Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/11/1970 Council Minutes11 APRIL 1970 PAYROLL CONTINUED: 1120 Chancy E. LeVesseur 1121 Imogene Secretan 1122 Albert Dupre (2/3 fees) 1123 Gunder B. Gunderson 1124 Roy H. Backlin 1125 John R. Juleen 1126 Virgil M. Beecher 1127 Jack Rector 1128 Robert Lundgren 1129 Robert W. Barott 1130 Donald N. Paul Minutes approved at the meeting of May 11, 197 25.00 102.70 112.64 40.50 315.00 62.00 75.60 78.30 237.60 129.60 18.80 Clerk- Treasurer The regular meeting of the Lino Lakes Village Council held on May 11, 1970, was called to order at 8:05 p.m. by Mayor L'Allier with all members present. Mr. Jaworski moved to accept the minutes of the April 27th minutes with the following correction: Page 1, paragraph 6, change Hwy. Dept. to Dept. of Health. Seconded by Mr. Bohjanen. Carried unanimously. The Clerk reported that a letter had been received from Don Waalen of Chomonix again asking that their hearing on Chomonix East be continued until next meeting. She also reported that an election on a $1,045,000 bond for District Memorial Hospital would be held on June 30th from 1:00 to 8:00 p.m. Notice had been received from the County Assessor that the Board of Review will be held on June 18th at 7:30 p.m. A letter from the State Hwy. Dept. was read indicating that they are in agreement that a larger directional sign is needed at County 14 and Hwy. 8; this will be installed. The affidavits of publication for Ordinances No. 32A and 31C had been received. The Clerk stated that she was unable to get any mobile home statistics from the State Departments of Health or Motor Vehicle Licensing since neither compiles any. Mr. Cardinal moved to continue the hearing for Chomonix East until May 25th at 8:30 p.m. Seconded by Mr. Bohjanen. Carried unanimously. Mr. Cardinal had no report. .ism. Jaworski noted that a new outdoor flag was needed at Sunrise Park. Mr. Bohjanen asked Mr. Jerry Hajney of the VFW Post whether they could obtain one reasonably. This will be looked into. Mr. Jaworski stated that the flag would only be flown during daylight hours. Mr. Jaworski stated that they were proceeding with the ball diamonds and that the work was going well. He mentioned that one section of the backstop had been stolen over the winter and wondered whether it would be worthwhile to put in an insurance claim for it. He did not have the replacement price but will check it out. Mr. Rosengren reported that he and Mr. Gotwald had looked at 64th Street and are trying to come up with a correction and a turnaround. Mr. Gotwald mentioned that according to record, the road had been maintained into the Scherer yard since the vehicles turned around there. However, they were now turning around at the base of the hill. He felt it was better for both the public and our equipment to turn around there rather than in Mr. Scherer's yard for liability purposes. Mr. Scherer had suggested that since Marvin Rehbein is doing some work in the area that he dump 1 1 9 in some dirt and the Village do the shaping and add gravel. Mr. L'Allier asked whether we would seal -coat 64th; Mr. Gotwald replied that it would be done later this summer. Also, they will try to correct the drainage in front of Flannagan's by deepening the ditch about 1 to 1 1/2' and installing a 15" culvert. Mr. Gotwald noted that Mr. Flannagan would like to have the whole road lowered but this would cost about $300 and he doubted that the Village cared to spend the money. However, if the Village goes through with the Engineer's suggestion, Mr. Flannagan could grade his front yard to drain into the ditch. Mr. Pete Scherer stated that at one time the Village had asked the Contractor (Lind- berg) to correct the road or else pay for the dorrection. There was some discussion on this. Mr. Locher noted that the contractor was no longer doing business in Minnesota, but that the original bond on that construction could be attached; how- ever, a bond held on another project could not be attached for this purpose. Mr. Gotwald explained the State's procedure on designating haul roads. During further discussion, Mr. Gotwald estimated the cost of shaping 64th and putting on some gravel at about $300 to $350. Mr. Rosengren moved to authorize the above work on 64th Street as suggested by the Engineer and to have the Clerk check the minutes to see what pro- cedure for dealing with the contractor had been set up; also the Road Dept. was to keep track of the time and cost of the work so that the contractor could be billed for same later. Seconded by Mr. Bohjanen. Carried unanimously. Mr. Rosengren inquired whether the road into the Hansen property on Otter Lake was a Village road or had been accepted for partial maintenance. Mr. Gotwald stated that the road had been accepted for partial maintenance with snowplowing. Mr. Rosengren stated that it needs gravel in spots. Mr. Gotwald noted that it should be brought up to condition in a future project. After discussion, Mr. Bohjanen moved to authorize the hauling of the necessary gravel for Hansen's road in keeping with the partial maintenance agreement. Seconded by Mr. Jaworski. Carried unanimously. Mr. Rosengren mentioned that a delegation of Peltier Drive residents were present; that at one time we had talked about changing the roadway by running it over the hill; thus straightening it out and taking it away from the lakeshore. Mr. Gotwald noted that the St. Paul Water Dept. will take down the old pumphouse on Centerville Lake this summer and will haul the rubble to Peltier Drive for fill. Mr. L'Allier stated that we had held back on the realignment because one land owner would not contribute the easement. Mr. Brisson spoke for the delegation, stating that the road was in real bad shape, had no gravel, and that several vehicles had gone over the edge in the narrow spot. Also, if the present road were widened to 66' it would be up against the Wilhelmy house. After discussion, it was suggested that Mr. Rosengren and Mr. Backlin would pay a visit to the Thies and Houle families to see if something could be worked out. Mr. Locher explained the procedure for the construction of the road, both on a general revenue basis or on special assessments paid by the benefitted owners. Mr. L'Allier moved that Mr. Gotwald be authorized to work up a cost estimate on the relocation of Peltier Drive; that Mr. Rosengren and Mr. Backlin be authorized to contact the property owners on Peltier Drive to secure the easements necessary; that the Engineer and Mr. Rosengren report back at the next meeting. Seconded by Mr. Jaworski. Carried unanimously. Mr. Gotwald will also contact the Water Dept. Mr. Rosengren mentioned that the streets in Twilight Acres need repair and asked what was to be done. Mr. Locher stated that the streets were platted; he recalled that an agreement had been made that after a certain percentage of the lots were built up, the streets would be built up and assessed to the landowners. Mr. Gotwald felt that under partial maintenance we would blade and oil the streets; it would cost 120 $700 ro $800 for the 2600' of road. However if they wished to have bituminous surface with curb, a petition for the improvements would be in order or the Council could initiate the hearing, or could call for a hearing to see if the property owners were interested in such construction. Mr. Rosengren felt it would be simple to sealcoat the streets and the job would last for a topple years; Mr. Gotwald noted that road mix would cost closer to $3,000. Mr. Rosengren will contact the owner to see what percentage is built up by the next meeting. Mr. Rosengren also noted that he had located a double power broom for the new tractor at a cost of $800; however he hasn't seen it, but will check. The hearing for rezoning and a special use permit for a mobile home park for Gilbert Menkveld was called to order at 8:40 p.m. The affidavits of publication, posting and mailing of the notices were checked and read by Attorney Locher, who declared them to all be in order. Mr. Joe Summers, Attorney for Menkveld, presented the request. He reiterated items presented to the Planning & Zoning Board, mentioning that the original proposal had contained 571 lots not in the usual arrangement, but utilizing modules of 8 or 12 units on a cul -de -sac (private street). In order to accomplish this proposal, stating that in view of the problems brought out at the P&Z hearing, they would now be happy to accept rezoning of the whole parcel to commercial (the parcel would probably be rezoned in the future anyway since it abuts the freeway), but they now requested a conditional use permit for only 100 trailer lots on a portion of the parcel designated as Phase 1. This would take care of the sewage problem since the 100 units could be served by an underground Imhoff Tank on a temporary basis. If this were granted, then they would return for another condi- tional use permit for each expansion of the park. Mr. Summers then noted the variances to our present ordinance which their proposal wouldn't meet: 1. The lot dimensions would not meet 10' x 60' size or the 6000 sq. ft. require- ment, but would range from 4900 sq. ft. to 5300 sq. ft. at a density of 4.8 units per acre, considerably lower than our maximum of 7 units per acre. A lot of the land is devoted to cul -de -sac area and more green space. 2. They also wish a variance from the 10 degree angle requirement. 3. They can meet the 20' setback requirement on the main collector streets but wish a variance to have the units set back 10' off the cul -de -sac. 4. They also wish permission to have the units 12' apart or 6' from the interior lot lines. 5. They would like to have 24' instead of 30' interior streets to give more green space. 6. Whereas our ordinance requires that 2% of the land be set aside for recrea- tional use, they have given 15% on the entire tract and considerably more on Phase 1 alone. 7. Whereas our ordinance requires sidewalks on all the streets, this would not serve their plan. They suggest internal green walkways, which they would be glad to concrete, to better accomodate internal pedestrian circulation where people would be more likely to walk. This also draws attention away from the street. 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 Mr. Summers stated that since there didn't appear to be any generally accepted information on the tax impact of mobile homes versus single homes (he personally feels that, value for value, both mobile homes and regular homes pay about the same, but neither pays their own way; municipalities lose money on any housing) and since there is talk of the 1971 Legislature receiving requests for clarification on tax problems, they would accept a limitation on the conditional use permit for Phase 1 only not allowing any school age children in those 100 units. This would eliminate the bulk of the tax concern and would lessen the need for municipal services such as recreation facilities, fire and police protection. Mr. Summers stated that he had Bill Jensen of Suburban Engineering to answer questions also. He mentioned that they felt they could easily hook up to municipal sewer at the Southeast corner of the tract as well as originally planned at the Southwest corner (to NSSSD). The natural topography showing 20' to 25' difference in elevation would easily allow this. Mr. L'Allier asked Mr. Jensen if there would be any problem with snow removal on the numerous cul -de -sacs. Mr. Jensen replied that it was their intent that the manager remove the snow on the cul -de -sacs. Perhaps they might need some special snow equip- ment to handle this. Mr. Jaworski asked if they didn't feel that a variance allowing the units to be only 12' apart would create a fire hazard. Mr. Summers answered that trailer fires are not too frequent; that he never considered them to be particularly inflammable with an outside metal sheathing; that he didn't feel that their interiors would be affected by closeness to another burning unit. Mr. Bohjanen asked that since they mentioned they would be willing to go along with no school age children in Phase 1, if they would be willing to hold down the percentage of school age children in Phase 2 if the 1971 Legislature should fail to make an adjustment in the tax situation. Mr. Summers stated that they could not now bind themselves on this point for the rest of the development. It was expected that a certain portion of any mobile home park would be built for those who don't care to be around children- - in this case it is being built first. In view of the economic feasibility, they didn't care to commit themselves for the other phases. He mentioned that the park plan does not accomodate double wides, only the standard widths; this in itself would cut out one area of school -age children. There ensued a discussion on the legality of disc°iminating against children such as is done in many apartments and other trailer parks, action taken by the Human Rights Commission, leases and such. Mr. Rosengren asked if they had determined the approximate finished valuation of the park. Mr. Jensen stated that it would cost some $2,500 to $3,000 for site preparation per unit. Mr. Summers offered some statistics from a study done in Hastings, Minnesota prepared by Midwest Planning, Inc. in contract with the municipality on a 325 unit court; the land is valued at $130,000. This study showed that the total of State and local taxes for the school district revenue met their needs when the population of children reached .47 children per unit. This need was met with single- family dwellings when the figure reached 1.3 children per unit. Mobile homes cost for the average $8,500 and single family homes at $21,580. These figures supported Mr. Summers' previous remarks. Mr. L'Allier asked the Clerk to read the letter received from Mr. Hankerson showing the total number of children in school from mobile home courts is 284 for 1969 -70. 122 This letter also gave figures showing the differential in taxes received for each pupil from trailers and homes. Mr. Hankerson felt that a moratorium on new trailer courts would be appropriate at this time. Mr. Summers noted that these figures did not tell the whole story since the under- lying real estate for each court contributed taxes also. He presented copies of a study done in Anoka - Hennepin Independent School District No. 11 showing that the tax received for each pupil from a mobile home court is $235.00, which did not entirely cover the need after real estate taxes were deducted. Mayor L'Allier asked Attorney Locher when do we pass from reasonable to unreasonable on the limiting of children; would the courts uphold such a restriction. Mr. Locher stated that a contractural agreement would have to be made between the Village and the mobile home court owner. He couldn't say whether such an agreement would be legal until a Supreme Court decision was made on a similar case. He had been unable to find an Attorney General's opinion on this either. There was more discussion on this with Mr. Summers stating that a lease agreement with the trailer owners would contain a clause stating that they would have to move when a child reaches school age. Mr. Summers also stated that they would prefer to accept anyone in the court, but will agree to the school -age limitation. Mr. Bill Houle thought a feasibility study of the economics should be made. He also inquired whether the Pollution Control Agency bad given approval yet. Mr. Summers stated that the State refuses to process their application until they have the approval of the Village. However, he knew of other mobile home parks using the Imhoff tank system and sees no reason why they shouldn't get approval. Mr. Gotwald was asked for his opinion on the sewage disposal. Mr. Gotwald stated, that it was impossible to know what the PCA will do; he didn't feel that this project would have to go to the Metro Sewer Board, mentioning that that body had just turned down similar court proposals in Washington County and Forest Lake. This was disputed by Mr. Summers who stated that a referral committee of the Metro Council had voted to suspend the permits. Mr. Summers stated that they didn't have to make a positive application to the Metro Council today. Mr. Gotwald had checked the pre- liminary sewage plan for the proposal and could see no problem in the development as long as they were willing to go to the East to hook up with future municipal sewer. It was necessary to have such a private system in the park now. Mr. Gotwald stated that if the petitioner can get away with the Imhoff tank, he could see no problem in hooking up the proposed court to our lines in the future. Also, the private water system is no problem. It can be designed for municipal hookup if desired. However, Mr. Gotwald questioned a problem of runoff for a 500 plus development. He felt that the developer should check with the Highway Department to see if a large concrete culvert under I -35W would be needed to take care of the runoff created by heavy rains. 1 Mr. Gotwald stated that the streets in the park would be a private system, commenting that the project will still look like a trailer park regardless of the new concept plans. He noted that in a no- school age children project, it is likely that both people in each trailer will be working and that the amount of traffic in the cul -de -sacs and interior streets may be higher than expected. Mr. Gotwald felt that the proposed 74th Street should extend out to Sunset to help alleviate the traffic congestion. He felt that even in Phase 1, the road should be extended to 74th St. and out past the Youth Center. Mr. Rosengren asked if the developer had discussed the outlet on 74th; they don't know if easements can be gotten to the West but they have to the East. Mr. Gotwald also noted that they have provided for a service road along the III freeway. Mr. Gotwald asked what the dimensions of the back lots on the 12 -unit modules were and was told that they were the same as on the regular 8 unit modules, down to 62' by 108'. Mr. Gotwald asked if the trailers would be limited to 14' by 68' size and was told that this was the largest size allowed; they felt that the 14' by 65' was the most common being sold. Mr. Gotwald asked if many various sizes would be allowed, this causing problems for the park and the municipality. Mr. Jensen stated that they had designed out the double wides which they don't feel belong in a park like this; they felt that most of the trailers would be 14' by 60' or 65'. They would have room on some of the lots for trailers with tip -out living rooms. Mr. Gotwald summed up that it seemed feasible to serve this area with utilities owned by the private owner. He felt that the only problem was with the drainage -- that a pipe might be needed under the freeway. However, this was no problem with just Phase 1, but the entire development, but they should have an answer now. He noted that before a permit was issued for construction, we would need a letter of approval on the internal utilities from the State. Mr. Summers stated that a State permit was necessary. Mr. L'Allier, in recapping these statements by Mr. Gotwald, asked then if the Imhoff tank system was adequate and would not create any problems for the Village. Mr. Gotwald stated that this system must be approved by the PCA and would have to be designed to fit the project similar to the designing work for Chamonix. He still wondered if they wouldn't have to go to the Metro Sewer Board. In other words, besides Village approval, they still need other approvals. He noted that most trailer courts in the Cities use this method. Mr. Jaworski inquired what effect 500 trailers would do to our capacity allotted in the future sewer. Mr. Gotwald replied that it would be virtually none since the sewer system was designed for the ultimate level of use for all the acreage it drains. Mr. L'Allier asked Mr. Gotwald if he were familiar with the request of our representative on the Metro Council to ascertain cost estimates to run the planned sewer line on Hwy. 61 down Hwy. 8 instead? He didn't know, but Mr. Summers stated that it seems hey wish to serve some planned development north of Forest Lake and would bypass Hugo, Oneka and Forest Lake Township on the planned line. Mr. Gotwald stated that as Forest Lake and Hugo have made formal requests for capacity in that line, that they wouldn't be bypassed; this was just a smokescreen. He mentioned that he had stated at the P&Z hearing that it would be a problem for the developer to try to connect with NSSSD Mr. L'Allier asked if the applicant had any expected rate of development. Mr. Summers stated no, that this Phase 1 was of small size, that if it goes well they will probably apply for Phase 2 in a minimum of 1 year after they start construction on Phase 1. Mr. Summers stated that they don't intend to run a sales office. Mr. L'Allier asked Mr. Locher if they could require them to allow only new units. Mr. Locher stated that by contract we could. Mr. Rosengren noted that taxwise this was the best idea because of the depreciation factor. Mr. Bohjanen wondered if this wouldn't force the owner to put in a sales office, but was told not necessarily since he would require the trailer tag to be shown. Mr. Jaworski asked if the developer had considered what effect the airport would have and was told that they were not in the restricted zone, that there was no regulation on land use in their area, that housing was required for an industrial area. Mr. Jaworski felt that they will still get noise, that he didn't want to see another South Minneapolis created and that they should wait for the airport decision: This completed the presentation by the Menkveld group. There were no comments either in favor of or,against the proposal from the audience. Mr. L'Allier stated that he still had questions regarding tax. He read from a resolution offered by the League of Minnesota Municipalities asking that the 1959 tax law be amended so that trailers are taxed similarly with other housing and in the same manner if they are used as permanent housing. He felt if the Council proceeded with this court, this would be something to think about. Also, Mr. L'Allier felt that it was reasonable to ask for an Attorney General's opinion on the limitation of children or excluding a number of children in a mobile home park or a portion thereof. Mr. Menkveld commented that he had called the Attorney General's office on this and was told that they have no opinion on record. Mr. Locher stated that we would be asking for an opinion. Mr. Rosengren asked if they had made any provision for storm protection such as a basement shelter. Mr. Menkveld replied that they had not planned any for this park, but felt that a basement could be put under the central building. He also noted that a wash house was not required since all new trailers have their own laundry facilities. He felt that they would require that all large trailers be anchored at each corner. They had planned on a house for the manager and could put a basement under this on the office end for a shelter. Mr. Cardinal commented that it would have to be a pretty large basement to accommodate all those people and that each phase would require its own shelter facilities. There was discussion on the possibility of the owner, Menkveld, actually owning the trailers and having them permanently attached, so that they could be taxes like homes; this is now prohibited by our ordinance. Mr. Gotwald commented this would be somewhat like what Pemtom is doing, but that the construction of the trailers would not meet our building code. Mr. Jensen noted that it could be done movilla style with the running gear left on. Mr. Summers noted that they would want to prevent all the trailers ageing at once; that if they were placed on basements in ten years they would have a slum. Mr. Menkveld stated that any trailer replacing one moving out would have to be no more than 2 years old. Following some general discussion, Mr. Pete Scherer stated that since the residents of Lino Lakes have generally been opposed to trailer parks in general, he would like to see this proposal put to a referendum vote. He thought that if the court were allowed, there would be lots of opposition from residents. Another point brought out was that mobile homes depreciate while homes appreciate and that a trailer will not exceed its new value. Mr. L'Allier noted that the following questions have not been answered: 1) the sewer, but we have been advised that it must go through proper channels. 2) the legality of restricting the number of children either by the Village or by the developer by a contract and 3) the possibility of requiring all new units within the park. After discussion and being asked for a motion on action on the developer's request, Mr. Jaworski moved that the hearing be continued until further notice. Seconded by Mr. Cardinal. 1 1 1 1 1 1 Crystal Ahlman complained that it was unfair to postpone the decision on such weak excuses as waiting to see if it is legal to exclude children. Mayor L'Allier stated that a decision could be made tonight but that it might be a decision to deny the court and would not be fair to the developer if we did not get all the facts first on the new questions brought up. Vote was taken on the motion and it carried unanimously. Mr. Jaworski then moved that the Attorney be directed to contact the Attorney General's Office to receive an opinion on the following: 1) the restriction of children, 2) the age of trailer homes and 3) whether a whole trailer park could be designated as having no children or what percentage thereof could be so designated. Seconded by Mr. Cardinal. Carried unanimously. Mr. L'Allier noted that the Attorney reminded that notices of the next hearing will be sent out to the affected property owners but will not be published. Mr. Cardinal moved to close the hearing for Mr. Menkveld at 10:12 p.m. Seconded by Mr. Bohjanen. Carried unanimously. Mr. Jaworski presented Joe Davis who asked permission for the Lion's Club to use Sunrise Park on May 23rd for a ball tournament with other Lion's clubs; they have insurance and would like to sell beer and light lunches. After discussion of their insurance and Lion's Club rules, Mr. Bohjanen moved to authorize the Lion's Club to sell tickets for a baseball tournament at Sunrise Park on May 23rd and to give away beer for donations to the Club; and that the beer license be allowed. Seconded by Mr. Cardinal. Carried unanimously. Mr. Bohjanen presented Jerry Hajney of the VFW Post who wished to discuss the possi- bility of having bingo again. He stated that they planned to seal the adjoining door between the two sides of the building and that they were putting another door into the hall, for two separate entrances. Mr. Locher thought this was all right providing they pull the liquor licensed premised down to the one section only. Mr. Hajney was asked to provide drawings of the floor plan and have the surveyor split the land for the liquor license. Mr. L'Allier announced that a trauma class was being presented on June 4, 5 and 6th at Mercy Hospital for policemen. This is an advanced Red Cross course and would cost $10 apiece for the men. It would be necessary to reimburse the men for two days of work lost. It was not yet definite how many of the men could attend. Mr. L'Allier moved to authorize the four policemen to attend the trauma classes and authorize the payment of $10 apiece for the course as well as to reimburse their lost salaries. Seconded by Mr. Jaworski. Carried unanimously. A special joint meeting between the Council and the Municipal Building Committee to review the building specifications with the Engineer was tentatively set for Thursday evening at 8:00 p.m. (May 14). The Clerk was asked to call the Civil Defense Auxiliary to see if they could hold their regular meeting elsewhere. Mr. Gotwald recommended Council acceptance of a proposal by Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. to place buried cable in Linda and Laurene Streets. Mr. Cardinal moved to accept this request by Bell Telephone. Seconded by Mr. Jaworski. Carried unanimously. Another request for buried cable was received but had not been studied. Mr. L'Allier asked Mr. Gotwald if he felt it was advisable to request an opinion on Mr. Menkveld's proposal from the PCA. Mr. Gotwald stated that before we have always referred these matters to the State first. Mr. L'Allier felt that the PCA would want to review all such development. 1 Mr. Gotwald stated that if the Council should okay the first 100 trailer sites, then we should ask that this first group be completely constructed before considering another phase. Also, we should request a very elaborate landscape plan. Mr. Bohjanen felt that 3 or 4 smaller shade trees might be better than 1 larger one. Mr. Gotwald commented that we should require 3 large ones as nowadays it is easy to move trees of that size. He also commented that regardless of the street plan, it will still look like a trailer park and to be distinctive it must be set off by the landscaping plan. More items were discussed. It was the general feeling that the Menkveld group would not operate the park. Mr. Locher noted that if the special use permit were not limited to an individual, it would go with the land. Mr. Locher stated that if the entire parcel were rezoned to commercial and a special use permit for a trailer park were granted for Phase 1, this would not bind the rest of the land for trailers since not having granted a special use permit for the remainder makes the question moot and if they proceed as planned, there will be an entire new Council which can't be bound. Mr. Jaworski noted that an article in today's paper on the burning ban stated that by next spring no burning would be allowed by any municipalities in the 7 county area. There was discussion on this. The Clerk was instructed to get the date of the Civil Defense auction from Mr. Cape. Mr. Cardinal moved to pay the bills as audited. Seconded by Mr. Jaworski. Carried unanimously. Mr. Jaworski moved to adjourn at 10 :39 p.m. Seconded by Mr. Rosengren. Aye BILLS: May 11, 1970 3003 Centennial State Bank 3004 Commissioner of Taxation 3005 State Treasurer PERA 3006 Babcock, Locher, Neilson & Mannella 3007 Progressive Design Associates 3008 Bruce Fleming 3009 Forest Lake Times 3010 Anoka County Union & Shopper 3011 Bill Munt Equipment Serv. 3012 Fridley Office Supply Co. 3013 Police Press, Inc. 3014 Marvin B. Myhre 3015 Jif f i -Print 3016 Robert Nelson 1 U.S. deductions from April payroll 117.30 Minn. deductions from April payroll 35.10 April payroll deductions 91.32 April Village contributions 144.43 Legal services through April 30th 159.60 Planning consultant services for April 240.00 Animal control for April 138.00 Publishing of Plat hearing (U.S. Lakes), 53.10 Ord. #21C and Ord. #32A Printing of Information Guide 50.00 Office supplies - stencils and copy paper 12.00 Office supplies- mimeograph paper, etc. 30.60 Police office supplies 10.3 Fog lights for squad car 27.69 Printing of insurance claim forms 16.50 1,000 envelopes (w /letterhead) 21.25 37.75 Bounty on 9 pairs gopher feet 2.25 BILLS: May 11, 1970 (Cont'd) 3017 North Central Public Serv. 11 11 3018 Northern States Power Co. ► n n V 3019 North Star Oil Corp. rr u Ir 11 3020 Northway Here & Auto Access. n n 3021 Equipment Refinishing Serv. 3022 Hugo Motor Service 3023 Capitol City Welding Supply 3024 Grand Ave. Motor Co. 3025 fdlephiLaTuff_ PAYROLL: May, 1970 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 Ralph M. La'Allier William I. Bohjanen Andrew J. Cardinal Henry H. Rosengren Ronald J. Jaworski June L. Emerton Edna L. Sarner Marvin B. Myhre Virgil F. Lundberg Richard S. Hauer William G. Anderson Lena Billik Chancy E. LeVesseur Imogene Secretan Gunder B. Gunderson Roy H. Baeklin Robert A. Lundgren John R. Juleen Clifford A. Hagen Virgil M. Beecher Gas for Village Hall $ 39.44 Gas for Lino Park 14.97 Service for Hall 21.81 Service for Parks 16.95 Street lights 90.30 Motor fuels for Police 15.95 Motor fuels for Parks 3.35 Motor fuels for Roads 39.00 Tools for office 5.37 Supplies for shop 43.35 Steam cleaning & sandblasting of dump trk 77.90 2 motor belts 7.74 Tank of acetylene for shop 5.50 Parts for truck Inv. #48651 10.95 Gagne bic .signs: "for car door "24.10 $ 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 300.00 200.00 225.00 200.00 100.00 100.00 50.00 25.00 61.10 37.80 343.00 318.60 86.00 126.00 55.35 Minutes approved at the meeting of May 25, 1970( /L Clerk - Treasurer The special meeting of the Lino Lakes Village Council set for May 14, 1970, to review the building specifications, was called to order at 9:39 p.m. by Mayor L'Allier after an hour's informal discussion. All Council members were present as were Robert Raymond, John McLean and Glenn Rehbein of the Municipal Building Committee and Mr. George Gotwald to make the presentation. Mr. Cardinal moved to authorize Mr. Gotwald, Engineer, to immediately revise the building specifications, as suggested in the earlier discussion, and to contact the Attorney on the publication and letting of the bids for the building. Seconded by Mr. Rosengren. Carried unanimously. It was decided that there would be a $25.00 fee charged for each copy of the revised bidding specifications.