HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 1998/05/11Page 1
May 11, 1998
Mounds View City Council
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
pppROVEU
Regular Meeting
May 11, 1998
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Hwy. 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER:
The Mounds View City Council was called to order by Mayor McCarty at 7:00 p.m. on May 11, 1998.
2. ROLL CALL:
MEMBERS PRESENT : Mayor McCarty, Council members Koopmeiners, Gunn,
Quick and Stigney
ALSO PRESENT: Chuck Whiting, Clerk Administrator
Jim Ericson, Planning Associate
Rick Jopke, Community Development Director
Cari Schmidt, Assistant to the City Administrator
Michael Ulrich, Public Works Director
Bob Long, City Attorney
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
A. Regulaz Meeting of Apri127, 1998:
MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Koopmeiners to approve the Minutes of the Apri127, 1998 City Council
Meeting as presented in writing.
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
4. SPECIAL ORDER OF B USINESS:
A. Resolution No. 5235 of Appreciation for Firefighter Eric R. Emerson.
Page 2
May 11, 1998
Mounds View City Council
Mayor McCarty noted that Mr. Emerson was unable to be present to accept this award and therefore this
item would be delayed to another time.
S. CONSENT AGENDA:
MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Quick to approve the Consent Agenda as presented.
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
6. RESIDENTS REQUESTS AND COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR:
Mayor McCarty explained that this is the time for residents to address the council with concerns on items
that are not on the Agenda. There were no questions or comments from the public.
7. COUNCIL BUSINESS:
A. Second Reading and Consideration of Ordinance No. 607, an Ordinance Amending Chapter 1008
of the Municipal Code entitled "Signs and Billboards".
Mayor McCarty noted that the public hearing for this item was held on Apri127, 1998.
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to approve the second reading and adoption of Ordinance No.
607, an Ordinance Amending Chapter 1008 of the Municipal Code entitled "Signs and Billboards" and to
waive the reading.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Council member Gunn: aye
Council member Koopmeiners: aye
Council member Stigney aye
Council member Quick aye
Mayor McCarty nay
Mayor McCarty stated he maintains his position that this Ordinance is unnecessary.
Motion Carries - (4 - 1 )
Council member Stigney asked that Item 5 (D) of the Consent Agenda be read for public record. Mr.
Whiting explained that Item 5(D) sets a Public Hearing for 7:05 p.m., May 26, 1997 for the Introduction
(First Reading) of Ordinance No. 617, an Ordinance Amending Title 1100, Chapters 1114 and 1115 of the
Municipal Zoning Code Relating to Permitted Uses within the B-3, Business Commercial, and B-4,
Regional Business Zoning Districts.
•
Page 3
May 11, 1998
Mounds View City Council
B. Second Reading and Consideration of Ordinance N. 615, an Ordinance Vacating a Drainage and
Utility Easement over and across Parts of Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, North Star Industrial Park Second
Addition.
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to approve the second reading and adoption of Ordinance No.
615, an Ordinance Vacating a Drainage and Utility Easement over and across Parts of Lots 2 and 3, Block
1, North Star Industrial Park 2nd Addition, and to waive the reading.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Council member Stigney aye
Council member Koopmeiners aye
Council member Gunn aye
Council member Quick aye
Mayor McCarty aye
Motion Carries (5-0)
C. Consideration of Resolution No. 5236, a Resolution Approving a Development Review to allow
for the Expansion of the Mermaid Entertainment Center.
Mr. Ericson, Planning Associate, noted that a copy of the site plan was on display showing the proposed
expansion of the Mermaid Entertainment Center.
Mr. Daniel Hall, representing the Mermaid, has requested a development review to allow for the expansion
of their facility by adding eight bowling lanes. The addition would consist of approximately 7,800 square
feet. This was approved by the Planning Commission at the May 6, 1998 meeting. He noted that the
parking issues which were discussed at the Planning Commission meeting have all been resolved. The site
is currently zoned B-3 which at this point does not allow for Bowling Alleys. They are allowed B-4
zoning districts. This issue was looked at in the 1970's when Bowling Alleys were added, however a Code
Amendment was never accomplished. Therefore, a Public Hearing has been scheduled for May 27th to
accomplish this.
The setbacks do not quite meet code requirements, but they are consistent with what is there now, therefore
staff is not proposing that the Mermaid re-construct their entire lot at this time. The only portion of the
parking lot that they plan to change will be the North parking lot.
Resolution No. 5236 will approve the development review requested by the applicant with necessary
stipulations.
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Gunn to Approve Resolution No. 5236, a Resolution Approving a
Development Review to allow for the Expansion of the Mermaid Entertainment Center.
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
•
Page 4
May 11, 1998
Mounds View City Council
D. Public Hearing and Second Reading of Municipal Code Changes Allowing a Festival in the Park
Beer Garden:
Ms. Cari Schmidt explained that the Festival Committee has expressed an interest in having a beer garden
as part of the Festival in the Park Celebration. In order to allow for this, changes will need to be made to
the city code. Ms. Schmidt briefly discussed the two changes.
Mayor McCarty opened the Public Hearing at 7:10 p.m. There were no questions or comments in regard
to this item, and Mayor McCarty closed the Public Hearing at 7:11 p.m.
MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Gunn to approve the second reading and the adoption Municipal Code
Section 503.03, Subd. 4, and the changes to the Municipal Code Section 909.07, Subd. 11, and to waive
the readings.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Council member Koopmeiners aye
Council member Gunn aye
Council member Quick aye
Council member Stigney aye
Mayor McCarty aye
Motion Carried (5 - 0)
E. Update on discussing MnDOT concerning access to the proposed Theater Site.
Mayor McCarty explained that he was directed by the City Council at the last meeting to work with city
staff in trying to clarify the city's position with MnDOT and what they will require in terms of access to the
theater site. Applications previous to Apri121 st included no outlets onto County Road H-2 or Long Lake
Road. A clarification from MnDOT informed the city that this was not what they intended to state. They
would require an opening on secondary roads in the City of Mounds View.
Mayor McCarty presented a schematic of the collection streets in the City of Mounds View. MnDOT
informed him that former county roads are arterial collector roads from Highway 10. It is their rules that
a local rule of government compliments their state system with a local system as well. They have indicated
that, regardless of any other misunderstandings, the city will be required to give at least one cut on these
roads. At a work session on May 5th, the Council decided that if this were the requirements, they would
seek an equal distribution to both County Road H-2 and Long Lake Road. After much discussion
however, it was felt that the connection to Long Lake Road should be discounted, as there were concerns
about congestion at that intersection and the unknowns about crossing wetland properties.
The offer to the City of Mounds View at this time to further and complete this project, is afull-movement
intersection on Highway 10 with a median break, a break on County Road H-2 about mid-way between
Long Lake Road and Highway 10 that would bring the driveway out facing two homes that are owned by
the property owner at this time. There will be no loss of buildings under this plan, and there is the
possibility in the future that we may be able to further enhance access to the property by opening right-
Page 5
May 11, 1998
Mounds View City Council
turn-in/right-turn-out access down close to Donatelles. These changes are the requirements of MnDOT
and are recommended by Mayor McCarty to the City Council for approval.
Mayor McCarty took this opportunity to address numerous concerns which had been addressed by
residents for council's consideration during the public hearing process on this project.
Mr. Whiting noted that during the afternoon, he received a petition containing approximately 900
signatures requesting a referendum initiative in regard to this proposed development.
Mayor McCarty explained that this meeting was not a Public Hearing on the project. At the last regular
Council meeting, it was recommended that action be delayed on the Resolutions approving the project with
the proposed property access configurations. The resolutions were approved by the Council, however,
and the Public Hearings were not continued. The project has essentially be approved with transportation
configurations that MnDOT has since denied.
Council member Stigney stated he, as well as many of the residents, were under the understanding that this
was to be a continuation of the Public Hearing.
Mayor McCarty noted that this does not prevent any resident from providing input.
Mr. Whiting explained that due to time requirements, the Public Hearing could not be continued. In regard
to the impacts of the petition, he asked Mr. Long to provide information.
Mr. Long explained that under the City Charter, Chapter 5, Section 5.03, there is a process that the City
Clerk must go through to determine the sufficiency of the petition. This must be completed within 10
days with a written response. Additionally, the attorney must determine whether or not the form of the
questions is sufficient to put into an initiative form under state law.
Mr. Whiting explained that he will take necessary administrative action and that he will be able to respond
on this issue at the next regular council meeting. A formal response, however, will be required within a 10
day period, which will occur prior to the May 26th Council meeting.
Mr. Long, City Attorney, explained that if it is the wish of the Council members to accept the
transportation configurations as approved by MnDOT, the Council would need to consider a motion to
reconsider Resolution 5226, which was adopted at the last council meeting. If it prevails, the council could
then amend the resolution to reflect the recommended changes.
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to reconsider the action on Resolution No. 5226.
Council member Stigney stated he would like to hear what the residents have to say in regard to this matter.
Mayor McCarty explained that the Council would allow comments while the issue is being discussed.
VOTE: 4 ayes 1 nay (Stigney) Motion Carried
Mr. Long explained that the council could consider Resolution No. 5226, could be adopted as it is written
with one amendment as follows:
Page 6
May 11, 1998
Mounds View City Council
"NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council does hereby approve a PUD
development stage plan dated 3/6/98 AND AS AMENDED S/II/98, for the O'Neil property, 2430
Highway 10, and as described .... "
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to approve Resolution No. 5226, Approving a PUD
Development Stage Plan, for Commercial Uses on the O'Neil Property, 2430 Highway 10, AS
AMENDED.
Mr. Jopke, Community Development Director, presented a copy of the revision that has been approved by
the MN Department of Transportation and outlined the changes which have occurred. The major change is
the public street which runs through the middle of the property, between the theater and the parking area.
This is a 50-foot right-of--way with a 30 foot street, widened at the intersection of Highway 10 to
accommodate the turn lanes. This road will cut through the 30 foot wide buffer area onto County Road
H-2. In order to accommodate the roadway, there have been some minor shifts in the office buildings to
the East. Mr. Jopke provided information in regard to setbacks, parking spaces, etc.
Mr. Jopke noted that he had asked the City Consultant who has previously performed traffic studies on the
project to review the changes and to advise as to the impact on surrounding streets. Mr. Jopke provided a
summary of their fmdings.
• Council member Stigney asked who will be responsible for handling any traffic problems which may result
on County Road H-2.
Mayor McCarty indicated that on-site issues will be handled by the developer. Wherever a traffic
problem exists in a public right-of--way, the city is duty-bound to respond.
Council member Stigney stated he would like to include a stipulation in the PUD that it will be the
developer's responsibility for handling traffic control problems in and out of his site.
MOTION by Stigney that a stipulation be added in the PUD that it will be the developer's responsibility to
handle traffic control problems in and out of the development site.
MOTION FAILS FOR LACK OF SECOND.
Council member Quick stated he would like to see a sidewalk added on the westerly side of the new
Edgewood between the theater and County Road H-2 to accommodate pedestrian traffic.
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to amend the main motion to add a sidewalk on the Westerly
side of the new Edgewood between the theater and County Road H-2 to accommodate pedestrian traffic.
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Council member Stigney stated the signalized intersection will be of considerable benefit to the theater
project and city staff was directed to assist the developer in requesting the signalized intersection. It is his
opinion that the city has gone well beyond their responsibilities. The fmal configurations indicate a
significant change in the Municipal center's parking lot, green space, etc. Additionally, it was originally
thought that MnDOT would be paying for the traffic signals; now MnDOT will not be paying for any
Page 7
May 11, 1998
Mounds View City Council
major portion of the signals or the re-alignment of Edgewood. The city will be responsible for a portion of
the costs. He is opposed to this. The residents have strongly argued against access from the site to
County Road H-2 and to Long Lake Road. The residents make up Mounds View and he believes the
Council should consider their concerns.
Julie Olson, 2663 Lake Court Circle, stated in a Resolution dated June 12, 1996, in regazd to County Road
H-2 and a collector street given back to the city, the resolution states that the roadway segment has been
determined to serve a local function only. She also wished to know who will be paying for the roadway
through the development and what the approximate cost is.
Mr. Smith of Anthony Properties stated the road from Highway 10 to County Road H-2 will be a project
cost paid for by the developer.
Mayor McCarty stated, in response to the June 12, 1996 resolution, he is not certain that it was the intent of
the council to expect that. '
Mayor McCarty requested a brief recess of the meeting.
The Council Meeting was re-convened at 8:10 p.m.
. Julie Olson noted that there are three phases to the development process and the city is in the second stage.
She asked what happens differently in the final plan as far a alterations and changes.
Mr. Jopke explained that the third stage is the fmal plan approval. These plans will be the ones submitted
for city building permits, etc.
Mayor McCarty explained that the resolution Ms. Olson referred to earlier, was relative to the turn back
process from Ramsey County and only intended to convey that the road will become a local road as
opposed to a county road. The designation and use of the road would remain as a collector road. It is not
a residential street.
Cliff Ash, 2664 Lake Court Drive, stated he attended the Council work session and feels the project is a
"done deal". He wondered where the funds would come from to fund the development.
Mayor McCarty noted that the funds are from the captured increments of commercial and industrial
development. These are the excess funds which are allowed to be used for certain purposes under state
law. The funds will not come out of the general property tax fund; this is a separate fund.
Daniel Rosen, 1200 MN World Trade Center, St. Paul, MN, stated he is an attorney, present on behalf of a
sponsoring committee of a Petition for an Initiative. He noted that the 898 registered voters who signed the
petition, make up close to 17% of the registered voters who voted in the last general election in the City of
Mounds View. Those who signed the petition are asking the Council to defer to the true democratic
process. In 120 days there will be the issue on the ballot and it will be voted on by the residents in the City
of Mounds View. Residents were told up until four days ago that there would be no outlet onto their
street. Now changes have been made and the council is being asked to vote on the change, which will
affect many residents. He believes this is a 100% sufficient petition without any legal input from council.
He asked that the council defer action on this until the people of Mounds View can speak on this issue.
• Page 8
May 11, 1998
Mounds View City Council
Ruth Berke, 2683 Lake Court Circle, provided excerpts from the City Newsletters in regard to the
commitments to residents on improving property values in the City of Mounds View. She wondered what
the theater project will do to the property values around the site. The council has lost the trust and respect
of the community and she asked that the Council reconsider their votes and end the battle.
Mayor McCarty noted that property rights extend to all -whether residential, commercial or industrial.
There have been many delays, but he noted that a great number of the delays have been at the request of
the residents for more time to look at other alternatives or different ways of doing the project. Sooner or
later that property will be developed and the right of that property owner to access County Road H-2,
Highway 10 or Long Lake Road is the same as a resident's right to access those roads.
Mike Welch, on Irondale Road, stated he feels betrayed by the City Council. He is bothered that there is
suddenly a "safety" issue which never was an issue before. He wondered if the safety of those coming
from outside Mounds View is more important than those residents of Mounds View. When Highway 10
is congested, people will try to fmd the easiest route and he fears that someone will be fatally injured.
Jerry Linke, 2319 Knoll Drive, stated that County Road H-2 is a collector street - it was made that way.
He stated he feels it would be beneficial to connect the proposed sidewalk to Long Lake Road. He noted
that his concern is losing the soccer field in front of City Hall. He stated he believes in this development
and thinks it is a benefit as a whole.
Dave Nord, 2522 Ridge Lane, stated assuming an additiona150 cars will be using County Road H-2 per
hour during peak hours, it will defmitely have an impact on the traffic in the area. He asked that the
Council please re-consider and not endanger the children in the area by encouraging this development.
Cyndi Camarillo, 5299 Greenfield Avenue, stated her husband is a firefighter in Mounds View and he must
respond to calls within a short period of time. The increased traffic will defmitely impact them as well as
the increased dust and exhaust. There are too many variables and the one-day traffic study do not
accurately depict the impact this will have on the residents in the area.
Pete Miller, 2462 County Road H-2, stated he moved to Mounds View approximately 1-1/2 years ago. He
was never approached by the developer, but he was aware of the proposed development. At that time he
was not concerned as he was told that the access to the site would be off Highway 10. The increased
traffic on County Road H-2 will force him to move.
Linda Buckardt, 2658 Lake Court Drive, stated she would have appreciated a notice of last week's meeting.
Bill Kendall, 5270 Edgewood Drive, stated residents have a reason to be angry with the Council. He asked
if the council has really thought this through well.
Al Zdon, 5064 Irondale Road, stated he is past resident of Hibbing, MN. He does not believe the Hibbing
City Council would have made one commitment to the residents and then changed their mind or changed
major portions of the plans only four days prior to the vote.
Page 9
May 11, 1998
Mounds View City Council
Dan Johnson, 7359 Park View Terrace, noted that within one block of the theater project, there are deaf
and blind residents. With the steady increase in traffic on County Road H-2, he has concerns in the safety
of these children and asked the Council to consider this when voting on this issue.
Al Gregerson, 7366 Park View Terrace, asked where the cars exiting onto H-2 will go. Also, there will
also be an increase in pedestrian traffic. If the stop sign remains at County Road H-2 and Long Lake and
there are 50 cars turning onto Highway 10, it will cause a backup. He believes there will be a greater
traffic impact than what is predicted.
Tracy Swig, 5292 Edgewood Drive, stated she would like to invite the mayor to come to her home from
2:00 to 4:30 p.m. and see the number of students walking along Edgewood. She believes these are safety
concerns that the Council needs to look at.
Kelly Rosenthal, 2425 Ridge Lane, stated prior to Thursday's meeting, the residents on her street were not
informed of the meetings on this development. She stated she cannot understand how the traffic consultant
estimated an additiona150 cars per hour on County Road H-2.
Mr. Jopke explained that the traffic engineer predicted that the vast majority of the patrons will use the
Highway 10 entrance. The peak hours are 8:30 to 9:30 p.m.
Mayor McCarty noted that residents within a designated distance of the proposed development are notified
in writing of the Public Hearings in regard to the project. Additionally, the Public Hearings are published
in the local newspapers.
Council member Stigney stated that he has taken the entire community into consideration in his stand on
this issue. Additionally, he plans to listen to the residents, as he promised. The cost of the re-alignment of
Edgewood should be covered by the developer. He would like the Council to consider a 50/50 split on the
costs between the city and the developer.
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Gunn to Amend the motion to state that 50% of the cost of the re-alignment
of Edgewood and the signalized intersection and associated costs be paid for by the developer.
VOTE: 2 ayes 3 nays (McCarty/Koopmeiners/Quick) Motion Fails
MOTION by Stigney to table any action on Resolution No. 5226 until after the pending petition is
resolved. MOTION FAILS FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
VOTE ON AMENDED RESOLUTION NO. 5226:
4 ayes 1 nay (Stigney) Motion Carried
Mayor McCarty recessed the meeting.
The meeting was reconvened at 9:25 p.m.
•
Page 10
May 11, 1998
Mounds View City Council
F. Consideration of Resolution NO. 5237, Denying a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Low
Density and High Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial for Properties Located at 2625
Highway 10 and 7715-7761 Eastwood Road.
Mayor McCarty noted that this resolution will clarify and strengthen the resolution which he presented at
the last Council meeting.
MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Koopmeiners to approve Resolution N0.5237, Denying a Comprehensive
Plan Amendment from Low Density and High Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial for
Properties Located at 2625 Highway 10 and 7715-7761 Eastwood Road.
VOTE: 4 ayes 1 nay (Quick) Motion Carried
G. Consideration of Resolution No. 5238, Denying Ordinance No. 614, An Ordinance Approving the
Re-zoning of Properties Located at 2625 Highway 10 and 7715-7761 Eastwood Road from R-3,
Medium Density Residential and R-1, Single Family Residential, to B-2, Limited Business District.
Mayor McCarty noted that this Resolution will clarify the action of the last council meeting in regard to the
Wallgreen's proposal.
• MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Gunn to approve Resolution No. 5238, Denying Ordinance No. 614,
An Ordinance Approving the Re-zoning of Properties Located at 2625 Highway 10 and 7715-7761
Eastwood Road from R-3, Medium Density Residential and R-1, Single Family Residential, to B-2,
Limited Business District.
VOTE: 4 ayes 1 nay (Quick) Motion Carried
H. Consideration of Community Center HVAC Change Order.
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to approve the HVAC Change Order as presented for the
Community Center.
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
8. REPORTS:
Council member Gunn: no report.
Council member Quick: no report.
Council member Stigney: no report.
Council member Koopmeiners: no report.
Mayor McCarty: Mayor McCarty informed the community that Dick Meyers, former City Attorney,
passed away; he extended prayers and thoughts to his wife and family. Mayor McCarty extended the
community's best wishes, condolences and prayers to the family of Melissa Peterson, 18 years old, who
Page 11
May 11, 1998
Mounds View City Council
died suddenly on Friday. Thoughts and prayers are extended to the family of Gil Groberg who passed
away last week. Gil was along-time resident of Mounds View and an active Lion's Club member.
City Administrator: No report.
City Attorney: No report.
9. NEXT COUNCIL WORK SESSION: June 1.1998 - 6:00 p.m.
NEXT COUNCIL MEETING: May 26. 1998 - 7.•00 p.m.
11. ADJOURNMENT.•
MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Stigney to adjourn the meeting at 9:30 p.m.
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Respectfully submitted,
~~ ~, ~ ~d~
• Tamara D. Saeflce
Recording Secretary
f
~~~MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL MEETING
J/ .
Please sign
NAME
~ G,
C~~
'~_
~~~
______
~~~
-~
-~~
. n
~" ~ ~ hn~
.. ~~~- -
ADDRESS
S Z Z S S~'"ib~, ~ r i V ~'
2~
~ ~~~ ~~
2~6y ~,a~ ~v;ve~
~~/.~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~.---- ~~ Ica ~~~~~.L~:
~ 7 ~ !f~Cl > /~
`7~ ~ ~ ~ -
~ ~ ~'t~ I ~~r^Q~-e,,~
~~~ ~ ~ ~
~ 1.~ 9 ~, . ~,,.. , ~ . A~ ;7 J
l'vc
e. ~~~
MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Please sign
NAME ADDRESS
~aZ~l/ \~~ ~~ 1/
~ ~
n ~~l ( ~ ~- ~ e
~-a ~ ~
~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~e ~~ ~
~~~~~ ~ .
_ ~~
LC ` C
~~ GT J
- ~
L~c~p
~~
i ~~ ~ ~ 1 Q
Y
~'~~ ~ ~a~~ ~6 .F ~a ~~-
~ .
Scoff L F ~w~~
g ~~.~.~ 531 ~~
~
~d
.
~
~ ~- s~ a5 i ~~ ~
~lJ ~1z_..;~ ~z ! ~~; ~ z~~ ~~
•
~,
~.~ ,~~_ c-~ ,
' ~r~
~G
_ 1.3 5 ~ ar~ ~ ,,~ U ~
'~ v ~ car U` ~ ~~~.
_r
~~~1 E~ ~~ - IVI ~ ss~r~
~~ ~-~-~~`~-~ ~- ~.~,~ !ti, fig z.
~~,
~ ' ~_
~L ~~~
~~ ~b ~~~c~-~
'~-~ (,u/
~f
~~
b~~.L
MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Please sign
N`4~ ~ ADDRESS
~~~ ~ ~ 11 5~~ 1
, ~'_ en~..~n1~0
~'~ a ~~~~
~K3 ~~Zo~{h~l~ ,V~ .
~~~t~ . S~r.~~a~cl ~~
~~~ .~ 20~~ ~~ ~ ~
..
I
~~~ ~
6 ~ S.
~~,~,/
`3'9/~
MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Please sign
NAME
ADDRESS