO 2297 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13312 021601 5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD 13115 021301 1001.4329 AMBULANCE FEES 13271 237777X1 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 2/22/0' 10:49:57 Page- 3 Business Unit ART CENTER REVENUES GOLF DOME PROGRAM INSPECTIONS ASSESSING CENT SVC PW BUILDING PARK ADMIN. GENERAL FINANCE ADMINISTRATION CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL ENGINEERING GENERAL PLANNING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL FUND REVENUES EDINBOROUGH PARK ART CENTER REVENUES GENERAL FUND REVENUES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/16101 —2120/01 Check-#. Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No 18.03 BRACKET 13272 237802 8.09 DOWEL CYLINDER 13273 235722 17.28 HOSE ASSEMBLY 13274 235821 Account No Account Description 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 2/22101 10:49:57 Page - 4 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13169 S14466 1305.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 13170 514467 1305.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 13356 882986 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 13357 659806 -1 5111.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT 13045 FEB 23 1260.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ENGINEERING GENERAL SEMINAR 13313 021601 13046 28202 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 5630.6201 LAUNDRY CENTENNIAL LAKES 13314 021601 56.99 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 13315 218645 2/20/01 ART WORK SOLD 101100 BOYER TRUCKS SALES & SERVICE 21331305 1318.6525 51,860.00 SNOW & ICE REMOVAL TRUCK CHASSIS 51.860.00 TRUCK CHASSIS 103,720.00 218646 2/20/01 102302 BRANDESS KALT AETNA GROUP INC. 304.05 304.05 218647 2/20/01 100665 BRISSMAN- KENNEDY INC. 40.47 40.47 218648 2/20101 100667 BROCK WHITE COMPANY 15.00 TRAINING SEMINAR -D. JOHNSON 15.00 218649 2/20/01 100873 BROCKWAY, MAUREEN 306.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 306.00 218650 2/20101 102051 CAMPBELL GROUP, THE 726.50 UNIFORM JACKETS 726.50 218651 2/20/01 102046 CAMPE, HARRIET 471.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 29.25 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 500.25 218652 2/20/01 100677 CARGILL INC. 1,643.47 ICE CONTROL 1,643.47 218653 2/20/01 100681 CATCO Account No Account Description 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 2/22101 10:49:57 Page - 4 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13169 S14466 1305.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 13170 514467 1305.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 13356 882986 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 13357 659806 -1 5111.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT 13045 FEB 23 1260.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ENGINEERING GENERAL SEMINAR 13313 021601 13046 28202 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 5630.6201 LAUNDRY CENTENNIAL LAKES 13314 021601 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 13315 02/16 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 13047 21331305 1318.6525 SALT SNOW & ICE REMOVAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDiNA Council Check Register 2/16/01 - 2120/01 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No 3,049.63 TRANS REPAIR 13048 3 -51606 636.24 COUPLER, FITTING, HOSE 13275 3 -51724 143.67 END YOKE, SLIP YOKE, SHAFT 13276 3 -51776 54.53 FITTING, HOSE END 13277 1 -96985 Account No Account Description 3,884.07 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 218654 2120/01 1553.6530 100684 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON 1,475.00 CRITICAL INCIDENT RESPONSE 1,475.00 218655 2/20/01 100688 CITY WIDE WINDOW SERVICE INC 15.71 WINDOW CLEANING 25.56 WINDOW CLEANING 15.71 WINDOW CLEANING 56.98 218656 2/20/01 100689 CLAREYS SAFETY EQUIP. 86.82 BRACKETS 111.60 AIR PAK STRAPS 198.42 218657 2/20/01 104209 COLWELL, SUSAN 21.00 CLASS REFUND 21.00 218658 2/20/01 100693 COMMERCIAL FURNITURE BROKERS 1,510.70 REMODELING 496.00 REMODELING 2,006.70 218659 2/20/01 104213 COMPUMASTER 399.00 COMPUTER TRAINING 399.00 218660 2120/01 100695 CONTINENTAL CLAY CO. 194.24 FIRECLAY STONEWARE 263.85 BUFF STONEWARE 458.09 218661 2120/01 100698 COPY EQUIPMENT INC. 43.10 PRINTER CARTRIDGE Account No Account Description 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 2/22/0'. 10:49:57 Page - 5 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13278 2 -01 -0001 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13049 173331 13049 173331 13049 173331 13420 59036A 13421 27788 13358 013101 13359 00720164 13360 00073588 13361 021601 13379 006450 13380 006615 13050 0190761 5821.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 5841.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 5861.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH ST OCCUPANCY YORK OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 4452.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CITY HALL 4452.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CITY HALL 5125.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS MEDIA STUDIO 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOI ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOI ENGINEERING GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Vendor Explanation 13423 061392 760.69 DEPT UNIFORMS COPY PAPER 13424 061397 803.79 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 218662 2/20/01 1470.6558 103171 CORPORATE ADVERTISING & INCENT 13195 124854 1,227.12 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER CHAMPIONSHIP T- SHIRTS 13362 124856 1,227.12 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 218663 2/20/01 104204 CREATIVE CRAFTS INTL INC. 131.04 CRAFTY WOOD 131.04 218664 2/20/01 100699 CULLIGAN -METRO 37.40 SOFT WATER SERVICE 37.40 218665 2/20/01 102021 CY'S UNIFORMS 988.27 UNIFORM - FISHER 64.50 UNIFORM - MEDZIS 7.50 UNIFORM EMBLEMS 1,060.27 218666 2/20/01 100706 D.C. ANNIS SEWER INC. 120.00 RESET URINAL 120.00 218667 2/20/01 103143 DAKOTA MAE DESIGNS 27.95 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 27.95 218668 2/20/01 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING 55.20 1,016.63 140.35 559.25 1.767.90 120.40 3,659.73 218669 2/20/01 101894 DIAMOND ART & CRAFT DISTRIBUTO 113.72 113.72 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/16101 - 2/20101 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description 13051 0190640 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13052 97397 4077.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13377 8935 1624.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 2122/01 10:49:57 Page - 6 Business Unit ENGINEERING GENERAL EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION PLAYGROUND & THEATER 13053 8903585 -1/31 1491.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LABORATORY 13423 061392 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13424 061397 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13425 060908 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13171 17966 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 13316 021601 5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 13141 124058 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 13142 124057 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 13143 124059 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 13194 124855 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 13195 124854 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 13362 124856 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 13363 195207 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHO R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE Vendor 218670 2/20101 5842.5513 100652 DIETRICHSON, BILL 13198 338658 408.00 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13199 338664 408.00 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 218671 2/20101 5862.5513 100141 DNR- ENFORCEMENT 13201 555188 520.00 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 520.00 218672 2120/01 104189 DRAKE, KATHIE 34.00 34.00 218673 2/20/01 104210 DUFFY, ELYSE 113.00 113.00 218674 2/20/01 100739 EAGLE WINE 49.40 1,005.10 2,286.94 52.68 908.22 7.13- 4,295.21 218675 2/20101 100741 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 3,648.25 2.733.36 2,654.20 1,470.00 1.368.30 1,449.87 12.60 13,336.58 218676 2/20/01 103594 EDINALARM INC. 268.38 511.20 1,047.96 Explanation INSTRUCTOR AC AERIAL DEER SURVEY CLASS REFUND CLASS REFUND CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/16/01 -2120/01 PO # Doc No Inv No 13317 021601 MAR. - AUG. ALARM SERVICE MAR. - AUG. ALARM SERVICE MAR. - AUG. ALARM SERVICE 2/2210, 10:49:57 Page - 7 Account No Account Description Business Unit 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 13279 01 -164 1509.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DEER CONTROL 13054 020901 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 13364 020701 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 13196 338661 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 13197 338662 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 13198 338658 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13199 338664 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 13200 338653 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 13201 555188 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 13144 746903 13202 750495 13203 746904 13204 748699 13365 749900 13366 749902 13367 749899 13055 16773 13055 16773 13055 16773 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 5821.6250 ALARM SERVICE 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 5841.6250 ALARM SERVICE YORK OCCUPANCY 5861.6250 ALARM SERVICE VERNON OCCUPANCY R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/16/01 —2120/01 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description 218677 2/20/01 100049 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 1,125.00 CIP CONSULTING 13368 18052 4452.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 2/22101 10:49:57 Page - 8 Business Unit CITY HALL 13205 7483 1,125.00 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX SOTH ST SELLING 13318 218678 2/20/01 CRAFT SUPPLIES 104195 EXTREME BEVERAGE LLC. 021201 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 192.00 192.00 218679 2/20/01 100373 FARBER, SONIA 248.00 LUNCHES FOR WORKSHOPS 248.00 218680 2/20/01 104205 FLICKER, KEITH -- 27.95 - - - -- -27.95 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 218681 2120/01 102015 FLOWERS OF EDINA 59.25 SYMPATHY 59.25 218682 2/20101 102727 FORCE AMERICA 254.77 CONTROL LEVER KNOBS 254.77 218683 2/20/01 102380 FORMS GROUP, THE 261.99 POLICE ADVISORY CARDS 97.13 PARKING REGULATION NOTICE 359.12 218684 2/20/01 101022 FRAME, SUSAN 925.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 925.00 218685 2/20/01 104207 FRANKFURT, SHEILA 168.00 MODEL 168.00 218686 2/20/01 101848 FRANKLIN COVEY 251.11 FEB. 15 SEMINAR - J. TURNER 251.11 2/22101 10:49:57 Page - 8 Business Unit CITY HALL 13205 7483 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX SOTH ST SELLING 13318 021601 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 13319 021601 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 13369 3325 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13116 045340 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER REVENUES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13280 00003008 1400.6575 PRINTING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13281 00003009 1400.6575 PRINTING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13056 021201 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 13320 021601 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 13117 70398940 1550.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CITY OF EUiNA 2/22/0, 10:49:57 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 9 2/16/01 -- 2/20/01 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Unit 218687 2120101 104206 FRANKLIN, GABRIELE 167.50 TEACH COMPUTER TRAINING 13321 021601 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 167.50 218688 2/20/01 103039 FREY, MICHAEL 816.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 13322 021601 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 816.00 218689 2/20/01 102076 G & K SERVICES 267.94 UNIFORMS 13057 3083229 5911.6201 LAUNDRY PUMP & LIFT STATION OPER 63.11 UNIFORMS 13058 3083076 1301.6201 LAUNDRY GENERAL MAINTENANCE 241.27 UNIFORMS 13059 3083051 1646.6201 LAUNDRY BUILDING MAINTENANCE 61.81 UNIFORMS 13060 3083085 1646.6201 LAUNDRY BUILDING MAINTENANCE 487.83 UNIFORMS 13061 3083383 1301.6201 LAUNDRY GENERAL MAINTENANCE 61.81 UNIFORMS 13062 3083086 5911.6201 LAUNDRY PUMP & LIFT STATION OPER 264.25 UNIFORMS 13063 3082862 5911.6201 LAUNDRY PUMP & LIFT STATION OPER 216.73 UNIFORMS 13064 3082861 5911.6201 LAUNDRY PUMP & LIFT STATION OPER 148.21 UNIFORMS 13065 3083142 5911.6201 LAUNDRY PUMP & LIFT STATION OPER 304.45 UNIFORMS 13066 3082860 5911.6201 LAUNDRY PUMP & LIFT STATION OPER 48.03 UNIFORMS 13067 3083272 1553.6201 LAUNDRY EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 288.53 UNIFORMS 13068 3083226 1553.6201 LAUNDRY EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 2,453.97 218690 2/20101 100773 GENERAL PARTS INC. 137.17 _ -- REPAIR PARTS 13370 436305 5421.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENTGRILL 137.17 218691 2/20/01 104221 GEORGE C MAURER HOMES 1,150.00 SAC REFUND 13426 021501 1001.4307 SAC CHARGES GENERAL FUND REVENUES 1,150.00 218692 2/20/01 103316 GOETSCH, SAM L. 330.00 SL INTERPRETER 13282 021501 1629.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADAPTIVE RECREATION 330.00 218693 2120/01 100780 GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL INC. 86.40 JANUARY SERVICE 13173 1010263 1280.6270 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL SUPERVISION & OVERHEAD 86.40 218694 2120/01 101103 GRAINGER R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation 7.99 WALLPLATE 132.95 DIGGING BAR, SHOVEL 15.25 CIRCUIT BREAKER 175.79 PARTS 209.14 DEGREASER CITY OF EDINA 2/20/01 VERNON SELLING 104196 Council Check Register VERNON SELLING 5822.5513 35.00 2/16/01 -2/20/01 SKATING LESSON REFUND COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING PO # Doc No Inv No A_ ccount No Account Description 13118 498 - 261848 -2 5912.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13119 498 - 174772 -0 5993.6556 TOOLS 13120 495- 318811 -9 5921.6530 REPAIR PARTS 13371 495 - 174771 -8 5420.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13427 495- 425629 -5 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 218695 2/20/01 VERNON SELLING 104196 GRANT, SARAH VERNON SELLING 5822.5513 35.00 50TH ST SELLING SKATING LESSON REFUND COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 35.00 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 218696 2/20/01 5862.5512 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 13175 48220 596.00 LUBRICANTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13176 48266 141.00 LUBRICANTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 139.00 1,343.33 2.219.33 218697 2/20/01 101518 GRAUSAM, STEVE 25.71 CELL PHONE CHARGES 25.71 218698 2/20/01 102688 GRIFFITHS, GEORDIE 162.50 INSTRUCTOR AC 162.50 218699 2/20/01 100782 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. 3,295.06 1,288.77 218700 2120/01 100791 HALLMAN OIL COMPANY 437.98 OIL 173.52 WINDOW WASH FLUID 611.50 218701 2/20/01 102320 HAMCO DATA PRODUCTS 93.24 PAPER SUPPLIES 93.24 2/22/01 10:49:57 Page - 10 Business Unit BUILDINGS DISTRIBUTION LIFT STATION MAINT CLUB HOUSE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13121 021301 5610.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ED ADMINISTRATION 13206 36973 13207 36016 13208 36972 13209 36976 13174 021501 13323 021601 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5841.6188 TELEPHONE YORK OCCUPANCY 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 13145 335708 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 13210 338657 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 13211 338663 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 13212 338654 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 13175 48220 1553.6584 LUBRICANTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13176 48266 1553.6584 LUBRICANTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13177 210630 5822.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 50TH ST SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF L- _, Council Check Register 2/16/01 - 2120/01 Check -# Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description 218702 2/20/01 101913 HANNA, JUNE 6695 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 13324 021601 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 13372 021601 13372 021601 13428 9160 13069 263 13122 021401 2/22/1, 10:49:57 Page - 11 Business Unit ART CENTER REVENUES 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 5120.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOT 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1260.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEERING GENERAL 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13378 SIGN0000039 1330.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13178 01P6105110 5620.6530 REPAIR PARTS 13325 021601 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 13070 0217 - 454419 66.95 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13071 218703 2/20/01 REPAIR PARTS 102190 HAYNES, PATRICIA 5912.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 195.50 0217 - 454523 INSTRUCTOR AC GENERAL SUPPLIES 97.75 GALLERY PT 293.25 218704 2120/01 100802 HENNEPIN COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER 1,128.60 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES - JAN 1,128.60 218705 2/20/01 100801 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 52.57 DGN DATA EXTRACTION 52.57 218706 2/20/01 100801 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 46.50 SECTION MAPS - ENGINEERING 46.50 218707 2/20/01 100801 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 67.84 4TH QTR. 2000 67.84 218708 2/20/01 100112 HERC -U -LIFT 114.94 BATTERY 114.94 218709 2/20/01 103861 HMONG FOLK ART 245.70 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 245.70 218710 2/20/01 100842 HOUSEHOLD BANK F.S.B. (KNOX) 273.49 DRILL KIT, PLUG 31.31 LUMBER, BITS, SCREWDRIVER 189.76 DISPENSER, FAUCET 10_5.42- CREDIT RETURN 389.14 13372 021601 13372 021601 13428 9160 13069 263 13122 021401 2/22/1, 10:49:57 Page - 11 Business Unit ART CENTER REVENUES 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 5120.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOT 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1260.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEERING GENERAL 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13378 SIGN0000039 1330.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13178 01P6105110 5620.6530 REPAIR PARTS 13325 021601 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 13070 0217 - 454419 1322.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13071 0217- 454343 1552.6530 REPAIR PARTS 13072 0217 - 454527 5912.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13073 0217 - 454523 5912.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ENGINEERING GENERAL TRAFFIC SIGNALS EDINBOROUGH PARK ART CENTER REVENUES STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING BUILDINGS BUILDINGS R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation 218711 2/20/01 100810 HRA /CITY OF EDINA 480,000.00 PO # Doc No Inv No TO FUND HRA Account Description Business Unit 480,000.00 022001 9000.1010 HRA BANK ACCOUNT 218712 2/20/01 021401 104212 HSAIO, BETSY ART CENTER REVENUES 13430 804066 64.00 DATA PROCESSING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CLASS REFUND 292571 5620.6230 64.00 13179 917510 5822.6122 218713 2/20101 13179 101910 HTE INC. ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 13179 2,735.10 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER FIRES MGMT 2001 13381 5506480 2,735.10 GENERAL SUPPLIES MEDIA STUDIO 13075 218714 2/20/01 GENERAL SUPPLIES 102114 HUEBSCH 009813 1553.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 67.54 13124 A -17368 TOWELS, RUGS PRINTING PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 67.54 17541 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 218715 2/20/01 100059 INFORMATION HOTLINE 197.50 HOTEL ADVERTISING 395.00 HOTEL ADVERTISING 197.50 HOTEL ADVERTISING 790.00 218716 2/20/01 103134 INTERLIGHT - _ — 191.10 GENERAL SUPPLIES 191.10 218717 2120/01 101861 J.H. LARSON COMPANY 42.24 NIPPLES, CONNECTORS 42.24 218718 2/20/01 104198 JACK MCCLARD 8 ASSOCIATES INC. 3,650.00 START -ALL 3,650.00 218719 2120/01 100830 JERRY S PRINTING 210.34 -- - ENROLLMENT FORMS 210.34 218720 2/20/01 102136 JERRY'S TRANSMISSION SERVICE 277.00 AMBULANCE LENSES 277.00 CITY OF EDINA 2/22/01 10:49:57 Council Check Register Page - 12 2/16/01 --2/20/01 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Unit 13429 022001 9000.1010 HRA BANK ACCOUNT HRA FUND 13374 021401 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 13430 804066 1470.6160 DATA PROCESSING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13074 292571 5620.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENTEDINBOROUGH PARK 13179 917510 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 13179 917510 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 13179 917510 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 13381 5506480 5125.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MEDIA STUDIO 13075 4212384 -01 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 13123 009813 1553.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13124 A -17368 1600.6575 PRINTING PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 13431 17541 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 2/22/01 10:49:57 Page - 13 Account No Account Description CITY OF EDINA 5862.5513 R55CKREG LOG20000 VERNON SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5862.5512 Council Check Register VERNON SELLING 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 2/16/01 -- 2/20/01 5822.5513 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No 218722 2/20/01 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1,939.50 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 13146 1218389 273.30 VERNON SELLING 13147 1218377 80.09- 5862.5512 13148 149151 286.36 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 13149 1219077 1,859.77 YORK SELLING 13213 1220956 158.05 5842.5512 13214 1220951 1,466.25 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 13215 1220950 994.28 YORK SELLING 13216 1220946 30.74 5842.5513 13217 1220952 2,458.35 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 13218 1220947 2,796.65 YORK SELLING 13219 1220945 11,219.18 13290 1220953 1,851.80 13291 1220955 163.65 13292 1220954 2,819.53 13293 1220949 5,175.30 13294 1220957 115.50- 13295 150521 36.95- 13296 150520 3.89- 13297 150519 26.74- 13298 149814 143.85- 13299 149813 33,085.69 218723 2/20/01 103654 JOHNSON, DENISE 438.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 13326 021601 61.75 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 13327 02/16 499.75 2/22/01 10:49:57 Page - 13 Account No Account Description Business Unit 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 218724 2/20/01 100919 JOHNSON, NAOMI 132.14 13076 021201 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES 56.90 13076 021201 5111.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 42.77 13076 021201 5125.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 45.40 - -- 13076 021201 5125.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES 277.21 218725 2/20/01 102719 JOHNSON, PHIL 323.41 PAPER & INK JET CARTRIDGES 13328 021501 5125.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 323.41 ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT MEDIA STUDIO MEDIA STUDIO MEDIA STUDIO R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount 5862.5513 Vendor Explanation 218726 2/20101 VERNON SELLING 102341 JOHNSON, RICHARD H. 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 384.00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE INSTRUCTOR AC 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 384.00 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 218727 2/20/01 102603 JONAS, LENORE 177.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 177.00 218728 2/20/01 100837 JUSTUS LUMBER -- 115.82 - OAK 115.82 218729 2/20/01 102101 KINKO'S 5.54 POSTER 5.54 218730 2/20/01 100944 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC. 1,189.75 319.50 180.00 1,205.00 1,416.90 1,508.00 463.00 215.00 6,497.15 218731 2/20101 102526 KOVACH, ORLEAN _9.10 - - -- ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 9.10 218732 2/20/01 104211 KREY, CYNDY 94.00 CLASS REFUND 94.00 218733 2/20/01 100846 KUETHER DISTRIBUTING CO 3,786.15 37.00 1,045.30 36.00 1,350.45 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/16/01 --2/20/01 PO # Doc No Inv No 13329 021601 13077 021201 13125 7536 2/22/01 10:49:57 Page - 14 Account No Account Description Business Unit 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13382 062200035647 5210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13150 145584 13220 145596 13221 145898 13222 145611 13223 145972 13224 145970 13225 145765 13383 145971 13330 021601 13384 021401 13151 290144 13152 290145 13226 290067 13385 290610 13386 290609 CENT SVC PW BUILDING GOLF DOME PROGRAM 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/16/01 -2120/01 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Check # -- - Date - -- -- Amount LAUNDRY Vendor Explanation 021601 5110.6103 6,254.90 ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 218734 2/20/01 100605 LANDS' END CORPORATE SALES 172.80 LOGO SHIRTS 28.80 - -- LOGO SHIRTS 201.60 218735 2/20/01 102904 LANGSETMO, KIRSTEN 29.25 ART WORK SOLD 29.25 218736 2/20/01 103441 LAWRENCE, JEANNE 86.45 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 86.45 218737 2/20/01 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 293.41 WASHERS, TY -RAP 449.14 - -- WASHERS, HOOKS, NUTS 742.55 218738 2/20/01 100853 LEEF SERVICES 25.93 LAUNDRY 25.93 218739 2/20/01 101957 LITTLE, DOUG 51.00 MODEL 51.00 218740 2/20/01 103264 LUNDGREN, BARBARA 26.00 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 26.00 218741 2/20/01 101741 M. SHANKEN COMMUNICATIONS INC. 48.00 WINE SPECTATOR 48.00 218742 2/20/01 100864 MAC QUEEN EQUIP INC. 101.22 ROD, CLEVIS, PIN, CLIP 600.00 SWEEPER SCHOOL EXPENSES 701.22 13078 01573478 5842.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13180 01582303 5842.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13387 021601 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 13331 021601 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 13079 1464159 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 13181 1468162 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 2/22/0 10:49:57 Page - 15 Business Unit YORK SELLING YORK SELLING ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13388 375169 5111.6201 LAUNDRY ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT 13332 021601 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 13333 021601 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 13182 357759 5822.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 50TH ST SELLING 13080 2011412 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13183 021401 1281.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Vendor 218743 2120/01 5842.5514 103298 MAIL BOXES ETC. 15.86 5822.5515 28.05 PAPER 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 28.05 5822.5514 218744 2/20/01 218747 100552 MARCOM DIRECT YORK SELLING 102612 103.31 YORK SELLING 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 103.31 5862.5514 218745 2/20/01 5822.5515 100868 MARK VII SALES 102.00 5822.5514 21.80 50TH ST SELLING 218748 2/20/01 982.50 104199 MCGIMPSEY, LILLIAN 1,259.75 82.63 10.90 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 55.95 1,372.65 2/20/01 101790 1,127.85 21.80 MASTER LICENSE FEE RENEWAL 945.90 80.00 893.15 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/16/01 -2120/01 Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description AREA CODE MAPS 13184 PO 1959 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PRINT INFORMATIONAL CARDS 218746 2120/01 VERNON SELLING 101030 MATHISON CO. VERNON SELLING 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 15.86 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX PAPER 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 15.86 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 218747 2/20/01 YORK SELLING 102612 MCCLINTOCK. KATHLEEN YORK SELLING 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 102.00 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER MODEL 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 102.00 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 218748 2/20/01 104199 MCGIMPSEY, LILLIAN 82.63 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 82.63 218749 2/20/01 101790 MCMAHON, DAN 80.00 MASTER LICENSE FEE RENEWAL 80.00 218750 2/20/01 100870 MDS MATRX 251.66 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 13126 2620 13153 246734 13154 246733 13155 246732 13227 246731 13228 246730 13229 246729 13230 246933 13231 246932 13300 248889 13389 246920 13390 248885 13391 248884 2210.6575 PRINTING 2/22/01 10:49:57 Page - 16 Business Unit CENT SVC PW BUILDING COMMUNICATIONS 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 13392 438631 -1 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOT 13081 021201 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 13127 021301 13082 021201 13432 729132 1001.4329 AMBULANCE FEES GENERAL FUND REVENUES 1281.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # - - - -- Date '- Amount Vendor Explanation Council Check Register 251.66 Page - 17 218751 2/20/01 102494 MEDICAL PRIORITY PO # Doc No - 275.00 Account Description DISPATCHER TRAINING 13083 37259 275.00 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 218752 2/20/01 5210.6406 101483 MENARDS 13393 41075 53.38 GENERAL SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 13085 87996 11.99 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISPLAYS 13086 55785 65.37 GENERAL SUPPLIES LIFT STATION MAINT 218753 2/20/01 5841.6406 101987 MENARDS 13088 55784 27.09 GENERAL SUPPLIES TAPE, PLUGS 13128 1997 27.09 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION 218754 2/20/01 5101.4413 100882 MERIT SUPPLY 13433 19503 371.90 GENERAL SUPPLIES SOAP, POLYLINERS 13232 62876077 66.88 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX MOPHEAD, MOP HANDLE 13394 67032235 902.59 COST OF GOODS SOLD POLYLINERS 13089 31891 1,341.37 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 218755 2/20101 102507 METRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS 143.50 OFFICIATING FEES 143.50 218756 2/20/01 102508 METZGER, MAURE ANN 66.30 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 66.30 218757 2/20101 101161 MIDWEST CHEMICAL SUPPLY 135.89 TRASH LINERS 135.89 218758 2/20/01 100692 MIDWEST COCA -COLA BOTTLING COM 108.00 213.65 COKE 321.65 218759 2/20/01 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & 4,350.00 REPLACE SERVICE 4,350.00 CITY OF Ebi.. 2122/01 .0:49:57 Council Check Register Page - 17 2116/01 - 2/20/01 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Unit 13083 37259 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13084 40781 5210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF DOME PROGRAM 13393 41075 5440.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 13085 87996 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 13086 55785 5921.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES LIFT STATION MAINT 13087 55709 5841.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK OCCUPANCY 13088 55784 4090.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET REVOLVING 13128 1997 4077.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION 13334 021601 5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 13433 19503 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13232 62876077 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 13394 67032235 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 13089 31891 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/16/01 —2/20/01 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No 218760 2/20/01 101638 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 18,111.00 CONNECTION FEE 13090 1/1 -3/31 2/22/01 10:49:57 Page - 18 Account No Account Description Business Unit 5915.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER WATER TREATMENT 13129 0097485 18,111.00 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 218761 2/20/01 1400.6104 101376 MINNESOTA PIPE & EQUIPMENT 13335 021601 1,010.79 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES NUTS, CLAMPS, COUPLINGS 13335 021601 1,010.79 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MEDIA STUDIO 218762 2/20/01 102330 MN CHIEFS OF POLICE EDUC FOUND 260.00 CONFERENCE FEE 260.00 218763 2/20/01 104220 MULTIVENTURE PROPERTIES INC 55.00 REFUND GARAGE INSPECTION 55.00 218764 2/20/01 104201 NADLER, SHIRLEY 279.40 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 279.40 218765 2/20/01 100921 NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE 62.03 57.30 CRAFT SUPPLIES 119.33 218766 2/20/01 101727 NELSON, BARBARA 42.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 413.00 MEDIA PROF. SERVICE 455.00 218767 2/20/01 104197 NESS, KAROL 35.00 SKATING LESSON REFUND 35.00 218768 2/20/01 104152 NESS, POOKA 178.75 -- ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 178.75 218769 2/20/01 101958 NICOL, JANET 129.50 MEDIA PROF. SERVICE 2/22/01 10:49:57 Page - 18 Account No Account Description Business Unit 5915.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER WATER TREATMENT 13129 0097485 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 13283 021301 1400.6104 CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13434 021601 13130 021301 1001.4351 UNDERGROUND PARK INSPECTION3ENERAL FUND REVENUES 1001.4329 AMBULANCE FEES GENERAL FUND REVENUES 13395 0123107JAES 5125.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD MEDIA STUDIO 13396 0205107JUDQ 5125.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES MEDIA STUDIO 13335 021601 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 13335 021601 5125.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MEDIA STUDIO 13131 021301 13336 021601 13337 021601 5610.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ED ADMINISTRATION 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 5125.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MEDIA STUDIO R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/16/01 --2/20/01 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description 129.50 218770 2/20101 101620 NORTH SECOND STREET STEEL SUPP 21824 ANGLE METAL CHANNEL 13132 042492 5910.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13284 310747 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 2/22/0 10:49:57 Page - 19 Business Unit GENERAL (BILLING) EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13435 P01493410001 218.24 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 218771 2/20101 5100.1740 101631 NORTH STAR INTERNATIONAL TRUCK - 14.98 - BRACKET 14.98 218772 2/20/01 102199 NORTHERN SAFETY CO. INC. _ 86.94 - SHOWER MATS 86.94 218773 2/20/01 101941 NORTHLAND MECHANICAL CONTRACTO 852.25 HEAT EXCHANGER 852.25 218774 2120/01 100933 NORTHWEST GRAPHIC SUPPLY 93.22 266.72 359.94 218775 2120/01 100930 NORTHWESTERN TIRE CO. 623.69 RECAP DRIVE TRAC, DISPOSAL 623.69 218776 2/20/01 101992 OMNI PRODUCTIONS 995.47 REPAIR 995.47 218777 2120/01 103563 OTTERSTEDT, KELLY 360.00 MODEL 360.00 218778 2/20/01 102440 PASS, GRACE 945.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 31.20 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 976.20 218779 2/20/01 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 13284 310747 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 2/22/0 10:49:57 Page - 19 Business Unit GENERAL (BILLING) EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13435 P01493410001 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13397 15536 5100.1740 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT ART CENTER BALANCE SHEET 13398 18721200 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOI 13399 18678900 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOI 13091 NW -68798 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13092 7892 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 13338 021601 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 13339 021601 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 13340 02/16 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date - Amount -- 5862.5513 Vendor - -- Explanation - -- 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 146.97 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 146.97 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 218780 2/20/01 VERNON SELLING 100946 PERA YORK SELLING 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 67,108.09 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE CONTRIB PPEND 02113/01 67,108.09 218781 2120/01 100946 PERA 39.24 -- CONTRIB PPEND 02113/01 39.24 218782 2/20/01 103292 PETERSON, JENNIFER 48.00 MODEL 48.00 218783 2120/01 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 825.26 990.75 1,105.55 177.75 77.61 488.48 112.50- 1,257.63 636.15 2,634.05 8,080.73 218784 2/20/01 102763 PHILLIPS, LINDA 29.25 - -_ ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 29.25 218785 2/20101 102156 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING 902.71 38.15 106.20 778.39 1,825.45 218786 2120/01 100961 POSTMASTER 980.00 BULK MAIL CITY OF EDINA 2/22/01 10:49:57 Council Check Register Page - 20 2/16/01 - 2/20/01 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Unit 13156 64841508 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 13436 022001 13437 02120/01 13341 021601 13157 691395 13158 691403 13233 693442 13234 693445 13235 693444 13236 693448 13237 3234131 13301 693447 13302 693446 13303 693441 13342 021601 13304 39800 13305 39798 13400 39786 13401 39785 13093 011201 1000.2023 P.E.R.A. PAYABLE 1000.2023 P.E.R.A. PAYABLE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 5110.6803 CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation - -- -- -- - _ - 980.00 - - - -- - 218787 2/20/01 100961 POSTMASTER CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/16/01 --2/20/01 PO # Doc No Inv No _5,000.00 PERMIT #939, UTILITY BILLING 5,000.00 218788 2/20/01 100961 POSTMASTER 136.00 4 ROLLS STAMPS 136.00 218789 2/20/01 100961 POSTMASTER Account No Account Description 13133 021301 5910.6235 POSTAGE 13445 021401 1550.6235 POSTAGE 200.00 POSTAGE DUE TRUST ACCT 001395 13185 001395 1550.6235 POSTAGE 200.00 218790 2/20101 101811 PREMIER FLEET SERVICES 655.58 HOSE REEL REPAIRS 655.58 218791 2120/01 100968 PRIOR WINE COMPANY 120.70 51.70 631.34 1,222.55 1,191.06 324.80 3,542.15 218792 2120/01 100971 QUALITY WINE 3,007.57 59.57- 2,535.03 25.03- 4,166.86 41.24- 1,204.60 23.90- 3,849.56 38.10- 3,187.84 63.31- 17.700.31 13438 15004 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 2/22/01 10:49:57 Page - 21 Business Unit GENERAL (BILLING) CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13238 338665 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 13239 338659 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13240 338660 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13241 338666 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 13242 338656 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 13243 338655 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 13244 931499 -00 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 13244 931499 -00 5840.4408 TRADE DISCOUNTS LIQUOR YORK GENERAL 13245 931249 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 13245 931249 -00 5840.4408 TRADE DISCOUNTS LIQUOR YORK GENERAL 13246 931250 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 13246 931250 -00 5860.4408 TRADE DISCOUNTS VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL 13247 931439 -00 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 13247 931439 -00 5820.4408 TRADE DISCOUNTS 50TH STREET GENERAL 13248 931204 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13248 931204 -00 5820.4408 TRADE DISCOUNTS 50TH STREET GENERAL 13249 931438 -00 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 13249 931438 -00 5860.4408 TRADE DISCOUNTS VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/16/01 —2/20/01 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description 218793 2/20/01 100973 RADIO SHACK 95.83 WIRE, SHAFT 13285 082378 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 2/22/01 10:49:57 Page - 22 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13286 021201 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 13094 020701 4077.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION 13186 021501 13134 37143 13135 37144 13136 37141 13343 021601 5511.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 5620.6186 HEAT 5311.6186 HEAT 1552.6186 HEAT EDINBOROUGH PARK POOL OPERATION CENT SVC PW BUILDING 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 12629 375043030. 1470.6408 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13095 00015304919 95.83 HAZ. WASTE DISPOSAL SUPERVISION 8 OVERHEAD 218794 2/20/01 5110.6103 100974 RAYMOND HAEG PLUMBING 310.00 REPLACE WALL HUNG TOILET 310.00 218795 2/20101 102327 RECREATION SPORTS OFFICIALS AS 2,112.00 BASKETBALL OFFICIALS ASSN. 2,112.00 218796 2/20/01 101889 REGION 6AA GIRLS HOCKEY 1,194.00 GATE RECEIPT PERCENTAGE 1,194.00 218797 2/20/01 103711 RELIANT ENERGY RETAIL INC. 7,494.69 37.28 20,077.73 27,609.70 218798 2/20/01 102095 RICKERT, DAVID 490.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 490.00 218799 2/20/01 101121 RITZ CAMERA CENTERS 11.02 - -- -11.02 PHOTO FINISHING 218800 2/20/01 100988 SAFETY KLEEN 107.11 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL PICKUP 107.11 218801 2/20/01 103859 SANDBERG, MARY 102.00 MODEL 102.00 218802 2/20/01 100995 SEH 36.14 HYDROGEOLOGIST 2/22/01 10:49:57 Page - 22 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13286 021201 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 13094 020701 4077.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION 13186 021501 13134 37143 13135 37144 13136 37141 13343 021601 5511.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 5620.6186 HEAT 5311.6186 HEAT 1552.6186 HEAT EDINBOROUGH PARK POOL OPERATION CENT SVC PW BUILDING 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 12629 375043030. 1470.6408 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13095 00015304919 1280.6271 HAZ. WASTE DISPOSAL SUPERVISION 8 OVERHEAD 13344 021601 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 13439 0072333 5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount .240.12 Vendor _ Explanation _--- - -- -- 13250 116518 20.24 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER WRENCH ORGANIZER 13251 - 276.26 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 218803 2/20/01 5822.5514 102870 SEIFERT, ELIZABETH SOUTHSIDE DISTRIBUTORS INC 13253 116514 33.80 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 13254 116519 33.80 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 218804 2/20/01 122.70 101380 SHAUGHNESY, SANDRA 36.40 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 36.40 218805 2/20/01 22.50 100998 SHERWIN WILLIAMS 157.03 PAINT CITY OF ED,rvA Council Check Register 2/16/01 - 2/20/01 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description 13440 0072723 01315.1705.2000NSULTING DESIGN 218806 2/20/01 5822.5514 103460 SNAP -ON TOOLS 13250 116518 20.24 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER WRENCH ORGANIZER 13251 - -- 20.24 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 218807 2/20/01 5822.5514 101002 SOUTHSIDE DISTRIBUTORS INC 13253 116514 1,556.95 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 13254 116519 2,834.20 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 122.70 887.35 11.25 22.50 5,434.95 218808 2/20/01 102698 SPOONER, ANNE 308.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 308.00 218809 2/20101 103277 ST. JOSEPH EQUIPMENT CO INC 93.02 WIPER BLADE ARMS 140.11 FENDER _435.70 VALVE, MUFFLER, GASKET 668.83 218810 2/20/01 104208 STEIDINGER, JANA REEG 98.00 CLASS REFUND 13345 021601 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 13346 021601 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 13137 0872 -8 1325.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13287 215310716 -96 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 529 2/22/0', 10:49:57 Page - 23 Business Unit BA -315 TH 100 8 77TH ST GEOME' ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES STREET NAME SIGNS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13159 116329 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 13250 116518 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 13251 116520 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 13252 116513 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 13253 116514 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 13254 116519 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 13347 021601 13096 S196088 13097 5196165 13187 5196209 13402 021401 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ART CENTER REVENUES R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2116/01 2/20/01 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation Po ft Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description 98.00 - 218811 2/20/01 104203 STERNER LIGHTING SYSTEMS INC. 3,874.00 LAMP POSTS, BOLTS, FIXTURES 13373 0232026 1330.6530 REPAIR PARTS 2/22/01 10:49:57 Page - 24 Business Unit TRAFFIC SIGNALS 13288 206453.1 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13289 206534.1 1400.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13376 183659.1 1400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13441 021601 3,874.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADAPTIVE RECREATION 13188 218812 2/20/01 TIRES & TUBES 101015 STREICHERS _ 71.69 GRIPS 160.20 SQUAD #152 REPAIR —_ 1,045.00 EXCALIBER LIGHT BAR 1,276.89 218813 2/20/01 104218 STRUESS, MANDI 132.00 SWIM INSTRUCTOR 132.00 218814 2/20/01 101020 SUBURBAN TIRE & AUTO 178.83 TIRE 178.83 218815 2/20/01 102510 SUNDIN, ROSALIE 840.00 MEDIA PROF. SERVICE 840.00 218816 2/20/01 101171 SUPERIOR SHORES CONFERENCE CEN 348.49 CRAFT SUPPLIES -ROOM 348.49 218817 2/20/01 101026 TARGET _ 22.34 STORAGE 22.34 218818 2/20/01 103826 TERRY SIPE PIANO SERVICE 75.00 PIANO TUNING 75.00 218819 2/20/01 101034 THOMSEN & NYBECK 14,133.12 PROSECUTING 14,133.12 218820 2/20101 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 2/22/01 10:49:57 Page - 24 Business Unit TRAFFIC SIGNALS 13288 206453.1 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13289 206534.1 1400.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13376 183659.1 1400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13441 021601 1629.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADAPTIVE RECREATION 13188 143425 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13348 021601 13098 021201 13403 85363 13099 021201 5125.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MEDIA STUDIO 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES 5440.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 5620.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENTEDINBOROUGH PARK 13100 154159 1195.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LEGAL SERVICES R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF L-.A Date Amount FIRST AID SUPPLIES 2/22/1, 10:49:57 Council Check Register 587327 1,379.20 FIRST AID SUPPLIES Page - 25 2/16/01 --2/20/01 020901 12.55 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Unit 13160 218081 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 13161 218082 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 13404 218630 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 13405 218629 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING Check # Date Amount FIRST AID SUPPLIES Vendor Explanation 13443 587327 1,379.20 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13444 020901 12.55 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13444 020901 28.50 DATA PROCESSING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13444 020901 _- 1,419.70 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 2,839.95 218821 2/20/01 103153 TREUTING, KRISTEN 74.43 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 74.43 218822 2/20/01 101042 TRIARCO ARTS & CRAFTS - 215.16 - 215.16 218823 2/20101 101047 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO 854.91 LABOR, PARTS ON DOOR 854.91 218824 2/20/01 104188 TWIN CITY MACK AND VOLVO TRUCK 135.3_5 LINK ASSEMBLY 135.35 218825 2/20/01 102255 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO 34.72 OXYGEN - ST 2 52.33 OXYGEN 87.05 218826 2/20/01 100363 U S BANCORP 289.50 AIRFARE - M SCHEERER 44.73 TECH SUPPORT - LAPTOP 78.00 - TRASH RECEPTACLE 412.23 218827 2/20/01 101280 UNITED HORTICULTURAL SUPPLYWA 556.92 MAXI -MELT 556.92 - MAXI -MELT 1,113.84 218828 2/20/01 102898 UNITED STATES FILTER CORPORATI 400.68 SUPPLIES 400.68 13349 021601 5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 13406 372313 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOI 13101 116353 1552.6530 REPAIR PARTS 13102 1071T 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS CENT SVC PW BUILDING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13442 585339 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13443 587327 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13444 020901 1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13444 020901 1470.6160 DATA PROCESSING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13444 020901 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13103 0365764 4090.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13189 0365844 4090.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13107 0671763 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET REVOLVING STREET REVOLVING ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/16/01 -- 2/20/01 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No 218829 2/20/01 101055 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 100.00 EQUIPMENT MANAGE CLASS 13104 105682 2/22/01 10:49:57 Page - 26 Account No Account Description Business Unit 1281.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING 13105 7122074 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 13106 7122533 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 13407 01CZ2305 4452.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CITY HALL 13375 3757 100.00 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 218830 2/20/01 5913.6180 100012 US FILTER DISTRIBUTION GROUP DISTRIBUTION 13375 48.15 5923.6180 BRASS WATER FITTINGS COLLECTION SYSTEMS 13375 74.77 5913.6180 BRASS WATER FITTINGS DISTRIBUTION 13375 122.92 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 218831 2/20/01 100282 US OFFICE PRODUCTS 1,577.99 REMODELING 1,577.99 218832 2/20/01 103590 VALLEY -RICH CO. INC. 9.291.01 SEWER REPAIR SEWER REPAIR 9,291.01 SEWER REPAIR SEWER REPAIR 9,291.01- SEWER REPAIR 9,291.01 218833 2/20/01 103920 VINO ARTE 68.00 102.00 — 170.00 218834 2/20/01 102218 VINTAGE ONE WINES 82.80 82.80 218835 2/20/01 102342 WENZEL, KENNETH 648.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 648.00 218836 2/20/01 101076 WEST PHOTO ____86.39 86.39 218837 2/20/01 101077 WEST WELD SUPPLY CO. 20.66 ELECTRODE 2/22/01 10:49:57 Page - 26 Account No Account Description Business Unit 1281.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING 13105 7122074 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 13106 7122533 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 13407 01CZ2305 4452.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CITY HALL 13375 3757 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 13375 3757 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 13375 3757 5923.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS COLLECTION SYSTEMS 13375 3757 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 13375 3757 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 13255 021201 13256 021301 13257 5293 13350 021601 13408 31828 13138 37468 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 5125.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS MEDIA STUDIO EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/16/01 - 2/20/01 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No 238.74 COUPLING, ELECTRODES 13139 37360 259.40 218838 2/20/01 101078 WESTSIDE EQUIPMENT 34.93 COUPLER 218839 2/20/01 1553.6406 101191 WILKINSON, JENNIFER EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13409 021601 7.38 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES PHOTO SUPPLIES 13409 021601 31.75 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES PHOTO DEVELOPING 13409 021601 15.00 MEETING EXPENSE CHAMBER MEETING 54.13 218840 2/20101 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 2,133.85 1,052.65 539.70 3,726.20 218841 2/20/01 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 592.70 463.75 539.50 1,595.95 218842 2/20/01 102335 WISCONSIN STATE LAB OF HYGIENE 354.00 QUALITY ASSURANCE SAMPLES 354.00 218843 2/20101 102720 WOLFE, KAY 144.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 144.00 218844 2/20/01 101086 WORLD CLASS WINES INC 429.00 64.00- 779.65 1,144.65 218845 2/20/01 100568 XEROX CORPORATION 104.00 RENTAL EQUIPMENT Account No Account Description 5910.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 2/22/01 10:49:57 Page - 27 Business Unit GENERAL (BILLING) 13190 0009273 -IN 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13409 021601 2210.6408 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 13409 021601 2210.6408 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 13409 021601 2210.6106 MEETING EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS 13258 054968 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13259 054948 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 13260 054947 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 13162 39228 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 13261 39476 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13306 39477 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 13108 697863 1491.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LABORATORY 13351 021601 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 13262 103099 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 13307 102726 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 13308 103100 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 13410 079942446 5110.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/16101 — 2/20/01 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation 104.00 218846 2120/01 101089 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 128.14 SAFETY ITEMS 128.14 1,405,612.24 Grand Total 2/22101. 10:49:57 Page - 28 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Unit 13191 54067026 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 1,405,612.24 Total Payments 1,405,612.24 MAINT OF COURSE 8 GROUNDS k R55CKSUM LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/221U. 10:54:31 Council Check Summary Page - 1 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 246.043.53 02200 COMMUNICATIONS FUND 157.44 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 10,208.74 04800 CONSTRUCTION FUND 240.12 05100 ART CENTER FUND 17,479.74 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 182.48 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 37.28 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 1,236.89 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 2,590.15 05600 EDINBOROUGH /CENT LAKES FUND 8,984.21 05800 LIQUOR FUND 142,648.12 05900 UTILITY FUND 40,803.54 09000 HRA FUND 480,000.00 09900 PAYROLL FUND 455,000.00 Report Totals 1,405,612.24 2116/01 - 2/20101 We confirm to the best of out knowledgle and belief, that thm daims comply in all matwid respects with the requirements of the City of Edina purchasing p and c kprocedures J. Fi City R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation 218847 311/01 5842.5514 100608 3M CO HGF0878 YORK SELLING 67.38 Inv No SIGN STICKERS Account Description 13452 308.58 1325.6406 LETTERS FOR SIGNS 13453 TP06507 362.54 SIGNS & POSTS SIGN SHEETING TP06812 1325.6531 738.50 218848 3/1101 100616 ACTION MAILING SERVICES INC. 384.49 MAIL PROCESSING 384.49 218849 3/1/01 104225 ADAMS, DAVE 20.00 TRAINING 20.00 218850 3/1/01 104244 AIR-PRO INC 312.05 CHIMNEY SWEEP 312.05 218851 3/1101 102609 ALL SAINTS BRANDS 388.35 388.35 218852 3/1/01 104224 ALTA4 296.05 SOFTWARE 296.05 218853 3/1101 102586 AMERICAN PAYMENT CENTERS 75.00 BOX SERVICES 75.00 218854 311/01 103980 ANNIE'S FROZEN YOGURT 92.00 92.00 218855 3/1/01 104235 APPLIED MEDIA 100.00 E.P. PERFORMANCE 100.00 218856 3/1/01 100469 AQUA PURE MIDWEST -MN 159.75 WATER FILTRATION 159.75 CITY OF - ..A 020901 5630.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS Council Check Register 13590 00033952 5842.5514 311/01 - 3/1/01 YORK SELLING PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description 13452 TP06508 1325.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13453 TP06507 1325.6531 SIGNS & POSTS 13454 TP06812 1325.6531 SIGNS & POSTS 2/28/, 8:55:34 Page - 1 Business Unit STREET NAME SIGNS STREET NAME SIGNS STREET NAME SIGNS 13719 87786 5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) 13783 022001 1281.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING 13784 020901 5630.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS CENTENNIAL LAKES 13590 00033952 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 13785 01020042 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ENGINEERING GENERAL 13520 16200 5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) 13786 045477 5630.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTENNIAL LAKES 13787 021601 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 13721 30376 - 272650 1551.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS CITY HALL GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation 218857 3/1/01 5842.5512 101977 ARCH PAGING YORK SELLING 13593 20759300 587.95 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR PAGER RENTAL 13594 33478100 386.32 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX PAGER CONTRACT 13595 33475300 974.27 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 218858 3/1/01 101255 ASCOM HASLER MAILING SYSTEMS 1 1,041.57 METER RENTAL 1,041.57 218859 3/1/01 103933 ASF ASSOCIATES LTD. 120.00 PO 3105 120.00 218860 3/1/01 104245 ASHLEIGH MANOR 148.03 MERCHANDISE 148.03 218861 3/1/01 102573 ASSOCIATION OF RECYCLING MANAG 20.00 MEMBERSHIP 20.00 218862 3/1/01 100637 AUTOMOBILE SERVICE CO. 46.36 - FRONT ALIGNMENT 46.36 218863 311/01 104192 BAG BOY CO. 187.66 -- PULL CART PARTS 187.66 218864 311101 103241 BALDINGER, WENDY 100.00 E.P. PERFORMANCE 100.00 218865 3/1/01 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 59.49 329.12 1,402.85 38.45 68.88 1,898.79 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 3/1/01 -- 3/1/01 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description 13488 K6339611B 1470.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 13489 K6338001B 1400.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 13521 721566 13722 6188 13788 109254 13720 022201 13455 25267 13723 68314 13724 021501 1550.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 2/28/01 8:55:34 Page - 2 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 5952.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS RECYCLING 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 5423.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GOLF CARS 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 13591 33478000 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 13592 20755600 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 13593 20759300 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 13594 33478100 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 13595 33475300 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount GENERAL SUPPLIES Vendor Explanation 218866 3/1/01 311/01 -- 3/1101 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS PO # Doc No 2.52- Account No Account Description OFFICE SUPPLIES CM8455430 1260.6406 23.58 13491 8495950 NOTE, FILE BOXES GENERAL SUPPLIES 13492 102.80 5510.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES 8507270 1552.6530 28.97 13725 161900 CALENDAR GENERAL SUPPLIES 13725 177.06 1120.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES 5.24 OFFICE SUPPLIES 335.13 218867 3/1/01 100650 BEST ACCESS SYSTEMS OF MINNESO 8,52 KEYS 8.52 218868 3/1/01 100711 BLOOD. DAVID 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 100.00 218869 3/1101 100776 BUTLER, GEORGE 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 100.00 218870 3/1/01 100678 CARLSON PRINTING 203.42 BUSINESS CARDS 203.42 218871 3/1/01 101377 CARLSON, CRAIG 150.00 E.P. PERFORMANCE 150.00 218872 311/01 100681 CATCO 97,25 - FITTINGS, HOSE ENDS 97.25 218873 3/1/01 100683 CHEMSEARCH 666.62 CONQUEST 666.62 218874 3/1/01 101264 CHETS SHOES INC. 157.25 BOOTS- FISHER 157.25 CITY OF EDINA MN- 127931 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES Council Check Register 13522 030101 1419.6102 311/01 -- 3/1101 RESERVE PROGRAM PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description 13490 CM8455430 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13491 8495950 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13492 8506380 5510.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES 13493 8507270 1552.6530 REPAIR PARTS 13725 161900 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13725 161900 1120.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 2/28101 8:55:34 Page - 3 Business Unit ENGINEERING GENERAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING ARENA ADMINISTRATION CENT SVC PW BUILDING CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL ADMINISTRATION 13456 MN- 127931 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 13522 030101 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 13523 030101 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 13464 00075997 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 13726 021601 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 13465 3 -52293 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13466 594290 1553.6585 ACCESSORIES 13524 9230 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN FIRE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount 100698 Vendor Explanation 218875 3/1/01 15.66 104236 CITY OF BRECKENRIDGE 75.00 BUS TO CONFERENCE 218880 3/1101 75.00 104243 CORK POPS INC 218876 3/1/01 241.81 100685 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE 50.00 E.P. PERFORMANCE 218881 3/1101 50.00 100370 CRAGUN'S CONFERENCE CENTER 218877 3/1/01 504.78 100693 COMMERCIAL FURNITURE BROKERS 346.13 REMODELING 218882 3/1/01 181.05 -- 101240 REMODELING 527.18 MERCHANDISE 218878 3/1/01 123.20 101323 CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS 218883 3/1/01 133.55 100712 GLOVES,TUMS,BANDAIDS 260.90 OINTMENT 394.45 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 3/1101 — 3/1/01 PO # Doc No Inv No 13789 022201 218879 3/1/01 100698 COPY EQUIPMENT INC. 15.66 PLANS 15.66 218880 3/1101 104243 CORK POPS INC 241.81 MERCHANDISE 241.81 218881 3/1101 100370 CRAGUN'S CONFERENCE CENTER 504.78 CONFERENCE- ELASKY, DRAPER 504.78 218882 3/1/01 101240 DACO TRADING CO. INC. 123.20 MERCHANDISE 123.20 218883 3/1/01 100712 DAVIES WATER EQUIPMENT 300.0_0 LOCATOR TRAINING 300.00 218884 3/1/01 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING 2128/01 8:55:34 Page - 4 Account No Account Description Business Unit 1120.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ADMINISTRATION 13727 021601 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 13728 00720211 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 13728 00720211 4452.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CITY HALL 13467 01456823 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 13467 01456823 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 13729 0191377 & 1495.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INSPECTIONS 0191376 13790 10010885 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 13494 02/15/01 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13730 00159658 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 13468 3050891 5919.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount 5842.5514 Vendor Explanation 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 1,381.00 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 48.25 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT GOLF BALANCE SHEET 673.40 0690066 5400.1740 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT GOLF BALANCE SHEET 1,187.80 1,653.25 4,943.70 218885 3/1/01 100719 DELTA DENTAL 6,826.80 PREMIUMS FOR 03/01/01 6,826.80 218886 3/1101 100720 DENNYS 5TH AVE. BAKERY 53.71 BREAD 53.71 218887 3/1/01 104237 DOLE, BRIAN 50.00 E.P. PERFORMANCE 50.00 218888 3/1/01 100244 DOWNEAST CONCEPTS INC 9.00 MERCHANDISE 9.00 218889 3/1101 100731 DPC INDUSTRIES 1,493.61 CHLORINE & FLOURIDE 1,493.61 218890 311/01 104086 DUFFEY PAPER COMPANY 6,954.33 ABOUT TOWN PAPER 6,954.33 218891 3/1/01 100736 E -Z -GO TEXTRON 34,187.76 9 ELEC GOLF CARS 357.00 FREIGHT UNDERCHARGE 21,726.00- TRADE INS 30,389.12 8 GAS GOLF CARS 3,819.64 1 GAS GOLF CAR 47,027.52 218892 3/1/01 100739 EAGLE WINE 967.98 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 311/01 -- 3/1/01 PO # Doc No Inv No 13596 125629 13597 125623 13598 125624 13599 125625 13600 124858 13525 022201 13731 96327 13791 021601 13732 78399 2/28/01 8:55:34 Page - 5 Account No Account Description Business Unit 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 1550.6040 HOSPITALIZATION 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL GRILL 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 13526 7000 - 1383791 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT 13527 068569 -00 2210.6123 MAGAZINE/NEWSLETTER EXPENSECOMMUNICATIONS 13528 0684691 5400.1740 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT GOLF BALANCE SHEET 13529 0689529 5400.1740 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT GOLF BALANCE SHEET 13530 0686552 5400.1740 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT GOLF BALANCE SHEET 13531 0684692 5400.1740 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT GOLF BALANCE SHEET 13532 0690066 5400.1740 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT GOLF BALANCE SHEET 13601 341531 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Vendor 120.70 2,061.80 817.20 111.40 4,079.08 218893 3/1101 100741 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 4,258.70 31.60 93.75 CITY OF EDINA 3/1/01 Council Check Register 101667 3/1101 - 3/1/01 Page - 6 Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No 13602 341537 13603 341547 13604 341551 13605 341542 218894 3/1/01 2/28/01 8:55:34 101667 EDINA HIGH SCHOOL Page - 6 Account No Account Description 1,443.0_0 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE GATE RCPTS % -GIRLS HOCKEY 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 1,443.00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 218895 3/1/01 50TH ST SELLING 100749 EMPLOYEES CLUB COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 650.00 SUPPLIES 650.00 218896 311/01 104195 EXTREME BEVERAGE LLC. 160.00 160.00 218897 3/1/01 101582 FIAM 10.00 2001 DUES - T SCHMITZ 10.00 218898 3/1/01 104238 FLOYD, ANN - 21.00 -_ - -- CLASS REFUND 21.00 218899 3/1101 101712 GAGLIARDIE, CELESTE 100.00 E.P. PERFORMANCE 100.00 218900 3/1101 101146 GLOBAL CROSSING TELECOMMUNICAT 455.9_3 TELEPHONE 455.93 13606 753515 2/28/01 8:55:34 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING Page - 6 Account No Account Description Business Unit 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13606 753515 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 13607 753513 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 13608 753540 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 13609 752931 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 13610 752928 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 13469 022001 5511.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 13533 030101 13611 7873 13534 022101 13792 022201 13733 021601 13734 021401 1500.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CONTINGENCIES 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 1470.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 5601.4605 LESSON PROGRAM INCOME EB /CL REVENUES 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount REPAIR PARTS Vendor Explanation 218901 3/1101 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 102383 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS AS 00008009 5842.5513 93.00 YORK SELLING 13652 GAAFR BOOK 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 93.00 13653 341550 5842.5512 218902 3/1/01 13654 101103 GRAINGER COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 13655 47.54 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR PARTS 13656 340772 47.54 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 13657 218903 311/01 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 102670 GRAND PERE WINES INC 555452 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 182.00 13659 555454 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 225.04 - 555451 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 13661 407.04 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 218904 3/1/01 5822.5512 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 13663 341541 5822.5515 908.00 50TH ST SELLING 908.00 218905 3/1/01 100785 GREUPNER, JOE 6,000.00 MARCH RETAINER 6,000.00 218906 3/1/01 100782 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. 187.60 154.85 2,293.56 .70 1,088.04 5,216.69 187.60 8,562.96 22.46 - 24.70- 96.62- 122.46- 28.70 1.532.01 83.05 19,069.52 218907 311/01 102426 HALE, WILL CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 3/1/01 -- 3/1/01 PO # Doc No Inv No 13470 40650 2128/0 8:55:34 Page - 7 Account No Account Description Business Unit 1160.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FINANCE 13735 498- 755803 -0 5620.6530 REPAIR PARTS EDINBOROUGH PARK 13646 00008042 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 13647 00008009 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 13648 37098 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 13736 022101 5410.6132 PROFESSIONAL SVCS - GOLF GOLF ADMINISTRATION 13649 341535 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 13650 341534 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 13651 341536 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 13652 319824 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 13653 341550 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 13654 341548 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 13655 341549 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 13656 340772 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 13657 555453 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 13658 555452 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 13659 555454 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 13660 555451 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 13661 341543 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 13662 341540 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 13663 341541 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation 218912 3/1/01 100.00 104226 E.P. PERFORMANCE 13497 0014 - 0000074 100.00 CONTRACTED REPAIRS CLASS REFUND 218908 3/1/01 35.00 100791 HALLMAN OIL COMPANY 218913 3/1/01 849.34 101048 PO 1042 35 595.65 PO 1042 13499 0014 - 0000074 1,444.99 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 218909 311/01 100792 HARMON AUTOGLASS HONMYHR, BABA 272.77 PO 1935 243.26 PO 1936 218915 311/01 107.43 100267 PO 1970 623.46 E.P. PERFORMANCE 218910 3/1/01 75.00 102843 HO, JEFFERY D. CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 311/01 -- 3/1101 PO # Doc No Inv No 13737 021601 2,000.00 MEDICAL DIRECTOR SERVICES 2,000.00 218911 311/01 100806 HOBART CORP 378.23 DISHWASHER SERV CONTRACT 2/28/01 8:55:34 Page - 8 Account No Account Description Business Unit 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 13495 48218 378.23 LUBRICANTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 218912 3/1/01 1553.6584 104226 HOEDEMAN, LEAH 13497 0014 - 0000074 35.00 CONTRACTED REPAIRS CLASS REFUND 34 35.00 218913 3/1/01 1553.6180 101048 HOME JUICE 35 146.80 13499 0014 - 0000074 146.80 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 218914 3/1/01 103348 HONMYHR, BABA 100.00 PARADE MINUTES 100.00 218915 311/01 100267 HOPKINS WESTWIND BAND 75.00 E.P. PERFORMANCE 75.00 2/28/01 8:55:34 Page - 8 Account No Account Description Business Unit 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 13495 48218 1553.6584 LUBRICANTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13496 48219 1553.6584 LUBRICANTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13497 0014 - 0000074 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 34 13498 0014 - 0000074 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 35 13499 0014 - 0000074 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 07 13738 030101 1470.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13471 4807890 5421.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENTGRILL 13793 022001 5601.4605 LESSON PROGRAM INCOME EB /CL REVENUES 13612 00089711 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 13535 022101 1627.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SPECIAL ACTIVITIES 13739 021601 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount GENERAL SUPPLIES Vendor Explanation 218916 3/1/01 3/1101 100417 HORIZON COMMERCIAL POOL SUPPLY HUEBSCH 17071 96.06 GENERAL SUPPLIES CHLORINE, ACID, DE 96.06 218917 311/01 100842 HOUSEHOLD BANK F.S.B. (KNOX) 73.32 46.38 PO 1854 218921 3/1/01 46.38 104228 IN GOOD TASTE CO 218918 311101 102847 HPI INTERNATIONAL INC. PLEAA SEMINAR 202.40 PO 3110 202.40 218922 3/1/01 218919 3/1101 J.H. LARSON COMPANY 101910 HTE INC. 108.16 36,755.69 SERVICE CONTRACT 2001 12,301.82- SERVICE CONTRACT CITY OF EL,..., Council Check Register 3/1/01 - 3/1/01 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description 13536 1021303 5620.6545 CHEMICALS 2/2810' 8:55:34 Page - 9 Business Unit EDINBOROUGH PARK 13500 0217- 454639 24,453.87 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDINGS 13501 218920 3/1101 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 102114 HUEBSCH 17071 5842.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 10.50 TOWEL CLEANING 62.82 TOWEL AND RUG CLEANING 73.32 218921 3/1/01 104228 IN GOOD TASTE CO 75.00 PLEAA SEMINAR 75.00 218922 3/1/01 101861 J.H. LARSON COMPANY 108.16 PO 1965 108.16 218923 3/1/01 101400 JAMES, WILLIAM F 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 100.00 218924 3/1/01 100830 JERRY'S PRINTING 179.29 ANNUAL MEETING 261.62 BUSINESS CARDS 440.91 218925 3/1/01 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 344.00 2/2810' 8:55:34 Page - 9 Business Unit EDINBOROUGH PARK 13500 0217- 454639 5912.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDINGS 13501 209417 1400.6408 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13502 802169 1400.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENTPOLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13503 804495 1400.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENTPOLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13504 296697 5620.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENTEDINBOROUGH PARK 13537 300872 5620.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENTEDINBOROUGH PARK 13794 022101 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13505 4213971 -01 1552.6530 REPAIR PARTS CENT SVC PW BUILDING 13538 030101 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 13539 A -17458 1100.6106 MEETING EXPENSE CITY COUNCIL 13740 17071 5842.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK SELLING 13613 1223316 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/28/01 8:55:34 Council Check Register Page - 10 3/1/01 - 3/1/01 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Unit 12.91- 13614 149539 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 6.54- 13615 149540 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 4.51- 13616 149541 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 7.46- 13617 149542 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,098.20 13618 1223320 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 230.95 13619 1223311 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 524.70 13620 1223309 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 803.10 13621 1223317 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 311.65 13622 1223314 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,214.48 13623 1223310 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,617.60 13624 1223308 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 80.09 13625 1223319 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 199.85 13626 1220948 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,605.60 13627 1220958 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 4.30- 13628 150524 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 8.28- 13629 150523 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 8.28- 13630 150522 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 380.28 13631 1221576 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 728.03 13664 1223313 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 10,086.25 218926 311/01 101072 JOHNSON, WALTER 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 13540 030101 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 100.00 218927 311/01 100839 KAMAN INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES 614.00 PO 6117 13506 Z194455 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 614.00 218928. 3/1/01 102101 KINKO'S 162.95 RENTAL CONTRACTS 13541 062200035702 5610.6575 PRINTING ED ADMINISTRATION 162.95 218929 3/1/01 100944 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC. 1,760.90 13632 146426 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 339.00 13633 146455 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,089.00 13634 145968 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 210.00 13635 146410 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 1,368.75 13636 146316 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 405.00 13637 146509 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 113.00 13638 146441 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF E,...A Council Check Register 3/1101 - 3/1/01 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No 27.95 13639 146425 760.00 13640 146424 1,995.00 13641 145969 114.00 13642 146032 1,600.00 13643 145597 2/28/0, 8:55:34 Page - 11 Account No Account Description 9,782.60 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 218930 3/1101 50TH ST SELLING 103078 KOMAREK, VIRGINIA YORK SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 40.00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE REIMB FOR CLOTHING DAMAGE COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 40.00 249107 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 218931 3/1/01 249109 100846 KUETHER DISTRIBUTING CO YORK SELLING 1,413.25 114.95 - 1,528.20 218932 3/1/01 102027 LACASSE, ANDREW 100.00 E.P. PERFORMANCE 100.00 218933 311/01 101480 M.R.P.A. 500.00 STATE TOURNAMENT BERTHS 500.00 218934 3/1101 104229 MADISON, KAREN 75.00 RETURN OF RENTAL PYMT 75.00 218935 3/1/01 100868 MARK VII SALES 339.90 24.60 1,263.20 79.90 15.20 2,270.10 3,992.90 218936 3/1/01 104242 MASTERPAK 193.00 CRAFT SUPPLIES 193.00 2/28/0, 8:55:34 Page - 11 Account No Account Description Business Unit 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 13472 021601 5421.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GRILL 13644 290638 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 13645 290647 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 13741 021601 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 13742 022301 13795 022001 4077.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION 5601.4554 EDINBOROUGH PARK EB/CL REVENUES 13665 249093 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 13666 248891 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 13667 248890 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 13668 249108 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 13669 249107 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 13670 249109 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 13796 462071 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2128/01 8:55:34 Council Check Register Page - 12 3/1/01 - 3/1/01 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Unit 218937 3/1101 100879 MEDICA CHOICE 330.51 AMBULANCE OVERPAY - SONNESYN 13507 022101 1001.4329 AMBULANCE FEES GENERAL FUND REVENUES 519.63 AMBULANCE OVERPAY - LUDCKE 13507 022101 1001.4329 AMBULANCE FEES GENERAL FUND REVENUES 850.14 218938 3/1/01 102494 MEDICAL PRIORITY 99.00 CONT ED - EDEWAARD 13508 37324 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 99.00 218939 3/1/01 101483 MENARDS - 22.15 PO 6118 13509 41679 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 22.15 218940 3/1/01 100881 MERFELD, BURT 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 13542 030101 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 100.00 218941 3/1101 100882 MERIT SUPPLY 244.36 CLEANING SUPPLIES 13743 55787 5111.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES ART CENTER BLDG / MAINT 244.36 218942 3/1101 104230 MI HUG 25.00 MIDWEST REG USER GROUP HTE 13797 022101 1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 25.00 218943 3/1/01 101161 MIDWEST CHEMICAL SUPPLY 685.38 CLEANING SUPPLIES 13543 19527 1551.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 685.38 218944 3/1101 100692 MIDWEST COCA -COLA BOTTLING COM 94.70 13671 62878040 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 128.94 13672 62877083 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 422.30 13673 65828090 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 62.46- 13674 65828108 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 583.48 218945 3/1/01 101670 MILLER DAVIS LEGAL FORMS COMPA 423.59 COUNCIL MINUTE BOOKS 13544 759430 1100.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY COUNCIL 423.59 218946 3/1/01 100894 MILLIPORE R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/28/01 8:55:34 Council Check Register Page - 13 3/1/01 --3/1101 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Unit 852.69 – — PO 1952 13510 2790490 1491.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES LABORATORY 852.69 218947 3/1101 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & 1,650.00 WATER SERVICE REPLACEMENT 13473 31903 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 1,650.00 218948 3/1/01 103216 MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPARTMENT 864.00 DATA PROCESSING 13511 40650000620 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 864.00 218949 3/1/01 101122 MINNESOTA MONTHLY PUBLICATIONS 166.67 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 13744 MM9291 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 166.67 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 13744 MM9291 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 166.66 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 13744 MM9291 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 500.00 218950 3/1/01 104231 MINNESOTA STATE UNIVERSITY -MAN 100.00 REG -M SIITARI 13798 021501 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 100.00 218951 3/1/01 100159 MOOERS PRINTING INC. 279.03 EFD ENVELOPES 13545 2121 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 279.03 218952 3/1101 101796 MPCA 32.00 WASTEWATER EXAM -M EGAN 13746 022001 5919.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS TRAINING 32.00 218953 3/1/01 101796 MPCA 1,050.00 WASTEWATER OPERATOR CONF 13747 02/20/01 5919.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING 1,050.00 218954 3/1/01 101626 MPWA 100.00 REG -CHRIS SMITH 13745 022301 1260.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ENGINEERING GENERAL 100.00 218955 3/1/01 102779 MSHS 40.00 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 13748 022201 5610.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ED ADMINISTRATION 40.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount 5400.1740 Vendor Explanation 218956 3/1101 GOLF BALANCE SHEET 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC. MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 247.71 REPAIR PARTS 17,311.58 13477 311097 NEW EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS COURSE SUPPLIES 6,115.23 2,458.12 BLOWER 218961 154.00 101415 REPAIR PARTS 72.80 COMMAND SCHOOL TIE ROD & SOCKET 700.00 23,653.61 218962 3/1/01 218957 3/1101 NORTHERN DOOR COMPANY INC 100724 NISSEN, DICK 168.27 DOOR TRANSMITTERS 100.00 168.27 POLICE SERVICE 218963 100.00 104232 NORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY 218958 3/1/01 142.02 100929 NORTH STAR ICE 142.02 74.69 218964 3/1101 103133 46.94 100.26 221.89 218959 3/1/01 101631 NORTH STAR INTERNATIONAL TRUCK _ 33.20 VALVE, SEAL 33.20 218960 3/1101 100925 NORTH STAR TURF CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 3/1/01 - 3/1/01 PO # Doc No Inv No 13474 54663 -00 13475 54711 -00 13476 55719 -00 13749 55901 -00 2/28/01 8:55:34 Page - 14 Account No Account Description 482.00 5400.1740 COURSE SUPPLIES - RICHARDS GOLF BALANCE SHEET 5400.1740 1,718.33 GOLF BALANCE SHEET COURSE SUPPLIES - BRAEMAR REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 247.71 REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS 13477 311097 10.08 REPAIR PARTS COURSE SUPPLIES 2,458.12 218961 3/1/01 101415 NORTHEAST FIRE APPARATUS INC. 700.00 COMMAND SCHOOL 700.00 218962 3/1/01 102888 NORTHERN DOOR COMPANY INC 168.27 DOOR TRANSMITTERS 168.27 218963 3/1/01 104232 NORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY 142.02 CORNER MOUNT REFLECTOR 142.02 218964 3/1101 103133 NORTHERN TOOL & EQUIPMENT 2/28/01 8:55:34 Page - 14 Account No Account Description Business Unit 5400.1740 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT GOLF BALANCE SHEET 5400.1740 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT GOLF BALANCE SHEET 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 5630.6530 REPAIR PARTS CENTENNIAL LAKES 13546 030101 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 13675 11102205 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 13676 11105005 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 13677 11105007 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 13477 311097 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13478 245309 5431.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES RICHARDS GC MAINTENANCE 13478 245309 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 13479 245230 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 13751 245461 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 13547 CSIL -0055 1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 13548 14901 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13799 8258 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 3/1/01 -- 3/1/01 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description 68.19 PO 2292 13512 3308377 5630.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 49.19 PRESSURE WASHER PARTS 13750 3310621 5620.6530 REPAIR PARTS 13752 15541 1551.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 13752 15541 1551.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 13753 18742900 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 13754 18755400 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES 13754 18755400 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 13755 NW -68909 5630.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13756 021601 13480 022101 13800 021601 13481 4512 13757 021801 13758 012601 2/28/01 8:55:34 Page - 15 Business Unit CENTENNIAL LAKES EDINBOROUGH PARK CITY HALL GENERAL CITY HALL GENERAL ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOI ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOI CENTENNIAL LAKES 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 1280.6271 HAZ. WASTE DISPOSAL SUPERVISION & OVERHEAD 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 117.38 218965 3/1/01 101941 NORTHLAND MECHANICAL CONTRACTO 1,164.71 ROOFTOP UPGRADE 45.94 SALES TAX ON MATERIALS 1,210.65 218966 3/1101 100933 NORTHWEST GRAPHIC SUPPLY 225.49 479.50 400.00 1,104.99 218967 3/1/01 100930 NORTHWESTERN TIRE CO. 164.11 TIRES 164.11 218968 311/01 101842 NOTEABLE SINGERS 100.00 E.P. PERFORMANCE 100.00 218969 3/1/01 102557 NTOA 35.00 RENEWAL MEMBERSHIP 35.00 218970 3/1/01 104234 NW METRO MPLS SAFEKIDS 25.00 CPS REGISTRATION 25.00 218971 311/01 103212 NYHLENS FILTER RECYCLING 200.00 USED OIL FILTER RECYCLING 200.00 218972 3/1/01 100729 ODLAND, DOROTHY 528.00 528.00 218973 3/1/01 100941 PARK NICOLLET CLINIC 1,224.86 PRE - EMPLOYMENT EXAMS 13752 15541 1551.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 13752 15541 1551.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 13753 18742900 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 13754 18755400 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES 13754 18755400 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 13755 NW -68909 5630.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13756 021601 13480 022101 13800 021601 13481 4512 13757 021801 13758 012601 2/28/01 8:55:34 Page - 15 Business Unit CENTENNIAL LAKES EDINBOROUGH PARK CITY HALL GENERAL CITY HALL GENERAL ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOI ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOI CENTENNIAL LAKES 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 1280.6271 HAZ. WASTE DISPOSAL SUPERVISION & OVERHEAD 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Vendor 110.00 1,334.86 218974 3/1/01 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 28.75- 143.60 114.85 218975 3/1/01 100946 PERA Explanation DRUG SCREENINGS DELINQ INT FEE 01/01 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 3/1/01 -- 3/1/01 PO # Doc No Inv No 13759 01126/01 2/28/01 8:55:34 Page - 16 Account No Account Description Business Unit 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 13678 63490224 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 13679 63490223 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 13760 022301 1000.2023 P.E.R.A. PAYABLE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET 218976 3/1/01 100950 PETTY CASH 6.00 13761 022101 1120.6106 MEETING EXPENSE ADMINISTRATION 10.00 13761 022101 1140.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PLANNING 30.00 13761 022101 1160.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FINANCE 122.26 13761 022101 1190.6106 MEETING EXPENSE ASSESSING 50.61 13761 022101 1190.6575 PRINTING ASSESSING 23.25 13761 022101 1260.6106 MEETING EXPENSE ENGINEERING GENERAL 4.22 13761 022101 1260.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEERING GENERAL 31.00 13761 022101 1490.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PUBLIC HEALTH 11.25 13761 022101 1495.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS INSPECTIONS 27.00 13761 022101 1495.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS INSPECTIONS 20.70 13761 022101 1550.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 48.97 13761 022101 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 2.75 13761 022101 1600.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 9.02 13761 022101 1600.6106 MEETING EXPENSE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 22.22 13761 022101 1629.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ADAPTIVE RECREATION 18.68 13761 022101 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 5.00 13761 022101 5919.6106 MEETING EXPENSE TRAINING 442.93 218978 311/01 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 1,154.25 13680 695400 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 736.80 13681 695399 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 22.00 13682 695394 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 706.80 13683 695393 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 280.75 13684 694225 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 4.12- 13685 3233742 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,343.40 13686 695402 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 573.65 13687 695395 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING • R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount 1,643.24 76.20 346.05 217.45 199.36 30.10 8.57 - 4.92- 8.96- 9.64- 6.55- 112.50- 806.05 244.80 2,448.45 2,029.70 12,703.79 Vendor Explanation 218979 3/1/01 102837 PIERCE MANUFACTURING INC 164,090.00 PLATFORM CHASSIS 164,090.00 CITY OF EDINA 2/28/01 8:55:34 Council Check Register 296.64 REPLACEMENT CLUB 13762 4922498 Page - 17 3/1/01 -- 3/1101 GOLF DOME PROGRAM 296.64 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Unit 13688 695389 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 13689 695396 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 13690 695397 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13691 695391 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13692 695390 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13693 695398 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 13694 3234406 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13695 3234405 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13696 3234404 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13697 3234403 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13698 3234402 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13699 3234132 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 13700 693891 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13701 695401 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 13702 693440 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 13703 693449 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 13549 M004236 1470.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 218980 3/1/01 100119 PING 296.64 REPLACEMENT CLUB 13762 4922498 5210.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF DOME PROGRAM 296.64 218981 311/01 102156 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING 202.76 13704 39989 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 999.80 13705 39990 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 541.63 13706 39927 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 29.05 13707 39988 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 391.17 13708 39870 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 7.95 13709 39961 5822.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH ST SELLING 330.99 13710 39960 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 25.75 13711 39799 5840.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES LIQUOR YORK GENERAL - 2,529.10 218982 3/1/01 100819 POPP COMMUNICATIONS 99.97 PO 8006 13513 41203 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 99.97 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/28/01 8:55:34 Council Check Register Page - 18 3/1/01 -- 3/1/01 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Unit 218983 3/1/01 100961 POSTMASTER 102.00 STAMPS 13763 022101 5410.6235 POSTAGE GOLF ADMINISTRATION 102.00 218984 3/1/01 100968 PRIOR WINE COMPANY 1,434.71 13712 341533 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 514.40 13713 341532 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 340.70 13714 341545 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 3,049.70 13715 341544 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 745.54 13716 341546 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 236.40 13717 341539 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 60.20 13718 341538 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 6,381.65 218985 3/1/01 100969 PROGRESSIVE CONSULTING ENGINEE 4,816.31 WATER TREATMENT PLANT #4 13482 00017.09 5991.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN WATER TREATMENT PLANT 4,816.31 218986 3/1/01 101877 PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY 520.65 BASIC LIFE 13764 021501 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 52.20 G HUGHES 13764 021501 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 63.00 COBRA 13764 021501 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 635.85 218987 311/01 100971 QUALITY WINE 1,755.43 13564 933676 -00 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 34.87- 13564 933676 -00 5820.4408 TRADE DISCOUNTS 50TH STREET GENERAL 829.75 13565 933857 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 8.20- 13565 933857 -00 5820.4408 TRADE DISCOUNTS 50TH STREET GENERAL 2,763.40 13567 933856 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 27.33- 13567 933856 -00 5860.4408 TRADE DISCOUNTS VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL 1,949.94 13568 933794.00 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 38.68- 13568 933794 -00 5860.4408 TRADE DISCOUNTS VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL 5,341.41 13569 933694 -00 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 106.10- 13569 933694 -00 5840.4408 TRADE DISCOUNTS LIQUOR YORK GENERAL 1,545.29 13570 933740 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 15.29- 13570 933740 -00 5840.4408 TRADE DISCOUNTS LIQUOR YORK GENERAL 485.46 13571 933675 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 4.80- 13571 933675 -00 5840.4408 TRADE DISCOUNTS LIQUOR YORK GENERAL 20.33- 13572 930379 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 58.72- 13573 930378 -00 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING • R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount CONTRACTED REPAIRS Vendor Explanation 242721 1553.6530 14,356.36 EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13484 242459 218988 3/1/01 EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 104233 QUAST, DEROLD ______20.00 TRAINING 20.00 218989 3/1101 102831 QWEST DEX 574.75 74.78 3.43 - 1.87- .23- .23- 104.74 15.67 4.28- 759.90 218990 3/1/01 100977 RICHFIELD PLUMBING COMPANY 118_.00 - 118.00 218991 3/1/01 100990 SCHARBER & SONS 2,62 NUTS 66.31 LAMPS 68.93 218992 3/1/01 100574 SCIENCE MUSEUM OF MINNESOTA 278.00 COMP CLASSES 278.00 218993 3/1/01 104239 SEAGER, KRISTI 100.00 E.P. PERFORMANCE 100.00 218994 3/1/01 100834 SHEPARD, JOHN 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 100.00 218995 3/1101 103237 SHIRLEY, TOM 81,85 SUPPLIES CITY OF EL.. -„ 2/28/0, Council Check Register Page - 19 3/1101 - 3/1/01 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Unit 13801 022001 1281.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING 13802 008053470000 13802 008053470000 13802 008053470000 13802 008053470000 13802 008053470000 13802 008053470000 13802 008053470000 13802 008053470000 13802 008053470000 5610.6122 5110.6122 5430.6188 5821.6188 5841.6188 5861.6188 5511.6188 5420.6188 5210.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER ADVERTISING OTHER TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE ADVERTISING OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 50TH ST OCCUPANCY YORK OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS CLUB HOUSE GOLF DOME PROGRAM 13765 23939 5420.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS CLUB HOUSE 13483 242721 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13484 242459 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13766 C49931 5410.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS GOLF ADMINISTRATION 13803 021601 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 13550 030101 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 13551 022101 5610.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ED ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # -- - -- Date -- Amount — EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT Vendor Explanation Council Check Register 5182 81.85 WELLS Page - 20 218996 3/1/01 101002 SOUTHSIDE DISTRIBUTORS INC PO # Doc No Inv No 832.05 Account Description Business Unit 13574 116713 61.85 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 13575 116714 73.10 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 13576 116721 5,355.85 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 13577 116719 6,322.85 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 218997 3/1/01 101016 SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC 7,874.28 COUNTRY CLUB 12,408.93 76TH / YORK 20,283.21 218998 3/1/01 103658 ST. LOUIS PARK COM. BAND _ 50.00 E.P. PERFORMANCE 50.00 218999 3/1/01 101007 STAR TRIBUNE 617.22 ADVERTISING 617.22 219000 3/1/01 104240 STORYBOOK FUN _ 66.00 E.P. PERFORMANCE 66.00 219001 3/1101 101015 STREICHERS 1,423.05 CHIEF SQUAD P031 11 1,423.05 219002 3/1/01 100011 SUMMIT ENVIROSOLUTIONS INC 1,540.00 VIDEO LOG 1,540.00 219003 311/01 100900 SUN NEWSPAPERS 67.92 CDPG NOTICE 91.16 AD FOR BID 159.08 219004 311/01 100794 SWANSON, HAROLD CITY OF EDINA 207054.1 1400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 2/28/01 8:55:34 Council Check Register 5182 5900.1753 WELLS Page - 20 3/1/01 – 3/1/01 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Unit 13574 116713 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 13575 116714 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 13576 116721 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 13577 116719 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 13552 4006 -2 1260.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEERING GENERAL 13553 4058 -1 06032.1705.2000NSULTING DESIGN TF32 76TH & YORK TRAFFIC SIGN 13768 021601 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 13767 060135001 & 5210.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF DOME PROGRAM 074996001 13804 021601 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 13514 207054.1 1400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13554 5182 5900.1753 WELLS UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 13769 396810 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 13770 396287 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS Vendor Explanation 13516 91669 -00 100.00 REPAIR PARTS POLICE SERVICE 13517 91298 -00 100.00 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL (BILLING) 219005 3/1101 102300 TCALMC 225.00 TRAINING FEE - DIBBLE 225.00 219006 3/1/01 101326 TERMINAL SUPPLY CO 34.08 WIRE - PO 1924 456.70 PO 1870 490.78 219007 3/1/01 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 47.95 4,315.10 4,363.05 219008 3/1/01 101496 TOUCH OF MAGIC, A 100.00 E.P. PERFORMANCE 100.00 219009 3/1/01 101047 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO 198,88 OPENERS 47.93 RECEIVERS 246.81 219010 3/1/01 103981 TWIN CITY OFFICE SUPPLY INC. 117,90 SIGN BOARD 117.90 219011 3/1/01 101280 UNITED HORTICULTURAL SUPPLY /UA 269.89 269.89 219012 3/1/01 104241 UNIVERSAL SIGNS INC _- 453.0_0 FIX OUTDOOR SIGNS 453.00 219013 3/1/01 101055 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 42.00 PESTICIDE BOOKS 42.00 CITY OF EDINA 2/28/01 8:55:34 Council Check Register Page - 21 3/1101 - 3/1/01 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Unit 13555 030101 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 13515 022001 1281.6104 CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS TRAINING 13516 91669 -00 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13517 91298 -00 5910.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL (BILLING) 13578 219284 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 13579 219283 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 13771 021601 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 13772 069028 5630.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES 13773 069457 5630.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES 13774 291837 -0 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 13775 0365914 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 13805 33534 5841.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS YORK OCCUPANCY 13777 1432 1643.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS GENERAL TURF CARE R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/28/01 8:55:34 Council Check Register Page - 22 3/1/01 - 3/1101 Check # Date Amount Vendor Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Unit 219014 311/01 101055 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 595.00 WATER UTILITY MGMT INSTITUTE 13485 02/16/01 5919.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING 595.00 219015 311/01 101908 US FOODSERVICE INC 123_00 13776 939179 5630.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTENNIAL LAKES 123.00 219016 3/1101 103590 VALLEY -RICH CO. INC. 2,469.99 WATERMAIN REPAIR 13556 3964 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 3,625.49 WATERMAIN REPAIR 13557 3966 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 1,567.49 WATERMAIN REPAIR 13558 3965 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 7,662.97 219017 3/1101 101058 VAN PAPER CO. 623.03 PO 4077 13518 358639 1551.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 58.58 LINERS 13778 356944 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 41.12 SCOURING PADS 13779 357942 5630.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES 172.26 TISSUE /ROLL TOWELS 13780 358358 5630.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES 894.99 219018 3/1/01 102970 VERIZON WIRELESS BELLEVUE 118.16 BUILDING 13559 021001 1495.6188 TELEPHONE INSPECTIONS 6.33 HEALTH 13559 021001 1490.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PUBLIC HEALTH 239.15 FIRE 13559 021001 1470.6188 TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 37.41 ADMINISTRATION 13559 021001 1120.6188 TELEPHONE ADMINISTRATION 27.05 CABLE 13559 021001 2210.6188 TELEPHONE COMMUNICATIONS 104.31 PARK ADMIN 13559 021001 1600.6188 TELEPHONE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 109.15 PARK MAINT 13559 021001 1640.6188 TELEPHONE PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL 7.04 GOLF COURSE 13559 021001 5420.6188 TELEPHONE CLUB HOUSE 248.14 UTILITIES 13559 021001 5913.6188 TELEPHONE DISTRIBUTION 192.08 ENGINEERING 13559 021001 1260.6188 TELEPHONE ENGINEERING GENERAL 213.30 STREETS 13559 021001 1280.6188 TELEPHONE SUPERVISION & OVERHEAD 8.21 PARKS 13559 021001 1640.6188 TELEPHONE PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL 1,310.33 219019 311/01 101080 WALSH, WILLIAM 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 13560 030101 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 100.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE Vendor Explanation 219020 3/1/01 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 103266 WELSH COMPANIES INC 055314 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 789.50 13583 055315 YORK AVENUE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 789.50 219021 3/1101 101077 WEST WELD SUPPLY CO. 319.91 ELECTRODES,PIPES,BITS 319.91 219022 3/1/01 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 497.70 996.70 1,528.50 1,005.70 4,028.60 219023 311/01 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 453.95 83.45 919.35 228.25 1,685.00 219024 3/1/01 100352 WINSTAR BROADBAND SERVICES 162.00 COPS -CDPD CONNECT 162.00 219025 3/1/01 102017 WONDER WEAVERS 100.00 E.P. PERFORMANCE 100.00 219026 311/01 101086 WORLD CLASS WINES INC 1,397.75 349.00 1,746.75 219027 3/1101 101087 WROBLESKI, HENRY 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 100.00 219028 3/1/01 101089 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 206.22 FIRST AID SUPPLIES CITY OF "_.. +A Council Check Register 3/1/01 - 3/1101 PO # Doc No Inv No 13561 030101 2/28/u. 8:55:34 Page - 23 Account No Account Description Business Unit 5841.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES YORK OCCUPANCY 13486 37536 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 13580 055349 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13581 055313 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 13582 055314 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13583 055315 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 13584 39734 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 13585 39732 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13586 39733 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 13587 39478 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 13519 631168 4606.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COPS MORE GRANT 13781 021601 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 13588 103202 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13589 103434 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 13562 030101 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 13563 54164862 5610.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT ED ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Vendor 206.22 219029 3/1101 101091 ZIEGLER INC 2,241.83 .3,291.13 5,532.96 486,951.87 Grand Total CITY OF EDINA 2/28/01 8:55:34 Council Check Register Page - 24 3/1101 — 3/1/01 Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Account Description Business Unit BACKHOE TAMPER & ADAPTOR 13487 G6863501 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION EQUIPMENT RENTAL 13782 E2780101 5913.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL DISTRIBUTION Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 486,951.87 Total Payments 486,951.87 R55CKSUM LOG20000 CITY OF , A 2/28/u 9:02:32 Council Check Summary Page - 1 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 229,421.20 02200 COMMUNICATIONS FUND 6,981.38 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 843.05 04800 CONSTRUCTION FUND 12,408.93 05100 ART CENTER FUND 2,145.13 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 909.58 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 81,538.10 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 1,750.51 05600 EDINBOROUGH /CENT LAKES FUND 4,424.69 05800 LIQUOR FUND 120,620.74 05900 UTILITY FUND 25,888.56 05950 RECYCLING FUND 20.00 Report Totals 486,951.87 3/1/01 - 3/1/01 We confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these claims comply in all material respects with the requirements of the City of Edina purchasing poll and procedures data , ,1 City Manager Darlene Wallin rom: Dan Roach [djroach @despatch.com] .ent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 2:32 PM To: 'dmaetzold @ci.edina.mn.us' Subject: Proposed referendum Dear Mayor Maetzold, As a longtime resident of Edina and parent of four young children, I am generally in favor of maintaining our park system. However, I am very concerned about the proposed park referendum that the City Council is planning. The $40 million plan is much too expensive and includes many things that are not necessary. For example, the plan calls for nearly $2 million in renovations and regrades for existing soccor fields. As a frequent user of theses fields with my children (I will be coaching my son's soccor team this year), believe this is a wasteful use of our taxpayer money. All of the fields that we have played on have been adequate. Have you or any of the Council members actually inspected the fields that are planned for upgrades? I urge you to do this before putting these renovations in a plan for a referendum vote. If this means delaying the referendum, then I believe it is your responsibilty to do so. As stewards of the tax payers' money, it is important thay you inspect these fields for yourself before proceeding with these plans. Another example is over $1.2 million for a "black box" theater. This seems primarily intended for use by the school, and does not seem appropriate for , park referendum. The proposal also includes a variety of maintenance items that do not belong in a 20 year capital funding plan. Replacing windows at Arneson pathway repair at Cornelia would fall into this category. These types of maintenance items would be more appropriate to expense rather than capitalize. They will certainly not last anywhere near the 20 year life of the referendum! It seems that the proposed list of projects is a laundry list of "wants" from a variety of groups that has been accepted almost blindly by the City Council. I am a businessman, and every year our company compiles a list of potential capital projects. It is typical for the initial list to include many "wants" that are not truly "needs ". Our board of directors forces us to have the discipline to pare down our initial "want" list to fit a budget. urge you and the Council members to excercise that same type of discipline in this case. Before you vote on this next week, I am asking you to reduce the list of proposed projects for the referendum to a more realistic figure. If you proposed a referundum that was trimmed down to include only actual needs, in the range of less than $20 million dollars, I would gladly support it when it comes to a vote. If stays in the unreasonable range of over $30 million dollars, I would not only vote against the referendum but I would actively urge my neighbors to do vote against it as well. Best regards, Jan Roach 5700 Creek Valley Road Edina, MN 55439 5700 Creek Valley Road Edina, MN 55439 February 28, 2001 Mr. John Keprios Park and Recreation Director City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 -1330 Dear Mr. Keprios, Subject: Proposed Park Referendum Thank you for your clear presentation of the proposed park referendum to the Creek Valley Neighborhood. As I expressed last night, I am concerned about the size and scope of the plan. Below are my specific concems, which were shared by the majority of my neighbors: 1. The plan includes many items that are "wants" and not true "needs ". For example, the plan calls for nearly $2 million in renovations and regrades for existing soccer fields. As a frequent user of these fields with my children, I believe this is a wasteful use of our taxpayer money. All of the fields that we have played on have been adequate. 2. The plan includes many items that serve only a small percentage of people, and should not be funded by the entire community. For example, I would be interested to know the average number of users each month for the pottery room. Another example is the proposed $5 million pool; this is a large amount of money for what seems to be a relatively small user group. Another example is the Black Box Theater. It costs over $1.2 million and is primarily for use by the high school. This does not seem appropriate for a park referendum 3. The plan includes several items that are maintenance items and thus seem more appropriately handled as expenses, rather than as part of a capital spending referendum that will be paid off over a 20 -year period. Examples of this are the window replacements at Arneson Park, and the pathway repair at Cornelia. These items should be handled by the existing park budget. 4. The plan is too large. A $30 -40 million referendum that will increase property taxes as projected is not fiscally responsible. The plan appears to be a large laundry list of "wants" from several special interest groups. 5. This is the second park referendum in the last five years. As the father of small children who greatly enjoys our parks and associated sports teams, I would like to support park funding. I cannot support the current proposal, which I consider wasteful and irresponsible. Please pass this along to the City Council in preparation for their meeting next week. 1 urge them to take a hard look at the details and drastically reduce the size and scope of this proposal before putting it before the voters Respectfully, Dan Roach L PRESTHUS MEMORANDUM TO: EDINA C1TY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: LINDA PRESTHUS SUBJECT: PROPOSED PARK AND RECREATION REFERENDUM DATE: 2/15/01 CC: JOHN KEPRIOS DOUG JOHNSON Linda Presthus 7104 Lanham Lane Edina, Minnesota 55439 (952) 941 -2954 (1) Member of the following ... • Edina Blue Ribbon Committee • City of Edina Park Board • Edina Athlete Booster Board • Edina Basketball Association Board • Community Education Board • Cl rrman of Edina /Eden Prairie Republicans (SD 42) (2) Edina Resident • Resident of the community for 29 years • Married and parent of 4 sons ranging in age from 28 —16; all of whom have been major users of the park system facilities, school facilities, and participants in numerous athlete associations including basketball, football, baseball, adult softball, soccer and hockey. One son is currently a professional athlete, two sons were/are college athletes, and one son is a high school varsity athlete. For several years I have seen a growing shortage of athletic facilities here in Edina. Since my sons have participated in intercity and interstate competition it has become even more apparent that our facilities are aging and are overcrowded. I have also seen cutbacks in programs because of space limitations. I have been involved in these programs for the past 20 years I have seen continual increase in the number of participants in all of our programs (boys and girls) and also the desire of adults to personally use the facilities due to the increasing emphasis in our society on recreation and fitness. We have not only had a dramatic increase in the number of participants in the traditional programs, such as basketball, football, baseball, & hockey, but there are also new sports attracting many participants (programs such as lacrosse, rugby and volleyball) that our Edina residents would like to have green space and gym space made available. As interest in recreation and fitness has increased and the programs have grown we have not increased the facilities in this community. Also, due to a lack of capital funding for our Park and Recreation program some of our facilities are in desperate need of repair. We are now at a critical } r` point in this community. Edina has always been recognized as one of the most desirable places to live because of the value we have put on quality of life issues that are based, in part, on green space, recreation facilities, and our programs. Other communities have emulated Edina. To be competitive and recognizing the needs /desires of their residents other communities have recently gone ahead and built or are currently expanding their recreation. facilities. The surrounding communities to Edina — Bloomington, St. Louis Park, Hopkins, and Eden Prairie have all passed referendums adding new recreation facilities in their communities. If Edina fails to not only maintain our current parks and programs, but also does not have the foresight to plan for the future and keep abreast of the needs of the community through this referendum we are in danger of losing this component of the "quality of life" in Edina. We can look forward to declining property values as young families look to purchase housing in communities that have the facilities and programs they desire. As you all know, the Blue Ribbon Committee we spent a lot of time not only listening to presentations, but also reading materials provided to us about facilities, demographics, market research studies, and lifestyle trends. As we put together our plan we took careful consideration to make the best use of the limited land that is available in order to provide the most benefit to the community. Each recommendation on the plan is not a line item ... we looked at the overall needs and built a very complicated web so that_everything planned for the community would have multiple uses and have access for the community at large. In some instances, this meant that by upgrading a school facility in the City Referendum the city would now have access to property that formerly was only used for school activities. Taking away any one component does have an effect on the overall plan. If for instance, one field is eliminated it affects the usage and plans we proposed for the other fields. Similarly, the bubble was put into the plan to provide space for some of the programs that are currently done in the gyms (or paid for by buying time in other communities). The bubble was suggested as a multi-use replacement for another gym since it is also a "green space" facility and would have multiple use possibilities. Similarly, the artificial turf recommendation is a solution to the increasing need for green space since artificial turf can accommodate more use than grass surfaces. The committee took very seriously, our mission to ascertain what would be the most economical and efficient for the City of Edina and the school district That is the reason that most of the recommendations for new facilities are in conjunction with some of the plans by the School Board to build new classrooms. There is an economy both in materials and disruption to the area if the projects are constructed at the same time. Please also keep in mind when you are considering these projects that we did look at all the alternatives and the proposal reflects what we thought would be the most economical for the city, the greatest use alternatives, and the least disruption to the community. While my "expertise" is in the athletic and recreation areas, I have now, by virtue of being a member of the Blue Ribbon Committee, a greater appreciation of the needs of our community toward the arts and am also in fiill support of the arts facilities recommendations as proposed by the Blue Ribbon Committee, including the renovation of the ECC auditorium, the black box theater and the Art Center improvements. I urge the esteemed City Council to accept the Blue Ribbon Committee recommendations and the citizens of Edina to vote in favor of the referendum I'm proud to live in Edina and am a strong supporter of constructing new recreational facilities and renovating others so that we continue to be one of the most desired communities not only in this metropolitan area, but also as a model community in the nation. To: Edina School Board and Edina City Council. From: Art Downey, EHS Boy's Swimming Coach. Edina resident: 4113 Kipling Av. So. Concerning: Advantages of a 50 meter pool over a 25 yd. by 25 meter pool (p`lus a .diving L). 2'5 YD. 50 METER COST $4,200,000 $4,200;000+ $600,000 NUMBER OF SCHOOL PRACTICE LANES (CURRENTLY 10) 10 +8 -5 =13 10 +17 -5 =22 COST PER NEW LANE $1,400,000 (3) $400,000 (12) ($67,000 (9) for the $600,000) OPERATING COSTS Equal or more than 50 meter. Equal or less than 25 yd. See Edina Swim Club estimates (very conservative). There are two meet formats: Short course (USA -25 yd; International- 25 meter) and long course (USA and International -50 meters). 25 YD. 50 METER HIGH SCHOOL TEAM PRACTICES Varsity at Valley View Varsity & JV at Valley View JV at South View POSSIBLE PHYSICAL PLANT LIMITATIONS 4 Foot depth. Synchronized (9 ft min.) 14 ft. High blocks (4 ft. depth required. Future ?) 14 ft. Low blocks (Less than 4 ft.) 25 meter Short Course (Incomplete wall) Bulkhead. Pool Pluses & Minuses Shallow water is slower. High blocks are faster. Low blocks are slower. Deep water is faster. High blocks. Home Dual Meets (Currently 2 lanes per team per event) 4 lanes per team 4 lanes per team No cool down pool Cool down pool Section Meets Undesirable - shallow water Highly desirable -deep water Desirable -High blocks Desirable -High blocks Undesirable -if low blocks Highly desirable -cool down EDINA SWIM CLUB 3 new lanes 12 new lanes - detailed report OAK RIDGE CONFERENCE CENTER 1 Oak Ridge Drive Chaska, Minnesota 55318 (952) 368 -3100 (952) 368 -1488 (Fax) CDtcn G; L Eil �`na .ti1 r� 3 bud- u.14-44 '�k 60" v /�i�tc .�a % LD/157� -�'a /1 �i cLd• "��n l� 'c 7�►!.`�(_s /O ft' fir- s � 80109 E (4/00) �u n A/ '�3 9�z , �z 2 —GS6 z I' i I I' I i ii I; i i I ii ii ?&r0eC —IW L SC i I i ii Feb 24 01 08:02a Willie & Doug Eden 952- 928 -9342 p:2 February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City. Council Edina School Board Dear Mayor, City Manager, City Council Members, and School Board Members: Re: Recreational Facility Improvements Referendum I support the Referendum as put forth by the Blue Ribbon Committee with some modifications. I am particularly concerned about the 25 meter swimming pool recommended as a replacement pool to make room for more classrooms at Valley View. Clearly, a 50 meter pool is a minimum to address the needs of the Edina swimming community. The larger pool is not a luxury but rather the cheapest alternative to cover the current demands. In addition to the comments you have heard at the Public Hearing 1 would like to add another perspective on why a 50 meter pool should be the replacement pool at Valley View. Two comments made at the Public Hearing need to be challenged. The first, "Edina offers an uncommonly high quality of life ". This might be the case for a number of reasons but it clearly does not apply to our swimming facilities. Comparisons to other parts of the U.S. would show we have not made ongoing investments to stay competitive. I will also submit Edina swimming facilities lag behind other less fortunate areas around the world.. 1 have recently transferred back to the area after living in Thailand and Australia for the past 8 years. Both countries have considerably better swimming facilities than Edina. In Australia we lived in an country town of 40,000 people. Our community pool was 50 meters with a separate diving well which included I and 3 meter spring boards and 2 diving towers, The facility also included a water park with 2 large water slides. The coastal cities of Australia had many 50 meter facilities for their competitive swimmers. It is no surprise why a much smaller Australia is at the top of the world with their swimming programs. In Thailand where per capita income pales to that in Edina the investment in proper swimming facilities was even more striking. Nearly all of the competitive pools being built were 50 meters. Unfortunately the international school my son attended took the short side view and huilt only a 25 meter pool some 7 years ago. Already, it does not meet the needs of the students so they train across the street in a 50 meter pool — at additional expense! Another comment, paraphrased "...no one disagrees with the need for a 50 meter pool, but the economics just do not justify the invcstmcnt". Thc numbcrs show otherwisc, but practically speaking we cannot afford not to build the larger pool. We have one chance to take a longer term view to correct the current short fall in facilities and put our young swimmers on par with other active swimmers here and around the world. I urge you to support the inclusion of the 50 meter pool at Valley View in the referendum and not be short sided in your approach to improving the pool facilities for the community. Respectfully, Douglas Eden 4501 Browndale Ave Edina MN 55424 Mary YaWda Fr"" 7412 Cave4 Was Fes, Mtxrraeatia 55439 Dent Mayot acrd Couwd Mew, / aac w�irg you to erreouoaye you ali tv 1(0& ,P lot Tie pupow te&mdarw to Ruud pa4 aad vmd"- twptovparwl. Am Amf been mwtd wh& aag Q&s pabbdy about Z4 by A appwettte usury eam Wtca tyrrrg to wAm e4 aes" ffaM wmW wd cow, outof& edrraVm &irrd. /a wt' opwm, FAw lot! beers UAg ow ti`s /C MA, d we cue to keep eowpdlMe trc eduaaVm aad A&A% we matupdate out %aalgae. %ke p00% curd gywrraeuiwe arl, s�j out[�.P,ri aNd aver u We � ea aoarcy paxtte�parrts && a wde vat* o(aettv&, we, owe C& & Wtdeals to Provrde 400 w" MmAd "Wama PAW eeuora4 ftwda a acrd vote YEM, Swere/y, Az - -�� Matt' Yaw* Fir wgarc Dear Mayor and City Council Members, M y name is Jack Finnegan and I am a participant in Edina Travelling basketball. This is my 7th year playing Edina B -ball. We have less gym time now as a 7th grade travelling member that I did when I dG was in 3rd grade. There are so many people participating there is no gym space. We have only 2 practices a week and we always get pushed out early. It's getting 'hard to compete with other cities because they have so much more practice time. It would be so great to have more "open gym" time, as it is now we only have 2 hours a week for everyone - boys and girls and all ages. Please vote yes to improve the gyms and pools. PLEASE, we really, really need it. Thank you, 6841 Oaklawn Avenue Edina, Minnesota 55435 February 23, 2001 Mayor Maetzold and Members of the City Council Edina City Hall 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Members of the Board of Education Edina Public Schools 5701 Normandale Road Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Maetzold and Members of the City Council and Board of Education, I am the parent of a third grader and prospective kindergartener at Normandale Elementary School. I have followed the development of the proposed referendum closely because of its impact on the school. I appreciated the opportunity to comment on the proposed referendum at the Public Hearing. I would like to ,propose that a restoration of the auditorium be considered in lieu of the currently } iroposed renovation o th separate entrance and lobby. A restoration would involve maintaining . the current configuration of the auditorium. entrance and hallways but restoring the,interior of the auditorium with new seating, repaired surfaces, etc. The advantages of a restoration are as follows: 1) The costs could be cut considerably. The costs of the renovation with separate entrance have jumped to nearly $2.5 million. Over half of the current cost is attributable to the separate entrance and lobby. 2) The seating opacity (around 900) could be retained instead of reduced to 600 as required with the proposed separate entrance and lobby. 3) The security- recommendation that the auditorium not be used during the Normandale schoolday could be followed. The separate entrance and lobby were introduced in an attempt to address security issues for Normandale Elementary School posed by schoolday use of the auditorium. I appreciate the willingness of the City Council and School Board to modify the plans for the auditorium based on this concern. Nevertheless, the security evaluation completed in July 2000 for the School District indicated that the auditorium should not be used during the schoolday. This recommendation was in keeping with the security consultant's recommendation that all non - student traffic be moved away from the west side (the auditorium side) of the building where the Normandale playground and bus loading areas are located. The recommendation included moving the school entrance to the east side of the building so that even parents visiting the school would not be using the playground/bus loading side of the building. Based on the security evaluation, I hope that the City Council and School Board will amend the Facilities Use Agreement to prohibit outside use of the auditorium during the schoolday and choose the less costly, higher- capacity restoration of the auditorium. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, I Kathy Christensen cc: Kenneth Dragseth, Ph.D. John Keprios Gordon Hughes February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15`s, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15%. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue: In addition to supplying a revenue-stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, &J'"�h�yu...__ y Cum% Aa C' _ J MEMORANDUM TO: Edina City Council FROM: Creek Valley Road(East) Residents RE: Proposed Blue Ribbon Committee Recommendations DATE: February 23,2001 The Creek Valley Road (East) residents would like to commend the Blue Ribbon Committee for its hard work on the report and recommendations, and for their concern for the future of our city. In light of the proposed school, athletic and recreational improvements, we the residents of Creek Valley Road (East) wish to express our concerns about the proposed Edina West Campus improvements. 1. We urge the City of Edina NOT to consider the West Campus as an alternative site for the proposed location of the Bubble for the following reasons: ■ The Braemar site is optimal ■ Neighborhood integrity would be adversely affected by increased traffic ■ Increased parking needs would be adverse to the present quiet Creek Valley Neighborhood ■ Being good stewards of our community's funds, the site is contraindicated due to potential flooding of the area from Nine Mile Creek Prior to any decision to locate the Bubble, an environmental impact study and traffic study need to be conducted 2. We believe that the present orientation of the baseball field is preferable to the proposed change for the following reasons: ■ Re- grading the present site could contain costs ■ The field would be less crowded, not butted against the tennis courts ■ No additional outfield fencing would be necessary 3. As a community, we are opposed to any potential opening of the cul -de -sac at the end of Creek Valley Road (East) to potential thru traffic or parking facilities. 4. As a community, we are opposed to any additional lighting of the West Campus facilities. We, the undersigned residents of Creek Valley Road (East), urge the thoughtful consideration of our concerns by the Edina City. Council, regarding the Blue Ribbon Report and upcoming Referendum. . � ST! e TIT)R FRR 2 550 5 YJ i 4301 137 3. As a community, we are opposed to any potential opening of the cul -de -sac at the end of Creek Valley Road (East) to potential thru traffic or parking facilities. 4. As a community, we are opposed to any additional lighting of the West Campus facilities. We, the undersigned residents of Creek Valley Road (East), urge the thoughtful consideration of our concerns by the Edina City Council, regarding the Blue Ribbon Report and upcoming Referendum. t� r* WILMA NEWCOMBE EDEN 4501 BROWNDALE AVENUE EDINA, MN 55425 February 26, 2001 Mr. Dennis Maetzold, Mayor Edina City Hall 4801 West 50,h Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mayor Maetzold: Enclosed are 76 letters I have collected from parents of the Edina Swim Club stressing the need for a 50 meter pool. Please share these letters with other members of the City Council and School Board. We appreciate your consideration in this matter. CC: Michael Kelly Scott Housh James Hovland Linda Masica Sincerely, Wilma Newcombe Eden Secretary, Edina Swim Club February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of 50 meter facility: However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community._ Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, 1 4l e February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School-District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. -In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15%. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Ipc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able,to-hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, 4 e February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members,. School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to reconxnend the construction.of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15`x, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19%. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition, to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the. outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, A i ��s- 3;611 February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15 'h, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, /-7 Q %-- 4e ✓c /- /(�, --T - 7—ciYX (-),) February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15%. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. 51e ly, GCS-, C�l�vJT February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15'', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %.. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Ipc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, %I- PS It bothers me each time we pay to enter another pool in a surrounding suburb for a meet where our son is swimming. My husband and I totally agree with having a 50 meter pool and are afraid that if we don't plan ahead at this time we will be sorry in the future. Thank you for everything you can do to make this happen! TOTAL P.02 February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 916. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19%. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, �— (�4 -- February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recomumend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction.of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19916. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerel , ft4- 4 February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina. Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, r, FEB-26-2001 08:44, FROM 6637 SERVICE MPLS TO 9529289356 P.01 February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50- meter pool instead of the 25 -yard by 25 -meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 -meter facility. However, the_ figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15'h, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low ac 19% The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 -meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 -meter by 25 -yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers_ The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 -meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, TOTAL P.01 Feb -25 -01 10:46A Select COmfOyt February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina. City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary. to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the glue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February WA, verity the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15%. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will albw the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or team to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim dub practice. feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, Mu. k+--<, I -A c L- o —51,, ( P. q1 Feb 2,4 01 10:51a R I ZPURU February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent 952 - 936 -7913 P.1 Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 1501, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19.0. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, �ti ��g FEB -23 -2001 15 =26 NORWEST February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent r.U1 /UZ Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 . meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15'h, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15%. For an . additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 1996. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water' aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. 1 feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the'needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, / �r I 0212$/2001 20:36 6129289663 JAMES KIRKHAM PAGE 01 February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15'h, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 metes facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a Hetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, lit•'! Vol- February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the . information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15t', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19916. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, OY /23 /01 FR I 15:57 FAA 01z azu 101U nt WOUIv VLS111.A11VA W--J VV• February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Doard Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, l would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In Fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15*, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15% For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19016. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One arc accurate. in addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative animal revenue estimate of S 140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, constriction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complctc practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum Thank you for your time and interest. Feb 23 01 02:53p STILES FINACIAL SERVICES 952 - 988 -0752 p.1, g SD- - qa�--Oj3!� February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15'", verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only IS %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of Am. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19% The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, ter, �u-sa VA �aoo Lan LahP February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only IS %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, �j /f 1Z /TVC February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15%. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, PA 2-6 2Se February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, _ February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 916. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19916. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. %moo February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a`, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue._ In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, ll�Y1 February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended.by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility.. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15s', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, 12c4i� February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all' of the information necessary to -recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three'25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only IS %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a.50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I, would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to -recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15'', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability_ to ,provide concurrent'programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had. all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15%. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter. facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue. Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only IS %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a . conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a.50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim'club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, '0 February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 _meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19%. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Ipc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendu h you for your time d interest. Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15 'h, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only IS %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 916. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to T-ecommend the construction. of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15'', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 1501o. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, -01" ( -I/Li, R, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to Tecommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate.. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, � � J� 5�,, W h H February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, Cx CI i2 10 Lie 7 February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the constructiomof a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15`, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building. a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 916. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers: The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, o' - "e""— February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 ., meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon .Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15`t', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only IS %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by . leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to -recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a`, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, Cm P • M acc,K2 '-trk'_ February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the'upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15%. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest'figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the. demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled, at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, LOAJIL 55 February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction. of a-50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15'', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to.build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15016. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19%. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. i cerely, �c7i�JA A4 AA e 4 -' Fu tU Pe GU i N i M +�C1Z February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to -recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only IS %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete, practices and competitions and water aerobics.or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. /2— Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this�figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, "' lu'v v q aoo & V-o e N, Lf CtCY C February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as law as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, sf�l7 C ©Inc�YVI '4 V :�—r- kC've c, I 'lye oe r aJd CiCt I/q Ate. r 4- oi i— i S i n �c< r ski WW 11 , "7 1,L MCO�r vucnL� � � �.�7e�rnc��a�s p�o7�l�d hq, p. .DAf it ....,��,✓ ��,,ovnon *- AZl49 Y'iunt JJ February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear'City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 _meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only IS %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide . . concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, S� -'e- -C' °1 s a - 9 a c, ; '0 bi a(, a 2-L... k- -'� Febnmry 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina city Mwwer Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool reconunended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Comniittee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter fac @ity. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $63 1,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Mimesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter fac @ity will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fi& the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, -rlpl February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction Ufa 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15 , verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, Ok. �O l February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all. of the information necessary to recommend the construrtion of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15ib, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19%. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sin ely, 1� na�tS r y n A `� February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction -of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15`h, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15016. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, COX&— 4' W i M m Q--f'5 Y(:�� + wm -e-l-'Ovoj C' ham. V- I Q-5 q 112 .� -1--r-, i 3 co fl 7 1 /7:2-- February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. - Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs,. construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same.time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. v i February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to -recommend the construct on.of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a`, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15%. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard: facilities is as low as 19%. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to.substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, Std ty-L., - t � l 1 G CL ! tf'. T - �.! W� Ctif S Gol m �� �- ru eve f- u i 9 Pm Se � e cLt a- 1,Jh h�, LOa n t -h e UN� ct .�r � .o :� .4-1, 0 r -n-4 -4 i f m i k,---t e Ci CO3/`�V-f � February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg; Beyer and Sachs,_. Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide C oncurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be, utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to - recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build: Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15%. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well.. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50.meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, ` / February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina. City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to -recommend the construction.of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15%. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19%. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice.. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to -recommend the co .nstruction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. -A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum: Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, ryi G0.nnor� c�iv'OM -�� L,z vo, L'Vo, r- February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction -of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15'', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only IS %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Ipc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, G!/e have e�vq / /yam o%' nor? Aho has om�;or7 /)n A-111, 1 -1 /ni,o 112DD February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only IS %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. kv '4 L 7 Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only I5 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19%. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, 4'4"SOr--' asa-- a -�J -100 v �3 February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent. Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to - recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15016. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, 4(k �,`V�& February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the.upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15`x, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three use 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19%. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture.firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction:of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a_pool of this size'effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, C �� February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15`x, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I'feel'this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 _meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. tj C Sincerely, V- February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would.like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of.only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 916. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a . conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,00.0 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, IV I. . February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, Irr -r -eg o the upcoming sports referendum I would like to urge you to include a 50 miter poo ead of the 25 yard by 25 meter poo recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had allot the information necessary to T-ecommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15`s, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers.. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, �G Yw �Ai '41 ctd February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only IS %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, k44rc wycA..d —Pk February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction. of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only IS %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational' costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Si fely, u Soc 4 '1. 1( inr. rAA M <<:�LQ -"q 0 Louu& YU CV_ Cum necaulr"(/r February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter - facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely roll February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter. facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences, between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, Q'c �� February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to - recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50. meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15%. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, W. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can,be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction 4 -a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15th, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only IS %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19%. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter. pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all -of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, .one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The, synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, 109 � � � BPS February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to -recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a`, verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only 15 %. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19%. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, 1 , \ February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina SchoolBoard School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building a pool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community fora construction cost increase of only 15%. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities, versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 19 %. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, February 16, 2001 Mayor of Edina City Manager Edina City Council Edina School Board School District Superintendent Dear City Council Members, School Board Members, School District Superintendent, Mayor, and City Manager, In regard to the upcoming sports referendum, I would like to urge you to include a 50 meter pool instead of the 25 yard by 25 meter pool recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee. In fairness to the Blue Ribbon Committee, they may not have had all of the information necessary to recommend the construction of a 50 meter facility. However, the figures assembled by the Blue Ribbon Committee and confirmed by TSP One at the public hearing held on February 15a', verify the fact that a 50 meter facility can be cost effective to build. Building apool of this size effectively creates three 25 yard pools in the community for a construction cost increase of only IS%. For an additional $631,000, the city of Edina will have three useable 25 yard pools instead of two. The increase in operating costs for three 25 yard facilities versus two 25 yard facilities is as low as 1901o. The Edina Swim Club has retained the architecture firm of Stageberg, Beyer and Sachs, Inc. to substantiate the construction and operational costs differences between a 50 meter pool and 25 meter by 25 yard pool with attached diving well. They have confirmed that the newest figures provided by TSP One are accurate. In addition, Mr. Bill Beyer, one of the chief architects of the University of Minnesota Aquatic Center has projected a conservative annual revenue estimate of $140,000 for a 50 meter facility. Based on the demand we know exists from neighboring swim clubs and the ability to provide concurrent programming, this figure could easily be as high as $200,000. A 25 meter by 25 yard facility can not provide this kind of revenue. In addition to supplying a revenue stream to help defray operating costs, construction of a 50 meter facility will allow the outdoor Edina Aquatic Center to be utilized solely by leisure swimmers. The synchronized swim team will be able to hold complete practices and competitions and water aerobics or learn to swim programs can be scheduled at the same time as a swim club practice. I feel this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a facility that truly fills the needs of all of the different groups in the Edina Swim Community. Please place a 50 meter pool on the referendum. Thank you for your time and interest. Sincerely, 03/05/01 MON 10:15 FAX 9528483951 EDINA COMMUNITY CENTER 0 003 MUUWL VKUUY hax :b12- 927 -4134 Mar 4 "U1 1b :63 t-. U1 Edina Swim Clut 4445 West 77`h Street — Su. to 24 0 Edina, MN 55435 (612) 831 -3814 March 5, 2001 Board of Education Finance Committee To Whom It May Concern: As per your request, please allow this letter to confirm the fact that th : Edina Swim Club will continue to rent a new pool facility at the new higher rate estat fished by the School District and for the same number of hours (or more) than the Club is currer tly utilizing at Edina facilities. The Club would use this facility even mote if scheduling issue:. can b : worked out. In addition, the Club %-ill actively support the construct;on of a 25 yaj d by 25 meter pool_ It is imperative that the Board realizes the critical need for a new fa :ility a nd the added need for improvements to Southview to eliminate health and other conc :rns. Thank you for your time and interest. Best Regards, Tim Moodie President - Edina Swim Club G ; 1 Sh"1 of VU ,NCORPORP`T v- 1888 REPORURECOMMENDATION To: Mayor Maetzold and members of Agenda Item the Edina City Council. From: John Keprios, Direct r Consent ❑ Park & Recreation Depa ent Information Only Date: March 1, 2001 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Subject: Off -leash Dog Parks. ❑ Motion ❑ Resolution . ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion INFO /BACKGROUND: As requested at the February 20 Council meeting, I have met with Ingraham Consulting Services, Inc. to study the feasibility of establishing off -leash dog park sites in the parks with an emphasis on-west Edina. Greg Ingraham, Landscape Architect and Park Planning Consultant, is going to study the feasibility of an off -leash dog park at Creek Valley Park, Braemar Park, and other potential sites throughout the city. He will be consulting with our Animal Control Officer, Police Department, and will present his findings and recommendations to the Park Board at their Tuesday, April 10, 2001, meeting. Mr. Ingraham will take into account all of the components and characteristics that are important to the planning of a successful off -leash dog park. If the Park Board recommends the creation of any off -leash dog park sites, notices will be mailed to all those who have dog licenses plus those neighbors in the area(s) of the proposed site(s) to invite them to an information and community input meeting. I anticipate that the Park Board will consider the community input and make final recommendations at their Tuesday, May 8,. 2001, meeting. - MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD TUESDAY, JANUARY 23, 2001, AT 7:00 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL LOWER LEVEL CONFERENCE ROOM 4801 WEST 50TH STREET MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Gary Nyberg, John McCauley, Herman Ratelle and Donald Wray MEMBERS ABSENT: Marilyn Curtis and Lois Wilder STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner OTHERS PRESENT: Country Club District Traffic Committee: Marie Thorpe, Mary Thibeau and Barbara Eppel I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Member Herman Ratelle moved approval of the minutes from the December 19, 2000, meeting. Member Donald Wray seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. II. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT TRAFFIC COMMITTEE REPORT: Planner Joyce Repya advised the Board that a Country Club Traffic Committee consisting of representatives from the district has approached the City Council regarding issues they have with the speed and volume of traffic traveling through their neighborhood. The Council has given approval for the City to hire traffic engineers to research the issues and provide traffic calming solutions. The Heritage Preservation Board is included in the decision making process because of the National Register designation of the District. Ms. Repya reminded the Board that 1993 was the last time the traffic in the Country Club District was addressed. At that time, traffic engineers evaluated the volume of traffic traveling through the District, and as a result of their findings, additional stop signs were added, and changes to some traffic triangle were implemented. All the changes at that time were subject to review and approval from the Heritage Preservation Board. Ms. Repya then introduced Marie Thorpe, Mary Thibeau and Barbara Eppel, representing the Country Club District Traffic Committee who had asked to address the HPB regarding the traffic concerns in their neighborhood. Ms. Thorpe explained that the primary concerns of the committee include the excessive speeds, the large volume of traffic and the lack of stop sign compliance. She pointed out that most recently a survey had been distributed soliciting feedback from all of the Country Club residents. Of the 538 surveys distributed, 274 were returned exhibiting a 50% response rate. The results of the survey indicated that 87% of the respondents agreed that speed was a problem; 79% agreed that the amount of traffic was problematic and 76% agreed a problem existed with stop sign compliance. Ms. Thorpe pointed out that upon reviewing the survey results, the committee had established the following goals: 1. Reduce speeds to 25 mph 2. Reduce the amount of traffic: Less than 1,000 trips per day on Arden, Drexel, Wooddale, Edina, Browndale, and Sunnyside. Maintain the status quo (No Increases) on Bruce, Casco and Moorland. 3. Raise level of stop sign awareness and compliance. 4. Follow -up on 1993 traffic study. Member Ratelle asked if the committee knew how many children resided in the District, pointing out that demonstrating the large number of youth in the neighborhood would help the committee drive home the need for addressing their safety issues. Ms. Thorpe stated that they did not know the exact number of children in the District, but agreed that identifying the large number would be beneficial to their cause. Ms. Thorpe stated that the purpose for the committee meeting with the HPB was to alert them of the ongoing traffic study, advise the Board of the committee's goals and objectives, and to give the Board a heads -up that the committee will be coming back with proposals to address their traffic calming and safety issues. Discussion ensued regarding the possible traffic calming proposals being considered. Ms. Thorpe explained that some options being considered include district entrance monuments, defined crosswalks, and traffic diverters to name a few. She stressed that the traffic committee wants to work closely with the HPB to ensure that the historic integrity of the neighborhood is not compromised by the changes proposed. 2 Ms. Thorpe then thanked the Board for their time and expressed a desire to work closely with them in the coming months to relieve the traffic pressures in the District. Member Ratelle thanked the members of the committee for presenting their concerns and goals in such a concise fashion. No formal action was taken. III. CLG GRANT APPLICATION: Chairman Nyberg left the meeting - 8:05 p.m. Ms. Repya presented the draft copy of a Certified Local Government grant request to fund a Master Preservation Plan for the Country Club District. She pointed out that the focus of the project has changed from design review guidelines to a master preservation plan. This shift in focus was suggested by Robert Vogel, who wrote the Historic Context Study and is familiar with the District. Mr. Vogel indicated that design review guidelines work well for individual homes or districts in need of very strict controls. However, guidelines that define specific architectural styles tend to stifle creativity. The question that needs to be asked is "What do you want to control ?" The suggested approach of defining a vision and establishing policies and procedures to support the vision appeared to better meet the needs of Edina's Country Club District. Board members agreed that the proposed Master Preservation Plan does a good job of addressing the need to identify the significance of the District and establish policies to protect the historic integrity. Member Ratelle then moved to approve the submittal of the draft CLG grant application to fund a Master Preservation Plan for the Country Club District to the Minnesota Historical Society. Member McCauley seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. IV. OTHER BUSINESS: None V. ADJOURNMENT: 8:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, K, I -494 CORRIDOR COMMISSION Summary of City Comments on I -494 FEIS Process February 2001 Bloomington DATE: February 9, 2001 TO: I -494 Corridor Commission Members FROM: Jim Gates, Deputy Director of Public Works RE: Transportation Improvements The City of Bloomington is unique in having Trunk Highway (TH) 77, Interstate 35W, and Trunk Highway 169 serving north and south through Bloomington, with I -494 basically on the north boundary of the City. All of these corridors are very important to the metro area. The following are some requests for improvement in these various corridors. I -494 I -494 was designed in the 1950's, built in the 1960's, reached capacity in the 70's and early 80's, and basically has had maintenance improvements in the late 80's and 90's. The I -35W/I -494 interchange handles approximately 400,000 vehicles per day. The I -494 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was initiated in 1992, but it was not signed because of the fiscal constraint parameter required by the Federal Highway Administration. The Final EIS is in process at the present time with a redesigned corridor included in that EIS. The anticipated approval of this Environmental Impact Statement coming in the spring of 2001 allows projects to proceed. The City of Bloomington has requested that the I -35W/I -494 interchange be moved forward in the schedule to a date prior to 2010 so it can be included in the next round of funding via the Transportation Efficiency Act for the 21 st Century. Presently the I -494 rebuild is programmed for 2011 -2016, with the exception of the third lane project from TH 100 to TH 212. With some projects not being implemented, it is Bloomington's request that the funding for that be moved into the I -35W/I -494 interchange. The City of Bloomington has realized that the I -494 Corridor will be reconstructed at some date. The City of Bloomington has oriented businesses to the extent possible south via the parallel arterial route; thus, minimizing access to the frontage road, as well as minimizing costs of right - of -way throughout the corridor. This has been true in other municipalities adjacent to the corridor as well. We have maintained the frontage road within the MnDOT right -of -way for 40 years without MnDOT participation. We now hope that there will be a successful return on the City's investment in the near term. There are numerous projects near I -494 that could be undertaken prior to the main I -494 improvements to provide relief to the congestion of the construction activity on I -494. In conjunction with the TH 169 at I -494, two signals were impacted as part of the project, but two signals were also replaced at the completion of the project. Since TH 169 is now the gateway to the southwest portion of the State of Minnesota, it is requested that the I- 494/TH 169 interchange be again enhanced to minimize signalization within the interchange. Trunk Highway 169 As you are well aware, the County Road 18 /Trunk Highway 169 Environmental Impact Statement was approved in 1985. The City of Bloomington recommended Alternative 9 for the County Road 18 /TH 169 Corridor. This alternative included grade separation at County Road I/Pioneer Trail, as well as TH 169 and the intersection with Anderson Lakes Parkway/Bloomington Ferry Road. Alternative 9 was not the option chosen and signalized intersections were constructed at Pioneer Trail and Bloomington Ferry Road/Anderson Lakes Parkway. The City of Bloomington has consistently been a strong supporter of County Road 18 /TH 169 and preserved over 100 feet east of the County Road 18 right -of -way to allow the construction of the improvement; thus, saving the State of Minnesota millions of dollars in conjunction with the improvement. It is requested that the grade- separated interchanges be constructed at Pioneer Trail and Bloomington Ferry Road/Anderson Lakes Parkway within the next five years. The vast majority of the right -of -way has been secured for the grade separations and the existing profile of TH 169 has been designed and constructed to accommodate these grade separations. HOV Ramp Bypasses It is requested that HOV bypasses be constructed at the various ramp locations to enhance the use of mass transit, as well as provide advantages to multiple- occupant vehicles on the various accesses to the interstate. Thank you for the opportunity to comment much needed improvements for the metropolitan area, as well as the City of Bloomington. N Eden Prairie The issues raised by the I -494 FEIS that have previously been communicated to Mn/DOT by the City of Eden Prairie can be summarized as follows: • I -494 / Prairie Center Drive full access interchange not included. (Mn/DOT has agreed to review concept design solutions that can be integrated in the future.) • Washington Avenue Bridge over I -494 not included. (The bridge may be desirable to provide parallel relief to the I -494 / TH 169 interchange.) • Directional Ramp Westbound I -494 to WB TH 5 / TH 312 not included. (This is beyond the scope of the I -494 interim project.) • Noise abatement walls deleted in Eden Prairie. (The new standards result in deletion of noise walls adjacent to residential neighborhoods that were identified in the 1992 DEIS. This may be difficult to explain to the effected residents.) • Ramp Meter Bypasses not included at all metered ramp locations. (This is subject to Mn/DOT's ramp meter policy.) Richfield II. BACKGROUND Council commented on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the Reconstruction of 1-494 in June 1992. The project was stalled due to high costs associated with the preferred alternative and insufficient funds. In 1999 Richfield initiated a study to redesign the 1 -35W/1 -494 interchange to reduce the cost of the project and hasten its construction. The Minnesota Department of Transporation (MnDOT) is now in the process of preparing the final layout that will be contained in the Final Environmental Impact Statement that will be issued this spring 2001. A public information meeting is set for February 20, 2001 at the Richfield Middle School on the final layout for 1 -494. Similar meetings will be scheduled for other cities along 1 -494 from the Minnesota River to 1 -394. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The proposed layout is consistent with the City's policies to improve capacity and safety, and to promote transit on 1-494 ki B. CRITICAL ISSUES The proposed 1 -494 design adds one additional lane in both directions and room in the median for a future additional lane in each direction consistent with Richfield's position taken in 1992. The proposed 76th Street northbound entrance ramp to 1 -35W will impact homes along Humboldt Avenue from 76th Street to 74th Street. The proposed 1 -35W/1 -494 interchange impacts the parking area of the Shops at Lyndale Shopping Center. The design of the 1 -35W/1 -494 interchange is based on the design proposed by the Richfield study. Due to limited MnDOT funding, work on 1 -494 through Richfield may not begin until 2011 -2016 at the earliest, although city staff is encouraging MnDOT to start the work much sooner than that. C. FINANCIAL • There is no financial impact on the City as a result of this proposed layout. D. LEGAL • No legal review of this proposal is necessary. It is for discussion purposes only. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S� Council may want to comment on the proposed layout, although MnDOT is providing the layout at this time for public information only. V. ATTACHMENTS None. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Chris Roy, 1 -494 Project Manager of the Minnesota Department of Transportation, will attend to answer any questions. City of Edina All comments on the FEIS have been addressed by NInDOT at this time. 4 I -494 Corridor Commission ➢ HOV ramp meter bypasses — all freeway entrances ➢ Bus shoulder lanes — TH 77 to 494/694/94 ➢ Park -and -ride facilities along 494 for pre - construction staging For all segments ➢ Park -and -ride, transit signage along 494 5 I -494 Corridor Commission/JPO Meeting Minutes of Wednesday, January 17, 2001. (Unapproved) L Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 8:45 a.m. by Chair Jim Hovland at the Southwest Metro Transit Commission, Those in attendance were: Jim Hovland, City of Edina Randy Newton, City of Eden Prairie Bob Streetar, City of Minnetonka Dave Lindahl, City of Eden Prairie Suzanne Zutter, Southwest Metro Bob Burlingame, City of Maple Grove Barb Senness, City of Plymouth Clarence Shallbetter, Metropolitan Council Lisa Raduenz, LJR, Inc. Larry Lee, City of Bloomington Perry Thorvig, City of Richfield Jan Mossman, City of Eden Prairie Joy Tierney, City of Plymouth Dick Allendort City of Minnetonka Sue Sandahl, City of Richfield Mike Eastling, City of Richfield H. Review of Minutes. Review of minutes from December 13, 2000 meeting. Motion made to approve minutes by Lee. Senness seconded the motion. Motion passed. M. Other Business. Hovland welcomed new council members to the Commission and asked everyone to introduce themselves (introductions were done around the table). Eastling provided an overview of the status of the Penn Avenue Bridge and several other related projects to Commission members. He outlined specific features of the I- 35W/494 interchange as part of the presentation, including the collector /distributor road system and the flyover bridge that runs from northbound 35W to westbound 494. As part of his explanation of the merits of the Penn Avenue bridge project, Easting explained the "single point diamond" design that is supposed to allow for more vehicle storage at both ends of the new bridge. He handed out several information sheets which detailed the cost and financing information for the bridge and the projects in which Richfield have been involved in along the corridor. Raduenz asked what the estimated right -of.- -way acquisition cost was for the 100 /Cedar section on 494? Eastling responded that it was estimated at $175 million but that it was most likely "not as expensive as what MnDOT has estimated ". Allendorf asked about the funding source for the Penn Avenue bridge? Eastling responded that it was funded in a pannership with Best Buy, the City of Richfield and $7 million in RALF funding from the Met Council. Hovland asked about the timing of the bridge project? Eastling handed out a sheet which showed that the bridge was to be under construction for ten months during 2002, when it would be completely shut down in order to accommodate an accelerated construction schedule. According to Eastling, the Southtown businesses are "driving this decision" to accelerate the project construction period in order to lessen the time the bridge is under construction. Hovland asked if there were high - occupancy vehicle ramp meter bypasses planned for the Penn Avenue bridge? Eastling responded that there were not —that the space required to install bypasses would have displaced an apartment building at the intersection. Hovland asked what the expected traffic estimates were at 494 and Penn? Eastling responded that the capacity of the left turns at the bridge is tripled by the design of the new bridge. Eastling also indicated that Best Buy has purchase agreements signed with 69 of 70 property holders at the site, the final one being Walzer Automotive. Shallbetter asked about the financing of the Best Buy project, and stated that it appeared that the City was simply foregoing revenue from Best Buy and that there was "no direct cost" to Best Buy in the building of the corporate headquarters due to Tax - Increment Financing (TIF). After some verbal jousting, Eastling agreed that the City of Richfield is in fact picking up the additional cost of interest on a loan to Best Buy in the long run. Mduenz provided' a quick overview of the 494 Final EIS process. She laid out the planned staging for the 494 corridor as is currently presented in. the document, with the first phase being the 212 -100 segment (2002- 2004); the second phase planned for the 212 to 394 segment (2006 - 2008), and the final phases to include the 100 to Penn and Penn to 3e segments (2011 and beyond) and 35W/494 interchange (2011 and beyond). MnDOT is holding informational open houses at each of the affected cities during the month of February, and Raduenz outlined the locations and dates/times of those meetings already scheduled for Commission members. She stated that the Corridor Commission would have to "make some tough decisions" in the next few months prior to the finalization of the FEIS in stating its issues with the MnDOT FEIS, and that the Commission should "get ready to do so ". Lee asked if a special meeting should be held with the Corridor Commission and MnDOT? He suggested that a position paper be drafted ahead of the meeting and distributed to members of the Commission for input at the MnDOT meeting. Allendorf asked if would make sense to have a draft of a position statement before the next meeting? Raduenz responded that if the Commission desired it, she could provide this to them. Lee suggested rather than a position paper, possibly an "issue list" for the Commission and MnDOT to review? Eastling interjected that the "cities along 494 took a position on the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) six years ago' and that MnDOT was "not in the position of accepting comments on the FEIS at this time ". Shallbetter disagreed with Eastling, indicating that the EIS now underway would be "significantly different" than the one prepared in 1.995, because of "fewer dollars available ", and that "we have a new question here —what is the roadway going to do for whom and how ?" Senness agreed, saying that "six years was a big difference ". Hovland asked Raduenz if she could get MnDOT to the next meeting of the Commission? She responded that she would try and do so. Lee indicated that the "strength of the .494 Commission has traditionally been in the past to look beyond individual city issues and we have gained great ground at the federal and state levels by doing so, and that he hoped the tradition of doing so would continue ". Hovland directed Raduenz to set up a meeting with MnDOT to review the status of the FEIS and to provide a centralized list of issues to Commission members prior to the meeting. Raduenz agreed to do so. 2 (In the interest of time, Senness asked that the specific items be moved up for discussion by members at this point —the Thorfinnson consultant contract and the 2001 -02 work plan. Members agreed). IV. Thortinnson Contract - Legislative Outreach. Hovland brought forth a proposal submitted per his request from Ross Thorfinnson, former Chair of the Corridor Commission. The proposal was for legislative outreach activities and outlined' two options —an hourly rate of $95 per hour or a flat monthly fee of $3150. Hovland recited Thorfinnson's contributions during the four years he served as Chair of the Corridor Commission and indicated that he would provide "an abundant use of time" as part of his proposed services. Lee provided additional background for the sake of new members at the table by mentioning that during the four years Thorfinnson was Chair of the Commission, he redirected the work of the Commission to a much more active role, and the group became much more heavily involved with other transportation groups, City Councils, agencies and Congress. Lee asked Hovland if he was able and had the time to fill Thorfinnson's shoes in the commitment of time it would take to continue the work already begun? Hovland responded that "to be honest, I don't think I can ", and that the Commission was "going to have to fill that legislative gap" as Raduenz was prohibited in doing so under the terms of the Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) grant that is used to pay for her services. Hovland indicated that in order to pay for Thorfinnson's services, the Commission has projected that a dues - increase for each city would be necessary by another ten cents per capita (the current dues have remain unchanged since 1986, and are set at ten cents per capita in each member city and used to match the CMAQ grant). Hovland indicated that he felt the dues increase was "clearly a worthwhile step, but that the whole Commission must decide ". Senness remarked that she would "particularly like to emphasize the momentum the group has at the present time, arid, that the group floundered in the late 80's and early 90's before regaining a renew,pd focus in the raid to late 90's and during 2000 ". She stated that it was "important for the Commission, and that the dues have been the same for fifteen years —where eisq. can you say that ?" Raduenz iterated that the discussion has ensued around presenting the current work of the Corridor Commission to each City Council on the regular update cycle held every two years by the Commission, and that a discussion on an increase in membership dues would be provided to each City Council at that time, along with a request to increase the dues beginning in 2002. Sandahl asked if the 494 bylaws had any language contained within them that prohibited the group from hiring a former politician within a year of leaving office? Raduenz said that she did not believe they did, but would check on the bylaws and respond to Sandahl's question. Hovland asked if the group needed to expand its functions? Tierney replied that `eve know that this group was spinning to a halt before, and that it. has now gained significant momentum ... are there legalities here because this is an, organization set up with CMAQ funds ?" Raduenz replied that the Commission was not "set up with CMAQ funds. . . it is merely a Joint Powers Organization that has been set up to receive various types of funding, including CMAQ, and she did not see a problem with collecting both dues money for lobbying purposes and also CMAQ dollars, as long as the accounts were separate." Shallbetter 3 indicated that he did not see a problem with collecting monies for lobbying from the group, as long as there was a "wall" between those used for CMAQ match purposes and those used for lobbying. Allendorf stated that the question the City of Minnetonka is going to have is what has the Commission done in the past couple of years... the City knows that no amount of lobbying is going to help with MnDOT. ". Hovland responded that he had put together a list to address the things that the Commission has done for a presentation he had made the week before to the Edina Chamber, and indicated that he would send it to Allendorf. Burlingame responded that he agreed with Lee, and that the efforts needed to continue. He added that there were many things: that need to be done on the "north end" of 494 as well, and that the Commission needs to keep going, and he will fully support the lobbying efforts. Sandahl asked if the Commission did an RFP for services? Hovland responded that the Commission did not. Tierney questioned the hourly rate that Thorfamson had proposed. She indicated that she thought $95 was "high" for a consultant. Allendorf responded that the City of Minnetonka had just conducted a survey of consultants and that all of them are "on either side of $100 per hour ", so the hourly rate was not "out of line ". Raduenz reminded members that Thorfinnson's proposal was based on either option —an hourly rate of $95 or a monthly fixed rate of $3,150 with unlimited hours and time. Hovland responded to Tierney's request by proposing to give Thorfinnson a set number of hours each month and no more. Burlingame suggested a trial period of three months at the monthly fee proposed, with a review and decision on the results to immediately follow the three month period. Lee suggested that three months would put -, the contract end in the middle of the legislative session and it made better sense to offer a six month contract at the fixed fee proposed, with a review after the third and fifth months. He also indicated that it would be important for Thorfinnson to keep track of his hours on the project in order for the Commission to understand its liability on the legislative matters at hand. Lee made the motion to offer Thorfinnson a six -month trial contract with the above stipulations (review after third and fifth months of trial contract period). Allendorf seconded the motion. Motion passed. (At this point in the ►feeling, dhcussion returned to the regular agenda under "Other Business'). Tierney brought up the staging of the Crosstown 62 project and the announcement by MnDOT that the ,roadway would remain closed for up to four years. She indicated her concern about the affects that traffic diversion would have on 494 and other regional roadways, including Highways 1.00 and 394, not to mention local streets. Burinigame mentioned that work was also gong to be done on 694 during the same time (widening project) and that all of the work was going to play havoc with the regional transportation system, but that no city wanted the work to stop. Streetar mentioned that he had been meeting with Metro Transit officials to determine services that may be offered to those working in Minnetonka and traveling along 694, 494 and other roads from the north to the south. Burlingame remarked that Maple Grove has also been having discussions with other local communities about increasing transit services in the area, because the services that Maple Grove provides 4 are '.'full" and cannot accommodate any more transit riders from places north of Maple Grove. A legislative bill is being introduced to p rovide a demonstration transit service from Rogers, which is 8 miles west of Maple Grove, to downtown Minneapolis as one way to alleviate overcrowding on Maple Grove buses. Streetar indicated he would talk with Burlingame in more detail to determine what could be done between the cities about transit connections. Final discussion occurred to finalize the proposed work plan on a small group basis for the next meeting. At this point in the meeting, a quorum of members had departed. A motion was made by Burlingame to adjourn the meet ing, with a second from Tierney. Motion passed. The meeting adjourned at 11:00 a.m. P INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 273 Regular Meeting, February 26, 2001, 7:00 P.M. Room 349, Edina Community Center 'AGENDA Determination of Quorum and Call to Order Approval of Minutes of Meeting of February 12, 2001 Approval of Minutes of the Public Hearing of February 13, 2001 HEARINGS OF INDIVIDUALS. DELEGATIONS, AND PRESENTATI PRESENTATION — Descriptive Statistics — Josh Howard, Scott Woelber REPORTS Assistive Technology for Special Education — Penny Kodrich, Elizabeth Gerich Sabbatical Leaves — Anne Jarvis, David Peterson 611 School Start Time — Jay Willemssen, David Vick ACTION Page 307 Personnel Recommendations 612 -614 308 Approval of Expenditures Payable on February 26, 2001 615 309 Class Size Guidelines, 2001 -2002 616 -617 310 Revised Policy 5121: Students — Examination, Grading, and 618 -622 Reporting of Student Achievement 311 Joint Powers Agreement Between ISD 273 and City of Edina, 623 appended 312 Facilities Use Agreement Between ISD 273 and City of Edina, 624 appended 313 Purchase of McAfee Total Virus Defense Software 625 314 Highlands Elementary School Addition (To be Walked -in) 626 315 Normandale Elementary School Security Locks (To be Walked -in) 627 CONSENT Is 316 Gift from Joe Struzyk 628 317 Gift from Dwight Hager 629 318 Gift from Jan Krutz 630 INFORMATION 319 Revised Enrollment as of December 22, 2000 631 320 Revised Procedure 5121: Students — Examination, Grading, and 632 -640 Reporting of Student Achievement 321 Staff Recognition 641 -642 Adjournment * Persons who wish to address the Board are requested to complete and submit an appropriate form to the Board Secretary prior to the designated hearing time. When recognized, each individual shall identify himself /herself and the group represented, if any. He /She shall then state the reason for addressing the Board and shall be limited in time at the discretion of the Board chair. Individual employees of the School District or representatives of employee organizations shall have utilized administrative procedures before making a request to address the Board. J t JP ez ' . AIL N���o T E UPDATE 2001 -2 WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2001 FEBRUARY REVENUE FORECAST RELEASED The Department of Finance released the highly anticipated February Forecast late this morning. The slowing national economy has reduced surplus projections considerably since the last revenue forecast was announced in November, 2000. Minnesota's general fund balance at the close of the 2000 -01 biennium (June 30, 2001) is now projected to be $856 million, down $67 million from the November estimate of $924 million. The Governor's proposal to rebate 100% of the surplus from the current biennium will not change as a result of the reduction. According to Commissioner Matt Smith of the Department of Revenue, the Governor's proposal will simply include rebate checks that are approximately 7.5% smaller than they would have been under earlier projections. The average rebate check will drop from $450 to $420. The real news will be later this week when the Governor announces changes to his proposed budget as a result of the reduced revenue projections for 2002 -03. The Governor's budget and tax reform proposals are based on the November Forecast, which projected a surplus, of $2 billion over the biennium. The most recent estimates are for a surplus of only $1.535 billion. As a result, the Governor will have to reduce proposed spending or tax relief by the difference in order for his budget to remain balanced.. The Governor stated that he expects to have this information available by the end of the week. It is anticipated that the cuts will come from tax relief measures, since spending initiatives in the Governor's proposed budget are already very frugal. We hope to have a detailed analysis of the Governor's amended budget available for the next edition of MLC Update._ The MLC Update is prepared by Robert G. Renner, Jr. and Elizabeth J. Shields Messerti 8 Kramer P.A., 145 University Avenue West, Suite 450, St Paul, MN 55103 Telephone 6511228 -9757 Fax 6511228 -9787 E-mail rrenner@mandklaw.com and eshieldsQmandklaw.com MLC TESTIFIES ON FISCAL DISPARITIES LEGISLATION The House Property Tax Division heard testimony on February 12th regarding two bills related to the metro area fiscal disparities program. Mark Bernhardson, City Manager of Bloomington, offered testimony on HF 193, which was introduced by Representative Erik Paulsen (R — Eden Prairie). HF 193 is an MLC initiative that would limit a city's contribution to the fiscal disparities pool to 15% of total net tax capacity. Representative Paulsen has been a real champion of fiscal disparities reform, and the MLC is very appreciative of his leadership on this issue. In presenting HF 193 to committee members, Representative Paulsen characterized the bill as a modest initiative. He stated that he thinks the time is right to reevaluate the program as a whole, but that this legislation would address some of the problem areas in the meantime. In light of the Governor's proposal to overhaul the property tax system, this may be the ideal time to assess the role of the fiscal disparities program. Since the implementation of the fiscal disparities program in 1976, there has not been a comprehensive assessment to determine if the program is successfully achieving its intended goals. Mark Bernhardson testified in support of HF 193 on behalf of the MLC. Mark did an excellent job of framing the fiscal disparities program in the context of the overall tax system. He provided committee members with a history of the impacts of the fiscal disparities program in light of other tax changes. Prior to the testimony by Representative Paulsen and Mark Bernhardson, Representative Ann Lenczewski (DFL - Bloomington) presented a different approach to fiscal disparities reform: HF 381 would, repeal the metro fiscal disparities program outright. Representative Lenczewski stressed the need to reevaluate the fiscal disparities program, and informed committee members that she was working with House Research to draft language requiring an interim study of the fiscal disparities program. That bill has since been introduced as HF 1178, and requires the Commissioner of Revenue to report to the Legislature by February, 2002 on the success of the fiscal disparities program in achieving the goals for which it was created. Some of the questions to be addressed by the study are as follows: • How has the program affected property tax disparities across the metro area? • Is the contribution formula reasonable? Should commercial- industrial property that is currently exempt continue to be exempt? Should contribution amounts be adjusted for differences in sales ratios among communities? • Is the distribution formula reasonable? Should the formula reflect measures of need as well as population? Should it be based on tax capacity rather than market value? 9 2 • Do local governments derive sufficient tax revenues from commercial - industrial property to cover the costs of providing service to the property, considering the tax base that must be contributed to the areawide pool? A hearing on this bill has not been scheduled in the House, and no companion file has been introduced as of yet in the Senate. This MLC will be following this legislation closely. SALES TAX ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT PURCHASES On February 15th, the House Sales and Income Tax Division heard testimony on a number of bills that would repeal the state sales tax on local government purchases. The repeal of the sales tax on local government purchases has been an issue of great importance to the MLC since the tax was first imposed by the 1991 Legislature. The first bill presented to the Sales and Income Tax Division was HF 108, introduced by Representative George Cassell (R - Alexandria). Before the bill was discussed, Representative Cassell offered two amendments that were then adopted by the Division. The first amendment was technical in nature, and did not substantively affect the bill. The second amendment would remove from the sales tax exemption any municipal entity that competes with the private sector, such as golf courses, liquor stores, fitness centers, campgrounds, etc. The Department of Revenue estimates that the state revenue loss that would occur if the sales tax repeal was passed into law to be approximately $100 million annually. Of this amount, approximately 60% would be savings for city governments. In the alternative, if the Governor's proposal to expand the sales tax base to include services were passed into law without the sales tax repeal for local governments, the loss to local governments would be an additional $40 million annually. The reaction of Division members was interesting, to say the least. Representative Ron Abrams (R - Minnetonka) suggested a trade of the sales tax repeal for a permanent reduction of HACA in the same amount. He explained that in the long term, this would actually result in savings for cities because the HACA reduction would be frozen, while sales tax liability would have continued to rise. None of the city officials who were on hand to testify responded positively to the trade- off. proposal. John Gunyou, . City Manager of Minnetonka, stressed that local government officials are accountable to their residents, and this would ensure that property tax relief would result from the sales tax repeal. Representative Abrams was not deterred by this assertion, and reiterated that a HACA offset would be necessary to ensure fiscal restraint on the part of cities. The MLC Board of Directors has not yet taken a formal position on the HACA offset proposed by Representative Abrams. . 3 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING UPDATE , The House Property Tax Division is holding a hearing on' Monday, March 5th to provide members with an overview of tax increment financing (TIF). House Research will first provide a presentation on the history of TIF and recent legislative changes. Following the House Research presentation, the Office of the State Auditor will present its own report on TIF. A number of TIF related bills have been introduced this session. Perhaps the most significant bill so far is HF 187/SF 73, introduced by Representative Ron Abrams (R - Minnetonka) and Senator Ann Rest (DFL — New Hope). The purpose of this legislation would be to require cities to certify new TIF districts for new projects rather than amending the plan of an older district. It is anticipated that this legislation will garner more support in the House than the Senate. Hearings have not yet been scheduled in either body. In an upcoming edition of MLC Update, we will provide a more detailed analysis of this legislation. GOVERNOR VENTURA PROPOSES NEW LGA FORMULA In addition to the state takeover of general education funding and property tax rate compression, a major component of Governor Ventura's tax reform proposal is a complete overhaul of the local government aid (LGA) formula and elimination of HACA. Under the Governor's plan, LGA would be divided into three "pots," one for 1St class cities (Minneapolis, St. Paul, Duluth); one for Twin Cities suburbs; and one for Greater Minnesota. Each group of cities would have slightly .different components in the formula. The new formula would base LGA on per capita need less a percentage of tax capacity, with density and sprawl factors figured in for metropolitan suburbs and Greater Minnesota. The need factor for Twin Cities suburbs is defined as the average basic expenditure on roads and public safety for suburban cities. The density factor would be multiplied by the need factor, and is defined as the square root of: city's residential units per residentially zoned acre metro area average residential density per acre (excluding core cities) For 1St class cities, the need factor is not an average, but the specific per capita expenditure on roads and public safety. The sprawl factor for Greater Minnesota allows cities to include 10% of residents living up to five miles outside city borders as part of the need factor. The chart on the next page illustrates the impact on MLC cities of elimination of HACA and implementation of the Governor's LGA formula. It, is important to note that this information does not take into account the Governor's proposal to remove the education levy from the property tax. We do not yet have, the necessary computer modeling to analyze the full impact of the Governor's proposal. 4 2002 PROJECTED CITY AIDS CURRENT LAW VS. GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL CITY 1999 Population Projected 2002 LGA Projected 2002 HACA Projected Total Aid Proposed Gov. LGA Total Gov. Aids Change in Total Per Capita Aid Change APPLE VALLEY 44,818 404,124 2,774,400 3,178,524 1,584,480 1,584,480 - 1,594,044 -35.57 BLOOMINGTON 87,476 105,796 3,727,749 3,833,545 2,439,167 2,439,167 - 1,394,378 -15.94 BURNSVILLE 59,306 396,850 3,332,073 3,728,923 2,399,660 2,399,660 - 1,329,263 -22.41 EAGAN 61,113 71,469 2,098,017 2,169,486 1,556,487 1,556,487 - 612,999 -10.03 EDEN PRAIRIE 51,913 59,682 1,145,195 1,204,877 217,201 217,201 - 987,676 -19.03 EDINA 47,274 0 979,864 979,864 926 926 - 978,938 -20.71 LAKEVILLE 40,315 499,403 1,749,190 2,248,593 622,841 622,841 - 1,625,752 -40.33 MAPLEWOOD 35,780 758,884 1,599,169 2,358,053 1,040,108 1,040,108 - 1,317,945 -36.83 MINNETONKA 53,444 63,180 2,100,830 2,164,010 0 0 - 2,164,010 -40.49 PLYMOUTH 64,313 74,616 1,852,073 1,926,689 658,407 658,407 - 1,268,282 -19.72 ROSEVILLE 34,548 167,933 1,781,772 1,949,705 1,389,339 1,389,339 - 560,366 -16.22 SHOREVIEW 26,545 31,941 1,011,184 1,043,125 8511316 851,316 - 191,809 -7.23 WOODBURY 42,342 43,253 1,335,493 1,378,746 265,869 265,869 - 1,112,877 -26.28 SENATOR LARRY POGEMILLER ADDRESSES MLC On Thursday, February 22 "d, the MLC was honored to host Senator Larry Pogemiller at a special meeting of the Operating Committee that also included some elected Board members. Senator Pogemiller spoke to members about his philosophy as committee chair, his thoughts on tax reform, and then answered questions on tax increment financing, fiscal disparities and transportation funding. With respect to the Governor's tax reform proposal, Senator Pogemiller stated that the education levy takeover, implementation of a new local government aid formula, and expansion of the sales tax base are all real possibilities this year. He also stated that there will likely be some additional investments in the areas of higher education and transportation. Members of the Board and Operating Committee were pleased to hear that. Senator Pogemiller views tax increment financing as a valuable redevelopment tool for city governments. He believes the state has a responsibility to hold harmless any city that experiences an increment shortfall as a result, of property tax rate compression. Senator Pogemiller also indicated that he thinks that TIF has been micromanaged in the past, and that the best role for the state with respect to TIF is to set up parameters for TIF purposes and then let cities manage their projects within these parameters. On another issue of interest to the MLC, Senator Pogemiller stated that a repeal of the sales tax on local government purchases is not high among his priorities, and that it would have to be offset with a state aid reduction of some sort. The MLC appreciated the opportunity to meet with Senator Pogemiller and looks forward to working closely with him on tax related issues. DATE FOR SPECIAL BOARD MEETING SET The regular April meeting of the Board of Directors has been moved up to March 29th for purposes of taking positions on legislative initiatives that have been announced since the 2001 Legislative Program was adopted. This meeting will take place at 4:00 p.m. at the League of Minnesota Cities Building in St. Paul. Please contact Liz Shields with questions: 651/228 -9757 or Eshields(cDmandklaw.com., For more information on any of the topics covered 1n this edition of MLC Update, please contact Liz Shields or Bob Renner at 6511228 -9757 or via e-mail at eshields(aD-mandklaw.com or rrenner(aD-mandklaw.com. 0 MAR. 6. 2001 11:16AM Work: 763764 -3951 Home: 952 - 929.6652 Fax 763- 764 -7384 GENERAL MILLS TREASURY Fm Dennis Maetzold, Michael Kelly, Front: John Weddle To: Soott Housh, James Hovland, Linda Masica Faun Various Pages: Phone: Various Date: O3%D1 Re: Edina Recreational Facilities CCs NO. 8623 P. 1 ❑ Urgent X For Review ❑ Please Comment ❑ Please Reply ❑ Please Recycle Thank you for the opportunity to comment at the public hearing on February 15. 1 want to reiterate what t said there and add one point; • In general, I support the recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Committee and appreciate the work they have done • The Edina community desperately needs a new pool, and needs the Southview pool upgraded to provide safe, healthy conditions for pool users. • The Edina community supports swimming and has a long record of acoompllshment and high levels of participation. Current facilities put Edina school and club teams at a d6advantage compared W other nearby communities. • I endorse building a 50 meter pool rather than the 25 meter facility. For a relatively modest increase in cost, the 50 meter approach offers more flexibility for multiple users as well as affording much greater income opportunities, especially during the summer months. • As shown on the TSP One diagram, 300 seats for spectators is not adequate to host certain meets (revenue generating opportunities). I am the Section 6AA boys swimming & diving meet manager. Every year attendance tops 425. Therefore, I recommend that the seating capacity be increased to a minimum of 450, preferably 500. This seating should be concentrated on the end of the pool used for 25 yard meets. • Finally, I would be happy to serve in any way that I can to assist in the decision- making process of the actual pool design. As a fan, official and meet manager, t offer a perspective that is important to take into account to make sure we invest wisely. 1 look forward to voting favorably on the referendum in Ma 40 Mayor Maetzold City Council Members John Keprios March 6`h, 2001 Dear Council Members, On February 15`h, at the Public Hearing, you allowed our ECC Neighborhood Association the option to address the council. At that time, we presented to the council, our Position Statement, and an overview of our position on the proposed referendum. We thank you again for that opportunity. Since the Public Hearing, there has been an additional meeting and countless discussions, newspaper articles and broadcast information circulated. We are concerned that our views are being mis- interpretted by some, therefore, we wish to reitorate: For one additional time, _our position to the proposed referendum We are not against the referendum, unless it includes a domed sports facility located at Kuhlman field. We will support the referendum, within these guidelines. In the spirit of collaboration, we would like to supply representation from the ECC Neighborhood Association on the future planning committee for the improvements in the area. We also would like to offer our assistance to the council (as long as the bubble is not located at the Kuhlman Field site) to join forces with other community action groups and participate in a "Get out and Vote" campaign that would be "Pro Referendum ". Help us to assist you to: "Preserve and Enhance the Quality of Life in Edina, and ensure that a safe environment exists in Edina, for all. Respectfully yours, f ti Maria Fesenmai Co -Chair ECC Neighborhood. Association 5713 Concord Avenue Edina 5542 952.922.6734 Presentation Overview from the 2/15/01 Public Hearing: Members of the ECC Neighborhood Association will articulate the points that support our position that a "Domed Commercial Sports Facility" in the middle of a residential area does not make sense. These issues include but are not limited to: Safety /Parking /Increased Traffic . ..........................Laura Nelson • Safety of our children as they walk from school during the week and when they are out during the weekend. • Parking is a problem now and will only be compounded by the proposed Domed Commercial Sports Facility. • More traffic will pass through our neighborhoods year round and will last till late night. (Past 11:30) Crime and Vandal ism ....................... ..........................Jeri Albrecht • More venues in a "Domed Commercial Sports Facility located in the middle of a highly populated residential area means more opportunities for crime. • More venues in a "Domed Commercial Sports Facility located in a highly populated residential area means more opportunity for vandalism. Impact on Property Values and Taxes ........... ......................JohnFeltl How will property values be affected by locating the proposed "Domed Commercial Sports Facility" in a highly populated residential area. Noise/Debris /Air Quality /Aesthetics i e ..Ron Fresauez p Facility", g y Not a problem now but it will be a problem wth th addition of a "Domed Commercial Sports Faceli in a hi hl populated residential area, hosting multiple events, on a daily basis late into the night. Donee Options There are other viable site options ......... Dan Rectenwald Building the "Domed Commercial Sports Facility" in the middle of a highly populated residential area is not the only option. Sunemary..........................Susan Covnick Statistics ............................... ..........................Maria Fesenmaier Results of the ECC Neighborhood Petition/Survey. On Saturday January 27`h, with less than 10 people, a petition was created - organized and circulated for response. Since that time, the number of ECC Neighborhood Association members circulating the petition, rose to over 50 people, eventually obtaining 402 signatures against placing the dome at Kuhlman Field. The main objective of the petition is to provide the City Council members with current accurate data, that verifies the high volume of concerned residents opposed to the location of the proposed dome at Kuhlman Field. It is our concern that from the previous marketing survey conducted in the spring of 2000, that the City Council did not fully identify the percentage of residents against the proposed Kuhlman location. From our research, we wish to demonstrate to the City Council, that it is very clear the residents will not support a referendum that places a dome facility over the Kuhlman Field. It is our request that the dome not be placed in the Kuhlman Field residential area. Here are the results we have obtained: ➢ 400+ ECC Neighborhood Association members ➢ Received mailing list 02/07/01 of residents that was mailed out to those within approximately 500' of the ECC, leaving 9 full days to collect petition signatures before the Public Hearing Y The City mailing list consisted of 192 addresses i After corrections, there were 173 homes on the City mailing list We removed 11 addresses from the list • 3 = the school • 1 = Mpls. address • 3 = moved • 2 = duplicate addresses • 2 = several miles away from the 500' indicator (In addition, we removed 8 homes that are winter vacationers that are unavailable, these were subtracted from the eligible addresses to contact, bring the working list down to 173.) ➢ % list VS # homes city .007% (less than 1 %) ➢ # of homes in the 500' list that we contacted ALL ➢ # of petitions signed total 498 ➢ # homes approached w /petition ➢ 459 (88 of petitions signed were either West Hwy 100, East France, or South of Crosstown) ➢ # of homes signed petition ➢ 364 ➢ % of homes approached that signed ➢ 79.3% ➢ # of homes will not sign 6 ➢ # letters collected additional 32 , total of. 60 # of homes in the 500' list that signed the petition 173 out of 176 (3 we contacted are moving, no new owners yet) ➢ # of homes in the 500' that will not sign 4 ➢ % of homes in the 500' list that will not sign 2.5% (forecast for City/ double this % to 5% out of 25,000 homes = 23,750 against) ➢ % of homes in the list that signed petition Total % signed petitions 83.5% 75% signed, 4 %z% winter vacationers not available to sign- removed from list, 4% want to sign unable to get copy to us 173 -8 vacationers =165 on adjusted list 136 signatures and 7 verbal requests =143 86.6% person approached with the petition, that were on the cities mailing list said NO to a Referendum that includes a Domed Sports Facility located at Kuhlman Field. 143/165 = 86.6% saturation From our research, we wish to demonstrate to the City Council, that it is very clear the residents will not support a referendum that places a dome facility over Kuhlman. Lois Garrison Young 5113 Wooddale Avenue Edina, Minnesota 55424 To The Edina City Council: I received the enclosed letter from Scott Whipple yesterday. For several years, we have had a contract with his company for lawn care. They are highly competent and provide quality service. He is an Edina native. This Edina resident was deeply chagrined to read this letter. I do not know the precise nature of this law or policy. What possible rationale could there be, however, for "targetting" lawn care services ? What I DO understand is that such tactics inflict undue financial burden upon the small business owner. Edina residents who are willing to pay fair market value for their services are then forced to pay inflated prices so that a small business can comply with excessive regulations. Is this really what Edina wishes to accomplish? Someone at Edina City Hall has not thought through the consequences of this policy. Edina should be about creating an atmosphere of consumer- friendly, small business - friendly cooperation. It should protect the consumer from fraud or deceptive business practice. That this policy consumes our police force, negates the efforts of a small business such as that of Scott Whipple, and forces the residents of your city to overpay for their services is a lose /lose proposition. WHAT ARE YOU THROC NG ? ?? Signed, A Frustated Long -Time Edinan, on March 6, 2001 EDINA SEAS®N, -L SERVICES, LLC K 952-925-2843 We put the "care" back in lawncare Dear Ualued Customer; Spring is just a few short weeks away. Enclosed are your lawn service contracts for 2001. You will notice that we haue made some changes in the contract wording. Please look them ouer carefully. If you haue a question feel free to call me. 952 -925- 2843. The year 2000 presented some unique challenges for Edina Seasonal Seruices, and I eHpect for all outdoor maintainence companies. The volatility of gasoline prices added about 35% to our auerage monthly fuel cost. Our shop and office natural gas costs haue skyrocketed, just like all of our homes. Our employee medical insurance has risen ouer 39% in the last 2 years and of course with the tight labor market the wages haue also gone up dramatically. The real challenge for us, and all other lawn and landscape services this last season, was the ouerzealous enforcement of truck and trailer laws, (which were never intended to apply to our industry), by the Edina Police Department. Edina Seasonal Seruices has always been proud of the fact that we have been in compliance with these laws, long before other similar seruices euer knew they existed, or chose to ignore them. The big factor became an interpretation issue, which in order to comply, will cost this company approximately $7288.00 in added labor costs, per season. Unfortunately these costs cannot be absorbed by us, and will haue to be passed on to you, our valued customers. I have met with seueral other lawn maintainence company owners, and we are working together to see what can be done about this problem. Edina and Plymouth, Mn seem to be the only communities currently working this ouerzealous enforcement program. If you haue any questions, or would like to help, by. contacting the members of the city council, please call me 952 -925- 2843. Seueral lawn service companies received fines last year in the $2080.08 to $6800.08 range. The Edina Police Department seems to be specifically targeting lawncare and landscape companies. f� 5201 Grove Street • Edina, Minnesota 55436 cot gi \ 1 j i 1( ;\\ 0310612001 10:00 9529220640 SOUTHDALE MEDICAL PAGE 02 NORTHCO MANAGEMENT SERVICEs LP SOU7HDALE MEDICAL, CENTER 6545 FRANCE AVENUE SOUTH EDINA, MN 55 435 TELEPHONE(952)922 -5399 FACSIMILE(952)922 -0640 March 6, 2001 City of Edina - City Council 4801 West 50°i Street Edina MN 55424 -1394 Re: Street Improvements - #BA -304 (West 65th Street) Drew Avenue Improvements - #BA -322 Dear Council Members: As you know, Southdale Medical has been generally supportive of the Fairview Hospital expansion. We are also generally supportive of the steps the city is taking to enhance the roadway systems in our area to accommodate the ever - increasing traffic. With regard to the Notice of Public Hearing for the above referenced projects we do have a few concerns that we would like to place on the record for your consideration: With respect to West 65'h Street ( #BA -304) 1) This improvement does not abut our property and basically does not improve the Southdale Medical Center property. The primary benefit .appears to be for the Fairview and BTO expansions. We would like to know the basis for allocating this assessment to include 6545 France Avenue? 2) We would consider picking up a fair share of this assessment when the Southdale Medical Center addition is built. 3) No assessment amount is allocated to 6400 France Avenue - (the new Ramp) currently under construction. It would seem that allocation of a significant portion of the 65'' Street cost to this ramp would be appropriate. 4) To the extent we are to be assessed any amount, could a 20 -year amortization period be . implemented? With respect to Drew Avenue ( #BA -334) 1) It does not appear that Southdale Medical Center received any credit for the value of the easement on our East boundary. 2) We are concerned that the cost of the improvements may not cover replacement of our landscaping and the relocation of the ramp entrance /:exit equipment? We also have a concern that the city plan may assume that our ramp entry can be modified without impacting the ability for cars and trucks to maneuver while entering or exiting the ramp. 03/06/2001 10:00 9529220640 SOUTHDALE MEDICAL PAGE 03 City of Edina — City Council March 6. 2001 Page 2 3) It would appear that the Assessment does not include many of the neighborhood buildings that benefit from the Drew Avenue improvements. Such as: The Colony, Edina Towers, all medical buildings on the East of Drew Avenue—etc. 4) To the extent we are to be assessed any amount, could a 20 -year amortization period be implemented? We would like to meet with the city to discuss our specific concerns at a mutually agreeable date. We also hereby reserve our right to object to the assessment at the assessment hearing to be scheduled at a later date. Sincerely, Northco Management Services, LP d /b /a Colonnade Properties LLC Acting Solely as Agent for SMB Operating Company LLC Cindy Fis e Property Manager Gea.r Fiie(iolW 51,utboqk) aufeA f m aa&� -t743M �v, per,. md r mt fity rar ctfieAdw a"A cake. 10 4"t �6tgr WkUl- sta AacL afl 4EpC6oDb- -Tb F(aj-h lxtl&apAant 4AUwzL, /Al oA c<juidoy) 9awtaty �, a-f aboal-k `00A , d s r 4UVf /UL CO—&j iou aoLd tjoul, a4,fAw eto 0 116r� card - tee, tE"4afi,Qd— 4ter 7b 4atm-t�� 5wj"A yc?4�j . 1071 q) ale. 4,U.V fiU4Liel ,4,a,j, SOU�r6-c� c a4--c 4tt)w: &tOW4.Zr� IA ud-aA"� /,t ad -kKV 9duVc Fvm bey VZA W�-/iq 5c,�e r%f . , COLO, la W � PA 14 41.4 3 Ernest Guille S. j6117,eCh ,W" v AVe 55410 -2725 Minap °Ils, 7n, a rlw� r. 3- z' Z42 . 6/1 A-e A ��a • � C -�'"�� r� �' `""�- /�b�.ICS 7�b` ' %fit _ o f r G! 2 461(l rL Y,714 14� 6£303 Wooddale Avenue Edina, MN. 55435 -1635 February 22, 2001 Marty Scheerer, Chief Edina Fire Department 6250 Tracy Avenue Edina, MN. 55436 Dear Chief Scheerer: On February 20, 2001, your representative, Todd Porthan, came to our home to install smoke detectors in accordance with the program for Edina senior citizens. I am writing to commend you for having such an .i-mpressive person as Todd under your command. Todd is personable and courteous and was very business like. I:e installed the detectors quickly and efficiently. Thereafter, he made several pertinent observations about our carbon monoxide detector installation and about some po- tentially hazardous electrical connections in our home. 17 suggested appropriate corrective action which I have already taken. I was greatly impressed by Todd's technical knowledge and his professional bearing. He merits my few words of personal commendation. Sincerely yours, Iu 1V, � uJ � L V Or