HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 1983/11/28CITY CODNCII. MEETING
CITY 01' MOUNDS VIEW
November. 211, 1903
7:30 p.m.
A G E N D A
I. Ca.l1 L() Order
2. Roll Call - Blanchard, Doty, Linke, Hankner, McCarty
3. Residents Requests and Comments from the Floor
----------------------
CITIZENS: BEFORE SPEAKING PLEASE GIVE Yf1OR
---FULL-NAME-AND ADDRESS FOR THE MINUTES
----- ---------------------------
4. Approval of Consent Agenda
ITEM A. Approve Resolution No. 1683 Reapportioning
Assessments for Silver Lake Woods Plat
ITEM B. Approve Resolution No. 1684 Authorizing Installation
of a Street Light
ITEM C. Authorize Mayor and Clerk -Administrator to Enter
into Civil Defense Mutual Aid Agreement
ITEM D. Approve Starting Salary for police Chief Ramacher of
$30,500 Per. Year Retroactive to November, 15, 1983
ITEM P. Approve Resolution No. 1688 Approval of the
Completion of. Development Agreement No. 83-56 with
Mermaid Supper Club
ITEM F. Reschedule December 26, 1983 Council Meeting to
December 27, 1983 and January 2, 1984 Agenda Session
to January 3, 1984
ITEM G. Authorize Finance Director to Subsidize the MEF.D
Program Position Wage for the. Finance Department Up
to an Additional $2.00/Hour
ITEM H. Confirm Mayor's Appointment of Craig McCluskey to
the Festivities Commission for a Term of Office
Ending September 30, 1985
ITEM I. Authorize Submission of Claim from Jan Quick, 8330
Knollwood Drive, to the City's Insurance Carrier
-continued-
AGENDA
Nuvumber 28, 1983
Page Two
4. Approval of Con5ont A(Jonda (rout.)
ITEM J. Approvu Resolution No. 1687 Approving Securities
Furnished by the First State Bank of New Brighton
ITEM K. Sot Publir Hearing for Rezoning of Property Located
at 5084 Long Take Road from R-1 Single Family
Residential to R-2 Single and Two Family Residential
for December 12, 1983 at 7:40 p.m.
ITEM L. Licenses for Approval
ITEM M. Approve Resolution No. 1686 Approving Just and
Correct Claims Against City Funds
5. First Reading of ordinance No. 350 Amending Chapter 48 of the
Mounds View Municipal Code Entitled, "Wetland Zoning
Ordinance"
6. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 351 Amending
Chapter 48 of the Mounds View municipal Code Entitled,
"Wetland Zoning Ordinance"
7. First Reading of Ordinance No. 352 Amending the Municipal
Code of Mounds View by Repealing Chapter 40 Entitled,
"Zoning" and Chapter 43 Entitled, "Mobile Homes" and Adopting
a New Chapter 40 Entitled, "'Zoning"
8. Consideration of. Memorandum from Police Chief Regarding
Purchase Of Mubile Radios
9. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding Review of City
Newsletter Delivery Procedure
10, Report of Director of Public Works/Community Development
11. Report of Attorney
12. Report of Councilmembers - Blanchard, Doty, Linke, Hankner,
Mayor McCarty
13. Report of Administrator.
14. Adjournment
•
•
•
CONSENT AGENDA
November 28, 1983
The Consent• Agenda is a technique designed to expedite handling of
routine and miscellaneous official business of the City Council.
The entire Agenda may be adopted by the Council in one motion.
The motion for adoption is non-dobaLable and must receive unani-
mous approval.. By request of any individual Councilmember, any
I item can be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed upon the
Regular Agenda for debate,
ITEM A. AdupL Resolution No. 1603 - Reapportioning Assessments
for Silver Lake Woods Plat
ITEM B. Adopt Resolution No. 1684 - Authorizing Installation of a
Street Light
ITEM C. Authorize Mayor and Clerk-AdminisLralor. to RnLo r. into
Civil Defense Mutual Aid Agreement
ITEM D. Approve Starting Salary for Police Chief Ramacher of
$30,500 Per Year Retroactive to November 15, 1983
ITEM R. Adopt Resolution No. 1688 - Approval of the Completion of
Development Agreement No. 83-56 with Mermaid Supper Club
ITEM F. Reschedule December 26, 1983 Council Meeting to December
27, 1983 and January 2, 1984 Agenda Session to January 3,
1984
ITEM G. Authorize Finance Director. to Subsidize the MEED Program
Position Wage for. the Finance Department Up to an Addi-
tional $2.00/Hour
ITEM H. Confirm Mayor's Appointment of Craig McCloskey to the.
Festivities Commission for a Term of office Ending
September 30, 1985
ITEM I. Authorize Submission of Claim from Jan Quick, 8330
Knnllwnnd Drive, to tha City'c Insurance Carrier
ITEM J. Adopt Resolution No. 1687 - Approving Securities
Furnished by the First State Hank of New -Brighton
ITEM K. Set Public Hearing for Rezoning of Property Located at
5084 Long Lake Road from R-1 Single Family Residential to
R-2 Single and Two Family Residential for December 12,
1983 at 7:40 p.m.
-continued-
CONSENT AGENDA
November 28, 19111
Page Two
ITEM L. Licenses for Approval
Lenora 1 - Exp I re 6/3O/84
0. I'. V1nrek Corporation - New
Whole Builders - New
Heating & Air Conditio_ninc - Expire 6/30/84
B(11's 5eel: McLal. -- New
Other - Expire 6/30/84
Associated Roofing & Maintenance Contractors, Inc. - New
(Roofing)
1TX'M M. Adopt Resolution No. 1686 - Approving Just and Correct
Claims Against City Funds
Q
`y�74,lc N
RESOLUTION NO. 1604
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSRY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION AlYmoRIZING INSTALLATION OF A STREET LIGHT
WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View has received a petition from
the Mounds View School District requesting the installation of a
street light at the intersection of County Road H and the parking area
off of County Road II located on the Edgewood Community Center
property; and
WHEREAS, the petition does meet street light installation
criteria as outlined in Resolution Nos. 1069 and 1354; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed this request and has
determined that a street light at this location is needed from a
safety standpoint; and
WHEREAS, it has been the policy of. tile. City and the Mounds View
School District to enter into agreements providing for in -kind
services equal to the cost of any service provided by each other.
NOW, THEREFORE, DE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City
Council orders the placement of a street light at the intersection of
County Head II acid the Edgewood Community Center parking lot entrance
off of County Road H contingent upon the Mounds View School District
agreeing to provide in -kind service to the City equal to the annual
cost of the street light.
Adopted this 28th day of November, 1983.
ATTEST: _-------
Mayor
(SEAL)
Clerk -Administrator
V' 4L.6
RESOLUTION NO. 1688
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE Of MINNESOTA
APPROVAL Of THE COMPLETION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 83-56
WITH MERMAID SUPPER CLUB
WHEREAS, the Mermaid Supper Club was required by Development
Agreement No. 83-56 to provide a security in the amount of
b5,000.00, and
WHEREAS, the security is required to insure that the
Development Agreement is in accordance with the requirements as
outlined in Development Agreement No. 83-56; and
WHEREAS, all conditions and requirements pursuant to
Development Agreement No. 83-56 have been completed and fulfilled;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Mounds View approves the completion of the conditions and
requirements in Development Agreement No. 83-56 and authorizes the
release of the security to the Mermaid Supper Club
Adopted this 28th day of November, 1983.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
ayor
Clerk -Administrator
Kuvcmbor 21, 19F,3
1a1
1• �
� �1983
eit^ ui Mounds View
y QECcIVEQ
!Lc"u:ds Vlew, %naesota 55112
CIiY OF f
MOUNDS VIEW �
\�
Sir:;:
On Saturday, 1'ovemher 19, my lu+sband found vater ou our ru!! in
the. basement. After searching; for tha cause, he found the water
meter leaking. (The neter had haen repinced during the past year.)
The fittings an both stdes of the meter vere not tight. !!,,
contacted
a "Cary" before breaking a seal to tighten up both fittings.
:!y
husband was directed to So ahead and correct the. problem.
The enter l.enking caused some damage to items stored ender
the dr.tp:
Accordinn and Case $200.00
Clean-up 2 hours 40.00
1 Could appreciate leaking from you nn thl-s notter.
'thank you,
�� �
� 6'
Jan wick
8330 l:nollwood 1lrive
!!pis. ICI 55432
i86-4631
cc
4&;t,
TO: Mayer b Cnnnef1.
(� FROM: Finance 01rector-Treasurer Brayer
IIATf: November 16, 1983
RE: PLEDGED COLLATERAL OF FIRST STATH BANK OF NEW BRIGHTON
The First State Bank of New Brighton is the official
depository of City funds. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes the
bank must pledge securities as collateral for our deposit. At
the present time $2,600,000 is pledged. At this time the bank
requests approval of the deletion and addition of securities
designated in the attached resolution. This action will not
change the total amount pledged as collateral. A resolution
approving is necessary and would be in order.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Resolution No. 1687 approving securities
furnished by the First State Bank of New Brighton.
DB/ds
Attachment
RESOLUTION 10. 1687
CITY OF MOIINDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING SECURITIES FURNISHKO BY THE FIRST
STATE BANK OF NEW BRIGHTON
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mounds View has
designated the First State Bank of New Brighton as a
depository of City funds; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 118.01 require that a
municipal depository provide securities for collateral; and
WHEREAS, the First State Bank of New Brighton has
proposed deletion of the following security from being pledged
as collateral; and
amount description maturity
$250,000.00 Federal Farm Credit Banks 12-01-83
$300,000.00 U.S. Treasury Notes 03-31-84
WHEREAS, the First State Bank of New Brighton pledges
the following additional securities;
amount description maturity
$150,000.00 U.S. Treasury Notes 02-15-86
$400,000.00 Federal Farm Credit Banks 09-02-86
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Mounds View authorizes its Clerk -Administrator to
approve and accept the securities provided by the First State
Bank of New Brighton in the amount of $2,690,000 as listed on
the attached documents labeled Exhibit A.
Adopted this 2011 day of November, 1983.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
Mayor
Clerk -Administrator
No. 1002—Aullnment of Seturllln In Ilea -I IIInd I.V 1'dwIc nepnl'Inhre. GXdl16IT A Still, Unl. Cu, 11lrua pnL.
Emit All 1t;101lirttrjJrr!froltt, •riiat._..... First.State Dank of. New
_............ -_..................................... .............. I ............. ......... ... .
in consideration of its designatiou as a depository of public funds of ..... _
as hereinafter specified, hereby assigns, transfers, and sets over to said .... _............
_._._.._.__...._..__......._......
-.............. _.____Cit,_.af_kiounds..9.iP_V .................... _................... _..._._...—_...____._......----.____......_
those certain securities described as follows, to -wit:
500,000
Federal Home Loan Banks
Due:
12-26-84
17-4
500,000
Federal Home Loan Banks
Due:
3-25-85
17-4
150,000
U. S. Treasury Notes
Due:
2-15-86
17-4
400,000
Federal Farm Credit Banks
Due:
9-2-86
17-4
300,000
U. S. Treasury Notes
Due:
12-31-86
17-4
300,000
Federal National Mortgage Assn.
Due:
10-13-87
17-2
40,000
Sarpy Co., Neb. SID 18 Echo Hill
Due:
12-15-85
17-4
25,000
Isle, Mr. ISO N473 GO Schl. Bldg.
Due:
3-1-88
17-2
25,000
Duluth, Mr. ISD N799 GO
Due:
6-1-88
17-4
17-4
20,000
Martin County, Mn. GO Drainage
Due:
Due:
1-1-90
4-1-90
17-4
50,000
50,000
Dade County, Florida
City of New Brighton, Mr. GO Water
Due:
2-1-91
22-1
25,000
Rice Lake, WI Mun. Bldg.
Due:
4-1-91
17-4
50,000
Lake City, Mn. GO
Due:
5-1-91
22-1
25,000
Lakeville, Mn. GO
Due:
2-1-93
22-1
50,000
Lansdale, Mn, GO
Due:
2-1-93
22-1
50,000
Norwood, Young America MN. ISD R109
Due:
2-1-93
22-1
30,000
Forest Lake, Mr. GO
Due:
4-1-93
22-1
100,000
Plymouth, Mr. GO
Due:
2-1-95
22-1
1686
ANI:
i.*d;.'.; At;A1:1:;' IT.'( 1-Tilt,
-.18225 18237 •i" !h- 42)002.79
12521.— 12595 67,549.81
18238 18241 33,459.69
NW:1-1111"D 143,012.29
UP! 11;1:: rollf.-I c:11.!
Gil.Y Coffiidl of ltbunds View
hor,:1...1 !Ippv. :.In l or claillin dnt.ed by the
vo! v I
ADDITIONAL
DIRECT EXPENDITUMS
CHECK
AMOUNT
CIATHANT
PURPOSE
18238
$ 300.95
City of Fridley
Sewer billing
18239
28,717.56
First State Bank
Payroll
18240
2,286.88
State Treasurer - PERA
pensions
18241
2,154.30
State Treasurer, Soc, Sec.
Pensions
$33,459.69
UTY !F
kiU!,_'. V
C C C A T :: P L C
1_
..I,
01c22o
!d»..
1 i I4i J:I :: iK CF
Q18;29
2�C1=..]
nh C JChPG
:Ir
r
t -
P41ASLE
018233
3.C1 .51
FT'ST ,T-T' 4`,K Cf
.1;-.4•L
.. .i'r #PART
TIME
_ t.
— ---
018231
2E0.94
I: 4 —.1FEM !,T CC�F
F'h;TC6
01!7232
2328.67
S I A I I,;LF': - F L
i 1h iCA'
II
'18134
31E93.33
ALL ILC _L ICF GC
P-l•
015235
1,200.00
SYSTE'!S niSLAFCH A$SCC
CTHc; F
-303.68
U S FOSTr:.�Ui;
FCSTACI
----CAI
.018236
c
018237
35
iLNJIT u S T
C:F Siff
t.. 1M,
L$AGE
;�
-- — i0
42100Z.19
n CFSS441 ,xF ACitu%cam SINic
Leal --CUNCIL
- i:'G
CITY OF MCUND'; VI
CHLCK4 L If 0 U T
012521
41.40
63. 10
!. r 1_ P F t L
L - 1 I' I
_,,.rnl, L) .T -)Ii
AcTI F I:ULi.IS iN�
COPIIkL EL:Ci--CNICS
CHAP,N FL,LISF'ING
CNIPFr.t:A SFoT'iCS GC,:F
ge.PJ C(�:•:srPY
415.79 CGPY LUPLICATING FFOC
99.11 CCTTEN, ItnC
1LS.62
CCUNTO' ALL. `- N-1
65.71
C4T,. _:JF T,'^ :n'.
1�329.E0
OATS 3PER;ILL;", INC.
1v592.50
GOVT TM4IP.T'+c r=VICE
106.90
i Kpis CFENiC;L INC
49.12
HAYCEN-HLPPHY
40,80
HEALY LAEORATORIES
5,13
III!E;46TICNAL ASSCC FLEG
89.05
J C AUTO SLPFLY
45.45 LAHASS MFG
115.51 LILLIE SL"06AN NchS
19.50 HURL FCNF. COMP
29,562.77 METRO hLSTE CCNTRGL W'M
4,132. 0 RICHAFO FEYEFS
L F r S = •
4tPAI�St LIILITI•'
cNE-`LFFIIE`,
�LP!F:,, cClilt<cNl
LtuiFIlSEAENT=
�t'-
•
BtNTAL, ECUIPPENT
SF.C-ELFFLIES.CFERATINC
CTHEP PRCFESSIONAL SEcV
RLNTAL, ECLIPPENT
SLFFLIES, VEHICL1-
ANC-SLFFLIESv ECU TrM'.6i
Q
SLFFLIES,CFEn,:TiNC ----
-��'
CCNT. SVCS., CELIVERY
CCNT. SVCS., KEY FUNCH
OTHER FRCFES&IONAL SERV
SLPFLIES,CFE;:oTING
SLFPLIES, '7REETS
OTHEF. FRCFESSIONAL SEnV.-
�F�^
ECOKS + FERICCICALS
e
SLPPLIES, VEHICLE —
ANC-SLFFLIES, ECUIPMENT
SLFFLIES, ECUIFF'LNT
•
LtG4 NCTIC=S — ---
ANC-ACVEAIIEEMENTS
•
CCMNLNICATICNS-TELEFr:CNE_
t+ETRC BASTE CCNT COMM
CENE94L LLCAL SERVICES
ANC-FROSECLTING ATTY SERVICE
ANO-;LViN. Ch4PGE PAYAELE
•
CIT'f OF MCUNC: VIth A C, C t, t. T P Y i L i �ATi 11-2;-e3 FAG` 3
CHICK' A M C U 'a T C L L " V H N T F U= F C S -
012543
56.13
M JWf T ,FH::L I: C r
I�
012544
13,856.i6
CITY Cr ,'CLI.E V:cr
P
tttiUNCS VI E'n Cl • LrI- t
J12546
18.91
W11CILJTC
J12547_
212.i9
N i. ElLL !ELCFFON: ,C
012548
21E.17
NEW LPIGHTCN HCWE
012549
3.L8
NORTH SLL,03AN .REhT 4LL
_012550
100.82
NORTHE�,N STAT_S PW LC
12551
1i.56
NGVACK I -NC
012552
210.35
F.--PSI LCLA 3CTTLIK CC
012553
24.83
TINOThY FITTM+:h
012554
6r.:'i
Rf- .SEY CCUNTY FTAC
012555
2,227.65
R FSi Y CCUt•TY TREs SUREr
r4'
012556
6_.:5
FAMLLA S ELSE
012557
13,56
S + 1 OFFICE PROGLLIS
012558
155.92
J L SHIELY CO
012559
29.-
SEITH L'JM*C2 ,.
0,12560
71701.Z8
SPRING LK F4F.K FIFE CEFT
3,
012561
13.50
ST PAUL CISPATCH
��
012562
i.98
MARY TATAREK
012563
720.59-
TEXGAS
_
to
012564
3.90
H R TCLL CCHFARY
lFFll `_, Tr!EIS
LIr,.F F+Cfc...lCt-'L Sr'nV I,
I
StFPL1: ,CF;zATI!,
�C-SLFFLJES, F.GL'IPMEhT h
„bL-tLFFLIc , ELtIGS+GRNOS
n
:LFrLJi`t Y'FTCU. 1
CLRMInICA I 1:':-I LEFHCNE_
SLPFLIESICF;:;.&TING j
AIX-SL'PFLILS, VEHICLE. `1
ANO-SUPFLIE-, EGUJPMENT r
At-G-REF., CLCCS + GROLNOS r.
FENTAL, ECUIFFENT ; F ;
ELECTtICIIY
n
SLFPLiES, ECtjIPMu,T pl
n
R E F b n C
SUPPLIES, VEh1CLE
40
TRAInInC :� '
CCNT, SVCS., .AHt;t.Y
ANC-SLFFLIES,CFERATI44
ow
NC! b'`d
SALARIES,TE:•F+P-R1 TIKE
,S
n
MISC CFFlCf LFFLIES
SLPFLIES, EL0 S+U R110.
SLFPLIES, ELUC +GF.NCS
GFANTS , SU'SiUIE�
AEVE FIISEFEh1S
TRAINING
II4EK_TCRY_
ANG-SUPFLIE:S, VEHICLE'��
-
FENTAL, ECLIFnENT
f 11
II
CITY OF
MGUhCS VI„
A CC C L N T 5 P A Y+ E L E
CATE 11-Z5-83 PAGE 4
CH_CK*
A 11 0 U t: T
C L = i t A N T
P O P C S E
—-
112565
101.`.9
Lt+ITGG c?,TAI: SYS1E"
CLEAN ING-IC4EELS + RAGS
AGO-uNiFC.tS + CLCTMING
§
°I
ii2566
5i. 7
v;nlr.G'.; GAF f4':.0 S4F:.iY
LNIFGMS + fLCihl'G
G12567
28`..:2
6CTC-' P"'CLLOV CC
SLPFLICS, L(ILITi S
a•
012568
1,718.53
CITY Ct' nrIf- cAF LAK,.
SALAFI[S, n'uLLA'
F-
4WO-S4LAFILS,T_VF,PARI IItE
ANC-PLN5ICN5
.I
ANC-F.I.L.A. _--
Tr
'
S
ANC-bCnxE 5 CCHFENSATION
>
ANC-TkAIn1NG
�
012569
45.d1
(IGHaj C -4usJL,
CTr.;= FnCFcS irr.AL S E F
P
u
012570
9u.C6
5u AN Cc','+PAGAN
CTHEG FSCFESSICNAL SEhV_.__—r�
=
012571
2EO.O0
LEZLIE 6CGLS
PROGPAV ItSIRU[TC'iS
f
712572
242.50
OE:: hAGECGPN
CTMr.= FFC`FESSIGNAL SERV
012573
260-GJ
O:ANNA tC TENSCN
PFOGF.f I:SIRLCT0a5-___-_. —t`'
>'
T
012574
45.30
LISA IsAR1E NUCIN
CTHEG F• r_a„ bd: S[ky
t
1%575
431.00
SEFCC LAF.OSATC.I:
CTh'- P<CFEiS1CNAL SERV
912S7b
143.10
KEN LELt
CTtiEF F^CFL;SIONAL SEFV
r
012577
S.EO
MINNESOTA [ALLY
ACVSSTISrtENTS
0 12 57 8
5i.J;
LASHINSKI SEPTIC StNVICE
SATELLITE'.
•
012579
153.Ei
hALLIN3 EFCS
kEFAHS,_c;LIFMENT
_
J12580
i+3J6.J0
EITUVIsCLS CCNSULTING
NEFAIFc, STd.i-TS
r•
L
012581
22.83
H,AP,ST ECOKS
SLPPLIES,LPCk.TIt+u
•
4"
012-SO2
60.00
HENNCFIN CCUNTY CHEFS
TFAINING__
-
A,
x°
012583
11.i0
OFF GAVIC
R E F L N 0
012584
55.00
CAN OEGRCSS
SALAFIES,TE"FiPAR1 TIME
•
�
__.012.585.
75.!;9
tiUGHAN PEST CONTROL
F., el[CS + GF.OUNC r
fti
012586
37.50
LINCOLN ELEVATOR SERVICE
F F., LCS + G40LtJOS
� i
oj
---------------
-
-
•
CILY OF NGU?OS VI`k
C C ." U I. T S ? y u 8 L c
CAic i1-29-63
F:.. °
•
�.;
CF_C K°
A I+ 0 G n T
C L c i P c r, 1
c L F F C
1
012587
I1E.lI
K-UGc L!
eEF3It S,
fCL IFVEIrt
e
--—012588
21.48
kL;:CI,:nl. ";_',i'
Lo�LI!S,
TILITI -S
R�
•
01c'589
21.00
PCLILL Ali-[ FA'_-TS
SLFFLI::,,
cCUIPN`.`i
012590
42.29
AMERICAN TCOL SUFFLY
SLFPLIES,
ECcIPP i
0 12 59 1
7.31
F: fL_� INC
+tl
014592_
43.o3
�V
012593
48.00
J"-N
0 12 594
32.D6
PYLO CUaTLFSCP;
�i.fLnlS
� •
812595
35..0
A KGISFPAN
CLFGSITS-
cUILCI';, c:.CCE
•
75
679545.61
CHECKS wPITTLN
TCTAL OF
85 CHECKS
TOTAL :C5,55G.Eu
4
i s++
�ss)
01
1
1710
L-
4,L5-46
MEMO TO: Mayor. and City Council
FROM: Director of Public Works/Community Development
DATE: November 23, 2983
SUBJECT: SUPPORTING TECHNICIAI, DATA FOR ORDINANCE NOS. 350 AND 351
AMENDING CHAPTER 48, WETLAND BOUNDARIES
Per direction given at the November 21, 1983 Council meeting, Staff
has prepared the following list of excerpts from the various
reports and letters received which evaluated the wetland boundaries
for Wetlands 1-22 and 1-23 within the proposed Miller Induslri.al
Park site. These items have been listed in chronological order of
when the reports were prepared and/or received by the City. It is
the intent of staff to provide this list for use by the Council in
documenting their position as it relates to the proposed Ordinances
350 and 351.
The following excerpts were taken from the Barr Engineering report
received by the City on July 28, 1983:
1. "Improper maintenance of the culvert crossing 85th Avenue
Northeast at the intersection of Long Lake Road has
impeded the natural drainage of the area and promoted the
development of wetland vegetation. 'thus, classification
of this area as a wetland may be erroneous because repair
and/or proper maintenance of the described culvert would
result in drainage of Wetland 1-22 and the natural
development of vegetation more characteristic of upland
conditions."
2. ..there are inaccuracies in the location of the boundaries
of Wctland 1-23 and that the delineated wetland contains
approximately 1.8 acres uf. upland."
3. "Vegetation in the previously drained areas primarily
consists of. goldenrod, Kentucky bluegrass, raspberry,
willow, and other plants characteristic of uplands.
4. "An on -site inspection of the wetland soils indicates that
the dominant soil is Markey muck which is generally less
than 50 inches deep and has an average depth of approximately
2.5 feet."
5. "Upland grasses and shrubs are encroaching into the marsh
grass type where the common boundary is located on long
flat slopes. This process has resulted in the displacement
of lowland vegetation on wetland soils and the development
of predominantly upland vegetation. In addition, portions
- of tall marsh grass cover type which previously contained
cattails are now dominated by Canada thistle and reed
hlayur and City Cuunell
Page Two
Nu'• abcr 23, 1983
1
canarygrass. These changes in cover type boundary and
composition suggest that the wetlands on the property are
naturally succeeding to communities characteristic of drier
conditions."
6. "The net effect of Phase I construction will be a slight
decrease in the area of upland forest and upland grass/
shrub and a slight increase in area of wetland vegetation.
Wetland vegetation will be more diverse containing portions
of inland fresh marsh ('Type II), inland shallow fresh marsh
(Type II), inland deep fresh marsh (Type IV) and wooded
swamp (Type III).
On September 26, 1983, a report was submitted by Braun Environmental
Laboratories at the request of the City. The following quotations
are excerpted from that report:
1. "Our evaluation of the site showed the dominant soils to be
the Lino loamy find sand and Markey muck with no evidence
of the Isanti and Seelyeville muck."
2. "Our results indicate that there are inaccuracies in the
Ramsey County Soil Survey and... that the muck type soil is
predominantly Markey much rather than Seelyeville."
J. "'The vegetation surrounding 1-22 is inturding upon it as the
result of natural succession."
A. "Based on our evaluation, we feel that there is about 31
acres of wetland in the I-23 classification. ...we would
consider the 7 acres as being marginal wetland. We consider
these areasmarginal because of the present of transitional
species and upland species not normally found in wetland."
5. "Without human distrubance or development, wetland number
1-22 will succumb to natural succession within approximately
50 years. Encroachment by fast-growing, quickly spreading
pioneer species has already begun, and the size and land-
locked location of the area do not favor its longevity as a
wet meadow."
6. "Phase I construction will have no discernable effects on the
wetland identified in the area previously identified as I-23.
The completion of Phase I will result in a slight increase
in the amount of Type III, IV and V wetlands as a result of
the ponded area."
7. "There are less restrictive souls present on the site than
described in the Ramsey County Sil Conservation report. The
soils on the site are similar to those being built on in
the metro area. There is less wetland present on the site
than described in either previous report. Phase I develop-
ment will des' - 1.1 acres of Type II wetland (I-22)."
Mayor and City Council
Page Three
November 23, 1983
Two letters were received from Ramsey Soil and Dater Conservation
District, one dated October. 19, 1983 from Tom Peterson, Consorvation
Specialist and one dated October 20, 1983 from Dr. Russell Adams,
Chairman of Plat Review Committee for the Conservation District.
The following excerpts were taken from those letters:
1. "Raving been party to the development of the Barr Reports
proposed wetland boundaries, I concur with both consultants
findings that there are areas of upland habitat, and that:
there are areas in the transition -phase within the area
mapped as wetland 1-23 by the District."
2. "My personal observations also shed some doubt as to the
accuracy of the soil survey on portions of this site."
3. "Our original wetland inventory specified that these data
are general in nature and that site specific data may still
be in order. Thus, the Engineering Reports were in keeping
with our reconunendations, and we concur with their findings."
4. "Second, earlier data and data in the Engineering Reports
suggest that the organic soil indeed may not be Seelyeville
snuck as shown in the Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey.
This would make a difference in our recommendation.
5. "Finally, there is probably little question that upland
habitat is becoming established because of long-term drainage
by judicial ditch No. 1.
The following excerpts were taken from a letter dated October 31,
1983 submitted by Braun Environmental Laboratories to questions and/
or clarifications requested by the City of Mounds View:
1. "This area (1-22) has vegetation typical of a wetland and
therefore falls within the definition used to classify
wetland areas. However, this area does not function as a
typical wetland."
2. "Because of the limitation placed on 1-22 such as being
surrounded by roads and being landlocked, this area is not
able to act as a wetland for a larger geographic area, and
rather only serves that small portion which is in the nurth-
west corner of the property."
3. "Because of the limited size and the landlocked conditions
of this parcel, it does not perform the functions of a
wetland in the typical setting in which wetlands operate.
In fact, one must stretch a point to even say that it
functions as a wetland for the small area within its boundaries."
Maya' and City Council
Page Pour
November 23, 1983
4. "I feel confident that when this area was originally mapped
little atLcntion was given to whether or not 1-22 functioned
as a wulland."
The following is excerpted from a letter dated November 2, 1983
from Mr. Bill Downing of. the Ramsey Soil and Conservation District
Permit Review Committee:
1. "Under present conditions, Wetland 1-22 has little, if any,
function as a nutrient assimilative instrument due to its
small natural drainage area. Likewise its stormwater storage
function is of little value under present hydrologic condi-
tions. Waterfowl production potential under present
conditions is also poor."
2. "'The District believes that if Wetland 1-22 were protected
from development and not actively managed and/or maintained
in a wetland condition, the area could become a dumping
ground and not serve in the public's best interest."
The following is excerpted from a letter dated November 7, 1983
from Darr Engineering Company:
1. "The restricted and landlocked nature area of the wetland
sovcrely limits its inherent nutrient -stripping capacity as
well as other ecological functions."
2. "As a result of past road construction, the wetland has been
landlocked and this severely limits the function of the
wetland might serve for the absorption of nutrients and
storage of runoff from adjacent upland area."
3. "The wetland lacks physical and ecological diversity which is
typically associated with prime wildlife habitat."
4. "Traffic noise and traffic hazards to the public detract from
the aesthetics, recreational, and educational value of the
wetland. ,These traffic hazards also limit the value of the
habitat for large mammals."
As previously mentioned, the purpose of this memo is to provide a
list of statements made relative to the wetland area contained within
the proposed Miller Industrial Park project. These statements are
intended to be used in whole or in part by the City Council as they
act on the proposed Ordinance Nos. 350 and 351 which amend the
wetland map which is part of Chapter 48. The above statements are
intended to be used to provide specific findings which must be made
by the Council in order to act on the request to alter the boundaries
of the wetland map.)
• Mayor. and City Council
Page Live
,November 23, 1983
Please contact me if you have additional questions or require
added clarification to the above items.
JCJ/bc
ORDINANCE NO. 150
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY nP RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 48 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW
MUNICIPAL, CODE ENTITLED, "WETLAND ZONING. ORDINANCE''
Thu City Council of the City of Mounds View does hereby
ordaint
99CTlUN 1. The wetland zoning district map as established
In 40,11, Huhdiviaion I of the Municipal Code, is hereby amended
by romnviog Wetland I.U. No. 1-22 from the wetland zoning
district map.
sECTIt1N it. This ordinance shall take effect thirty days
after the doto of Its publicatinn.
Rend by the Council of the City of Mounds View on the
day of November, 1983.
Read and passed by the Council of the City of Mounds View
this day of November, 1983.
ATTEST:
Mayor ---- ----
(SEAL)
Clerk -Administrator
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
q& 6
ORDINANCE NO. 351
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 48 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW
MUNICIPAL CODE ENTITLED, "WETLANn %ONTNG ORDINANCE"
The City Council of the City of Mounds View does hereby
ordain:
SECTION I. The wetland zoning district mnp no established
in 48.15, Subdivision I of the Municipal Code., Is hereby amended
by redelineating the wetland houndary for Wetlnod I.D. No. 1-23
as per the attached exhibit.
SECTION IT. This ordinance shall take offers thirty days
after the date of its publication.
Read by the Council of the City of Mounds View on the 14th
day of November, 1983.
Read and passed by the Council of they City of Mounds View
this day of November, 1983.
ATTEST:
Mayor �-----
(SEAL)
Clerk—Adminlstrator
APPROVER AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
ORDINANCE NO. 352
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF MOUNDS VIEW BY
REPEALING CHAPTER 40 ENTITLED, "ZONING" AND CHAPTER 43 ENTITLED,
"MOBILE. HOMES" AND ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER 40 F.WTITLED, "ZONING"
The Council of the City of Mounds View does hereby ordain:
SECTION I. Chapter. 40 entitled, "'Zoning" is hereby
repealed.
SFCTION II. Chapter 43 entitled, "Mobile. Homes" is hereby
repenlod.
SECTION ITT. The new Chapter 40, entitled, "Zoning", a copy
of which is attached, is hereby adopted.
SECTION IV. This ordinance shall take effect thirty days
after the date of its publication.
Read by the Council of the City of Mounds View the 28th day
of November, 1983.
Read and passed by the Council of. the City of Mounds View on
this day of , 1983.
ATTEST:
Mayor
(SEAL)
Clerk -Administrator
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
TO: Mayor, City Council, and Clerk -Administrator
FROM: Police Chief
DATE: November 21, 1983
RE: Purchasing of mobile radios
As per the 1984 adopted budget, $2,650.00 was budgeted for the purpose of
purchasing mobile radio equipment. Two estimates were requested and received.
Capitol Electronic quoted a price of S2,565.00 for three portable units and
accessories.
General Communication Inc. quoted a price of $2,600.00 for two portable units
and accessories.
I checked with technicians about the quality of the Capitol Electronic unit.
1 am comfortable that the Capitol Electronic Unit will meet our needs and
durability requirements.
I feel the need for the equipment is immediate. Our present equipment is
deteriorated to a point of frequent repair.
RECOMMENDATION:
Police Department recommends council authorization to purchase three portable
units and accessories from Capitol Electronic. Billing and delivery will be
after January 1, 1984.
• MEMO TO: Mnuud:: View ('iq ('01:11CII 41U 1
PROM: Isruce K. A(rdersun, Dirc:Lr
Parks, Recreation and F' r JJJ
DA'I'R: Novomber 23, 1983
RL': City Newsletter Delivery System
As you are aware, the City has been delivering the newsletter on
a bi-nmarthly basis Orough the local services of Roy Scout 'Troup
R400. Prior to utilizing the local boy scout troop, we utilized
a number of systems including postal delivery, the Independent
Delivery System, and the Mounds View Swim Club. During the past
year, we have experienced a number of problems with our City
Newsletter delivery system and staff has been actively reviewing
our proviuus methods as well as mect•iug with the local postal
service to determine how we might modify and best use regular
mail delivery.
The major problems that we have had with the Boy Scouts during
the pr,st two years has been inconsistent delivery from both a
timo pi•rspectivc as well as residential home areas being missed.
But more important than the inconsistent delivery is the fact
that the newsletters were often left outside to face the elements
as well as in different locations for the residents to find their
newsletter. The cost for utilizing the boy scouts was 51/copy
based on 4,200 newsletters or $210 per delivery.
The lndependent Delivery System that we utilized for a four month
period was similar to the boy scouts as they delivered
newsletters door to door a Wcopy also. The consistancy and
quality of deliveries with the Independent Delivery System was
better than the local boy scout troop but we did not receive the
obvious community -wide benefits from utilizing youth serving
organizations.
Based on our experience with four different delivery systems,
staff would propose that we return to using the postal service by
utilizing the third class carrier route pre-sort postal rate. By
uoiuy t`'' .,..:th^d 11"c ---- to got _ 7.4,"/ropy dpl ivory rate
which has gone down .9� from the past year. Staff has met with
the postmasters of both Fridley and New Brighton during the past
week and reviewed the specific routes that are delivered in
Mounds View. By mailing to the sevun routes as per the attached
sheet, we can deliver newsletters to all the residential,
commercial and business properties within the City of Mounds View
excluding the shaded areas on the attached maps. The total
number of post office deliveries will be 4,435 mailings.
We still will have to deliver approximately 275 newsletters to
Spring Lake Park residents in order to hit the remaining 420
Mounds View residents on Fridley route k3204. Staff feels that
this can be justified from the standpoint that there is some
^' involvement in our recreation programs from Spring Lake Park and
their close proximity makes City information relevant.
-2-
Staff would further recommend that. tho remaining 280 residents
included in the shaded area would be deliverer) by the Civil Air
Patrol at $35.00/nrwsll-ttrr dolivor•y or approximately
12.5�/copy. Staff feels that the increased money is justified as
the deliveries ace spread throughout the City. By working with
the Civil Air Patrol to hand deliver the shaded areas, we
eliminate 1,011 deliveries outside the city limits.
By utilizing this delivery system, the total Cost to the City
will be $1,969.00 for U.S. Postal mail delivery plus $210.00 to
the Civil Air. Patrol or a total of $2,.179.00. Staff has budgeted
$2,290.00 for delivery of the City Newsletter in 1984, so we
would be approximately 5110.00 under budget. In addition to
being within the City budget, staff feels that service and
delivery will be improved through the post office as well as the
utilization of the mail boxes.
It should also he noted that the City Newsletter totals for
printing this year were increased to 4,600 which would leave the
City staff approximately 165 newsletters available for general
distribution to City residents. Although this is really not an
adequate amount, staff feels that we would be able to make due
with this small problem and that the system as proposed would
best serve Lhu City residents.
RECOMMENDATION To deliver the City Newsletter through the third
class carrier route pre—sort at an individual cost of 7.4� per
delivery to the seven routes as prescribed excluding the shaded
areas which would be delivered by the Civil Air Patrol at a cost
of. $35.00 per delivery.
BKA/sll
Pr: _11 _� rNq I q CQ 4 � IIMa •PI• 1 i� r
.Y:(rrot,
'�.' tt/ -� iSzi'::_'�:crl.aaa.et ..u.ymv.pL'mnRrr�src�r
rrwWwM ;,,., �I!.I •.� 1 I wwr.rrYdrw.l
I'S�•.Y 1 r'I ! Mrr•r Yrwl. Flaw.
wY.~bft,&,o
y ydyd ! I
3 • I .I I N j N• r III, w
ItAiNt
YI' I
�� aYg1..1.JNll .mom l.. N;.W..1... -v.I w.IM-I. r.�(•.r �..Yrrw.+I` �...--..� \
IN.P tl I +4 •f �I . y.r•1wf
rj 1
J'"
I �\ — .n IPYYIM
NEW BRIGHTON POST OFFICE (55112
Route 1 1209 - 569
1206 - G33
1223 - 790
FRIDLEY POST OFFICE (55432)
Route N 3203 - 557
3204 - 694
3222 - 645
3226 - 547
Y
MI•:Mo 'ro: Mayor and City COanci 1.
1'RUPI; DIrCCIoI' of Public Works/Community Uuvelopmcnt l�
DATE': Nuvamber 29, 1983
SUBJECT: SIDEWALK SNOW REMOVAL
The City received an inquiry from the resident at 7501 Silver
Lake Road (model home for Mary Anderson project). This homeowner
was inquiring as to the City's policy on sidewalk snow removal,
especially for the sidewalk along Silver Lake Road south to
County Road I1-2.
It has been the past practice of the City to only plow
sidewalks for those through block crosswalks that are located on
public casements and/or right-of-ways. The inquiry noted above
resulted in staff reviewing the current policy on sidewalk snow
removal and determined that there is currently no formal policy
and that we have a section of sidewalk along Silver Lake Road and
County Road II-2 that probably will not be plowed or maintained
for a number of reasons. This section of sidewalk with the advent
of new homes in the Silver Lake Woods area will need to be main-
tained during the winter months to insure pedestrian safety in
the vicinity of Silver Lake Road and County Road 11-2.
Staff will begin developing a formal policy for Council review
covering the following issues:
•., blocv, lnnations such as walkway near
1. JllidwdlNO .� miu
the Edgewood Community Center.
2. Walkways along major aterial roadways such as Silver
Lake Road that are on the rear side of double frontage
lots.
3. Sidewalks along public roadways.
4. Sidewalks accessing to public facilities such as
schools and parks.
Because of the heavy snowfall received last week, staff has taken
the initial steps to insure that the sidwalk along Silver Lake
Road, north of County Road H-2, is cleared for pedestrian use.
'Phis section of sidewalk together with the other sidewalks that
have been maintained by City personnel will continue to do so until
such time as a formal policy can be discussed and acted upon by
the City Council.
if you have any initial concerns, please share them with staff.
JCJ/bc
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
CITY COUNCIL
'
AGENDA SESSION
Pecember 5, 1983
7:00 p.m.
1.
Consideration of
staff memorandum regarding
Improvement
Bond Redemption
Fund Defeasance Policy Issues.
2.
Consideration of
staff memorandum regarding
1984 Appointments,
3.
Consideration of
staff memorandum regarding
Clerk -Administrator
Performance Review.
4.
Discussion of Police
Chief Performance Goals
with police
Chief Ramacher.
5.
Consideration of
staff memorandum regarding
tractor and
mower specifications.
6.
Consideration of
staff memorandum regarding
special assessment
reapportionments
for Lots 1 and 2, Block 1,
Programmed Land,
Second Addition.
.14' , /
I1EM0 TO: Mayor and City founcil
FROM: Finance Director -Treasurer Brager
DATE: November 21, 1983
SUBJECT: POLICY CONSIDERATIONS ON A CASH DEFEASANCE OF THE
BONDS, IN THE IMPROVEMENT BOND REIDEMPTION FUND
The City recently authorized the hiring of Springstead, Inc., as
financial consultants, to advise and assist with a cash defeas-
ance of those bonds in the Improvement Bond Redemption Fund. I
believe that there are several policy considerations which have
to he addressed and on which Council direction should be given to
staff. These policy considerations involve the identification of
the goals and objectives that are to be met by undertaking a cash
defeasance.
During the presentation of the Special Assessment Debt Study, Bob
Voto indicated that the present good financial position of the
Improvement Bond Redemption Fund presented the City with several
options. I believe it important that those options be fully
understood. I shall briefly outline those options.
The first option identified would be to continue to make payments
of bond principal and interest until 1996. At that time all of
the bonds will be paid off. Projections made as part of the Debt
Study indicate that a surplus will exist in the fund at that
date. That surplus could be used for any public purpose.
A part of this first option is consideration of future scheduled
bonded debt tax levies of the fund. The City has the option of
levying those future tax levies or cancelling a part or all of
them. Levying would maximize the projected surplus of the fund
while cancellation of levies would minimize the projected
A second option identified would be to undertake a cash defeas-
ance of the bonds. A cash defeasance would satisfy the City's
obligation to its bond holders by investing in securities at such
maturities to meet the payment schedules of the fund's out-
standing bonds. These securities would be assigned to a bank's
trust department. The bank would then make the scheduled bond
payments for the City. Any remaining cash in the fund would be
considered a surplus and could be used for any public purpose.
Since our obligation to the bond holders is satisfied under a
cash deteasance, future bonded debt tax levies are not needed and
should be cancelled entirely.
-z-
Under a cash deteasance the amount of the surplus which would be
available to the city would vary direct-ly with the rake of
interest paid on the. investments. The greater the inturost rate
the greater the amount of the surplus available to the City.
It should be noted that under each option (waiting until the
bonds are paid ott or undertaking a cash dufeasance) the oppor-
U nity exists to fully cancell all future bonded debt tax
levies. Projections of the fund's financial position indicate
that if a defeasance is not undertaken the City still has the
opportunity to cancoll all future tax levies and has done so for -
the L904 budget year.
There is an additional consideration in choosing between con-
tinuing to make scheduled bond payments or undertaking a cash
defeasance, on a theoretical basis the benefit to the City is
the same given a constant rate of interest. If a cash defeasance
was undurtakun the surplus available now is approximately equal
to the surplus available when the final bond payment is made
discounted for interest earned during periods bond payments were
made. For example. if $10,000 were needed in 1993, S3,855.43
invested in 1983 at 10% interest compounded annually would be
worth $10,000 in 1993, The difference is the time value of
money.
The prime reason for undertaking a cash defeasance is a need for
the surplus which would be available as a consequence of the
defeasance. If there is not an immediate need for the money a
defeasance should nUC be Un(leCtdkell. TheBfs having funde bCit i1
immediately available for use rather than waiting until the bonds
finally mature and then having surplus funds available.
should the decision to undertake a defeasance be made the next
consideration is: how soon is the anticipated surplus needed? If
it is needed immediately the defeasanu- should Ibe undortanCr, a
soon as possible. If the anticipated surplus is not needed
immediately rate of return on investments becomes a considera-
tion. High interest rates on investments purchased for defeas-
ance allow the anticipated surplus to become larger.
If rate of return is a primary consideration the City should seek
to undertake a defeasance when interest rates are very high so as
to maximize the anticipated surplus resulting from the defeas-
ance. The greater the interest rate the greater the surplus.
Each half of 18 increase in interest rates has the effect of
increasing the anticipated surplus resulting from defeasance
by $50,000.
is
r
-3-
Stall sacks direction from Council as to what is do acceptable
minimum rate of return for defeasance. At what interest rate
should we undertake a cash defeasanco?
Staff does not feel it is appropriate to make this decision
alone, 'fryirg to determine when to defoase to maximize return is
an art not a science. It is very much a judgment• call. A defea-
sdnce could be undertaken for example at 12% and next month rates
could be 13% or possibly 11%. No one can accurately predict
where interest rates will go in the future. For that reason we
recommend that a rate be determined as a goal and when that rate
is reached a defoasance be undertaken.
Staff further recommends that prior to undertaking a cash defeas-
ance, policy be established as to the uses of the anticipated
surplus. A cash defeasance will result in the commitment of a
large amount of cash. Without proper planning this could result
in problems for other City funds. As our auditors have stated in
past audit reports and in the Debt Study an adequate fund balance
for the General Fund is required for sound financial management
of the diversified services provided by the City. The auditors
have recommended that the minimum required fund balance be one
half the budgeted tax levy and local government aid. For 1984
that is $630,000. Presently the fund balance of the General Fund
is $392,000; this is $238,000 short of the minimum required.
Staff recommends that if a defeasance is undertaken $238,000 be
transferred to the General Fund to bring the fund balance to the
minimum amount recommended by the auditors.
The Debt Study indicates that the Improvement Bond Fund of 1981
will experience a temporary cash overdratt of $231,700 in 1986.
If a defeasance is undertaken staff recommends that a loan of
that amount be made to the fund from the anticipated surplus from
the defeasance to be repaid in 1992.
The Debt Study projects that if a cash defeasance is undertaken
at a 10% rate of return the anticipated surplus would be
$714,700. If the fund balance of the General Fund is brought to
the minimum required level and a loan is made to the Improvement
Bond Redemption Fund to cover a projected temporary cash deficit
a balance of $245,000 remains plus collections of special assess-
ments due between 1984 and 1995.
Those fends present an opportunity for long range financial
planning and policy. Staff would recommend that Council give
serious consideration to establishing an Improvement Revolving
Fund with those monies. Loans to be repaid with interest could
-4-
be made to other City funds to tinance improvement projects.
Such a fund would br: of benefit to the City in two ways. First,
internal financing is less costly than external financing of
projects and linann•in,'l cn:;ls could log r!liminato(l, i.e„ aLfornuyr,
and consultants Fees on bond issues. Secondly, such a fund could
be a Lool to assist in managing the general purpose property tax
levy. For example, $1.1,000 is budgeted for City Hall roof
repairs in 1984. The repairs are being paid from the reneral
Fund which is heavily dependent upon property tax dollars.
It an improvement revolving fund existed a loan for the repairs
with a payback period of several years could have been made. In
so doing, the burden on the tax levy would have been reduced and
the loan would have contributed to the goal of minimizing
increases in the property tax levy.
RECOMMENDATION: Council provide staff with direction as to the
undertaking of a cash defeasance of the bonds in the Improvement
Bond Redemption Fund and if a defeasance is undertaken, provide
direction as to its timing and the uses of the anticipated
surplus in the fund. To provide this direction we request you
answer the following questions:
1. Is there an immediate need for funds which would justify a
cash defeasance of the bonds in the Improvement Bond Redemp-
tion Fund?
2. It there is an immediate need for funds which justifies a
cash defeasance, how soon are those funds needed?
a. should a rash defeasance be undertaken at whatever
interest rate on investments is available in the market
today?
or
b. Ehculd 3 ca;lr defeasance only be undertaken if a certain
interest rate on investments can be realized? What
Should that interest rate be?
3. If a cash defeasance is undertaken how should the resultant
anticipated surplus funds be used?
A representative of Springstead, Inc. will be in attendance to
answer any questions you may have on this matter.
DB/pf
Attachments
-1pt-
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
t! FROM: Clerk-Administrat r
DATE: November 30, 1983
SUBJECT: 1984 APPOINTMENTS
Attached please find a three page listing of appointments to be
made by the City Council for Fiscal Year 1984. Staff would
request Council direction as to your desires on these matters
in order that• appropriate resolutions might be prepared for your
consideration at the first regular Council meeting in 1984. These
resolutions will also include the redesignation of the official
newspaper and City depositories unless you direct otherwise.
DFP/pf
Attachments
CITY COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS
1984
Acting Mayor
COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COtIMISSIONS
Planning Commission
Parks & Recreation Commission
Lakeside Park Commission
Festivities Commission
COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES FOR OTHER ORGANIZATIONS
Norhtwest Suburban Youth Service Bureau
Ramsey County League of Local Governments /
Association of Metropolitan Municipalities
Suburban Rate Authority
Surinn T.aka Park/Plain.. /M...... a.. n: .___..
__-- ___..,__ _.. ,.. ,, -- :iie,nen'5 Reiief Association
9
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
DEPARTMENT LIAISON ROTATION SCHEDULE
1984
JANUARY - MARCH
Finance
Public Works/Community Development
Parks & Recreation
Police
APRIL - JUNE
Finance
Public Works/Community Development
Parks & Recreation
Police
JULY - AUGUST
Finance
Public Works/Community Development
Parks & Recreation
Police
OCTOBER - DECEMBER
Finance
Public Works/Community Development
Parks & Recreation
P01ice
COMMISSION TERMS EXPIRING IN 1983
AND UNFILLED VACANCIES
PLANNING COMMISSION
Peg Mountain, Chairperson -
Josey Warrcn -
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
Wayne Burmeister, Chairperson -
LAKESIDE PARK COMMISSION
(2 Vacancies)
POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
Richard Paradise, Chairperson -
Glen Dawson -
FESTIVITIES COMMISSION -
Sandra Shackle -
Russell Warren -
v,fhv PpmPYleaU
.
J
FIRST YEAR GOALS - POLICE CHIEF
1. Move the departmenL towards a proacLive mode of. law enforce-
ment as well as reactive.
a. Actively organize neighborhood watch areas and publicize
the need for and benefits of that program and Operation I.D.
b. Meet with church, school, and community groups to develop
support for the department- and crime prevention programs.
2. Upgrade the in-service training program to provide adequate
training and ensure the physical and mental health of the
officers.
a. Require physical. and psychiatric evaluations prior to
relicensing and employment.
3. 0ecome more actively involved in the labor relations aspects
of the department including participation in contract nego-
tiations.
9. Reinstate the City's Safety Committee and actively participate
in the preparation of safety programs.
5. Assume the duties of Civil Defense Director and undertake
efforts to improve the City's Civil Defense activities
including, but not limited to, upgrading of the city's
warning system, development of training programs for staff,
a:d diocc^incticn G
va. lira ,.erl.al tV t11U public Lull tl1U 11111 U1JClpter
preparedness.
6. Evaluate present scheduling, patrol and enforcement practices,
and organizational structure with outlook towards improving the
level of service provided to the community at the most reasonable
UVJL pussible.
7. Develop and implement measures necessary to improve the
security of the department, records and evidence.
S. Develop program for improving the methods for records storage
and management including an evaluation of microprocessing and
microfilming.
9. In coordination with the Civil Service Commission, update the
department's operating rules and regulations, including the
coordination of non -union position descriptions with that
contained in the City's Salary Administration and Performance
Review Program.
10. Obtain advanced training in the areas of management and
budgeting.
POSITION ACCOUNTABILITY WRITE-UP (tfounds View)
I Pgsition Tit:lc Police Chief Datc August, 1900
l llupartment l'olicu Admiuislration
Accountable To Clerk Administrator
Primary objjectik'c of Pu:;i.t-ion
To provide effective leadership in the planning, development, implementa-
tion and evaluation of a comprehensive, fair and impartial. law- .
enforcement program which will continually command the respect and
confidence of Mounds view citizens
Major Areas of Accountability
Implements a program of law -enforcement and public service which will
engender the respect and confidence of citizens, preserve law and
order and protect life and property
--- Clearly defines and interprets department rules, regulations
and operating policies for all assigned personnel to ensure
consistent understanding and compliance with such policies
throughout the dopartmm t
Delegates responsibility and commensurate authority to department
(" I officers in a manner which will remove uncertainty about their
assigned accountabilities and the level of performance expected
l.ViiuuC+._ ^tine tom,,,,S anA innnPri-inr1R of police beat to keep abreast
•-� of developments in the City and evaluate the performance of
assigned officers
1
2
3
Plans and directs an in-service training program designed to maintain 4
officers' awareness of changes in laws and individual rights in
t..inn nM- laW-
order to ensure rtllllll'Ats tlllll impartiality
uin carry_..,
enforcement activities
personally performs police -work activities on a regular basis and
provides direct assistance in special investigations or when cir-
cumstances dictate
Develops and implements various crime -prevention programs in a manner
which will build community support and understanding of the need
for such activities
--- Continually analyzes crime patterns throughout the City as the
basis for planning a prevention program with good chance for
implementation and success
Prepares and submits a sound and documented budget for the department
and controls expenditures within approved budgetary limitations
5
11
7
Iluviewed by ..------- Approved by
'-_
Stanton Attoclrtu
Compiles and submits regular reports to the City Council and makes 0
personal pronentat•ionu at mectinq:c to provide an accurate picture
of law -enforcement and public-service ict.ivi.tion being provided
by the Department
Dlaintains ongoing contact with other police departments in surrounding -
jurisdictions au well as metropolitan ptoi'ussioual police organiza-
tions to keep abreast of new t•rainincl procedures which will havr.
application in Mounds View
--- ICcaps tip to date with current developments in the field of po-
lice administration through a program of reading, attending
seminars and other activities as appropriate
Serves as Civil Defense Director and develops a civil -defense disaster 10
plan for the City and files completed pl.e.ns with the appropriate
state agency
Serves as Chairperson of the City Safety Committee in meetings to de- 11
termine the final disposition of action to be taken in the case of
personal injury or pruperLy damage involving City personnel and/or
City vehicles
Recognizes and accepts opportunities to address various civic groups 13
on important aspects of police work in order to broaden understand-
ing and cooperation throughout the community
Assumes other responsibilities as apparent or as delegated 14
Other Performance Measurements a
--- Established programs for law enforcement and public service are
achieved and implemented
-- opportunities are taken to promntr a favnrabin image of the depart- S
ment and create good public relations through civic groups and
other presentations in the community
--- Provided services consistently command the confidence and respect C
of the community
Res onsi.bi.lity for work of others
Direct supervision over ---
Police Sergeants
Police Investigator
Police Corporals
patrol officers
Department Secretary
Department Clark Typ'
. MEMO TO: Mounds View Citv Council
FROM: Hrncc K. Ando
Parks, Recrr;a
DATE: December 1, 1
RE: Tractor Sdocifications
Enclosed are bid specifications that staff has developed for the
purchase of the 1984 tractor to replace the City's 1963
International. As you are aware, the City Council has allocated
$16,500 for the purchase of a new tractor and staff has developed
specifications that we feel meet our current City needs.
In addition to purchasing a diesel tractor, staff has listed six
potential options which will be evaluated and reviewed on an
individual basis. Staf.f's initial recommendation would be that a
rotary mowing deck and front end loader/bucket are two required
attachments with the broom and sickle/bar mower as possible
purchases.
In addition to soliciting bids for a new tractor, staff has also
been actively pursuing the used market to determine if there is a
used vehicle that can meet the City's needs, when staff reviews
the bid proposals for the new unit, we will also be providing a
staff report which outlines the used market so the City Council
can review both aspects prior to awarding the contract.
AS ran ha nntnei i.^. t!:e bid
trade in the 1963 International which is in poor working
condition and currently in need of a great deal of repair.
Should you have any questions regarding the attached hid
specifications, feel free to contact myself directly at 784-3055,
ext. 41.
RECOMMENDATION To direct staff to set a bid opening date for
Wednesday, December 21, 1983 at 10:30 a.m, for the purchase of
one 1984 tractor with attachments.
BKA/sll
Enclosure
CI'1'y OF MOUNDS VIEW
2401 Highway 10
Mounds View, Minnesota 95112
INVITATION_fo HiD
The City of Mounds View, 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
will he accepting hid proposals in the Parks and Recreation
Department until LO:30 a.m. on Wednesday, December 21, 1983 at
which time they will be open and read aloud.
Instructions: Please quote promptly on the attached bid proposal
form. The hid proposal form should be filled out completely
including the firm delivery date as well as stating parts and
labor warranty. In addition, the City is requesting that you
ly municipalities which will he
furnish three references, preLerab
reviewed prior to awarding of the final contract.
Terms: The City will he providing a purchase order to authorize
the purchase with payment to be within forty -Live (45) days from
the date the invoice is received. ALL HIDS must he accompanied
by a cashier's or certified check directed to the City of Mounds
View for 58 of the total bid proposal. In addition, should the
proposed vehicle that you are bidding vary from the attached bid
specifications, be sure to attach copies of the manufacturers
data to substantiate tho bid specification differences.
The City Council reserves the right to retain the deposits of the
two lowest bidders for a period not to exceed thirty (30)
calendar days after day and time set for the opening of the bids.
The City Council also reserves the right to reject any and all
bids and further reserves the right to award the contract in the
best interests of the City.
BID PROPOSAL FORMS SHOULD BE MAILED TO:
Bruce K. Anderson, Director
Mounds View Parks, Recreation and Forestry Dept.
24nl Highway 10
Mounds View, Minnesota 55112
(612) 784-3055
DEADLINE FOR BID PROPOSALS IS: Wednesday,
December 21, 1983
10:
Mounds View City Hall
Council Chambers
TRACTOR SPECIFICA'rioNS
ONE; 1984 NEW 4—WHEEL DRIVE ALL PURPOSE TRACTOR
ENGINE 3 cylinder, diesel engine, water cooled with minimum 157
cu. in. displacement, not. fly wheel i.e.m.c., 34 horsepower at
2,000 rpm, 7 quart engine nil capacity, oil filter, dry cartridge
type air cleaner, oil pressure light, and water temperature
gauge.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM 12 volt with 77 amp hour battery, 51 amp
alternator, alternatuc light, key starter: switch with
transmission safety lock.
EXHAUST SYSTEM Upright muffler, low noise type to meet
M.P.C.A. O.S.H.A, standards.
SEAT I>nLrxe adjIlsting springs suspPnfipd with scat belts, to meet
O.S.H.A. standards.
TRANSMISSION 8 forward speeds, 2 reverse speeds.
P.T.O. Live 540 rpm roar P.T.0.
DIFFERENTIAL Manually operated differential lock.
BRAKES Individual or simultaneous foot operated parking lock
with a 14" minimum diameter shoe break.
FRONT END Swept back, power assist steering.
HYDRAULICS Three (3) point hitch lift with 8.5 gpm pump, two
lever hydraulic control. One (1) lever position, one (1) lever
draft control, one (1) lever remote control valve with c0un1Prc,
manual hydraulic oil flow control and swinging draw bar, with
stabilizer kit.
TIRES One (1) set of tires should be included in the bid
including 1.50 x 16, 6 ply front tires, 16.9 x 24, 6 R3 rear
tires with 510# rear wheel weights. fi-m ticus as f5peC1F"..
should be turf tires to be utilized on landscape or park turf
areas.
LIGHTS Two (2) sealed beam headlights and one (1) red tail
light, flashing safety light and instrument panel light, and rear
work lights.
OTHER EQUIPMENT Fuel gauge, hand throttle, tool kit, tool box,
full instrumentation and all additional standard equipment
including horn.
CAB O.S.H.A. approved all steel cab with roll bar protection. A
35,0UO H.'r.u. heater and defroster with pressurized blower with a
minimum of 630 cu.ft. per minute capacity with replacable
filter. Front and rear windshield wipers, rear view mirror,
moveahlo back window, removeable doors or half doors. The cab
should also include two (2) headlights in the upper front, dome
light, front windshield washer, directional lights and fenders.
-2-
litn OPTIONS
The City of Mounds Vir;w is also rr.que.:;Cin9 hid prop��sals for the
following pieces of equipment as optional attaclunents (jr
equipment to the aforementioned tractor:
1. BROOM A frout nuluntud hydraulic drive, 72" x 32" poly broom,
left: hyr
3 spnal control valve, righl and broomhood�Jw'ithfther
mounted hydraulic pump, hydraulic lift,
broom mounted on the tractor.
OhSbid oPO1ts ua
e the cost
2. FRONT OUNTED awe
„Me live 540 rpmPfOnlPfrs the rear
fnr
of. the tractor.
nted Witt' 8
3. SNO�aERrangp of,30ron45mhorsepowerwwit011 hwa�minimum cutting
width „ The minimum rutting height should be 24" and
width of 72 .
it should be a two stage snow blownr unit -
height range of 1-1/2" - 7-1/2". Blade
q, ROTARY MOWER DECK This should have a minimum cutting width
of 72" with a cutting g
inimum of 2,440 based on a three blade
rpms should be a m
system.
all
5, L'R0N'1' ENU LOAUEIt The Front edoubled
acter ing ulift �and bucket
loader frame with lift arms, minimum of
cylinders. The bucket wlMelchanicallyuld eself-leveling,7rr.turn
a 4�70UI iifi cap•-•-,. le lever control.
to dig feature, and sing
6, SICKLE/BAR MOWER The sickle/bar mower attachment must have
a minimum cutting width of 5'.
C1TY OF MONNDS VIEW
2,1111 Highway III
M1lnund>; Vi❑w, Milln -N01,1 55112
BID PROPOSAL, FORM
Firm Name:
Address:
Phone ¥:
Firm Representative or Contact Person
I. 1984 4-WWEIiI, DRIVE TRACTOR BID SPCCIFICATIONS.
YEAR MAKE MODEL DESCRIPTION BIt) PRICE
II. FRONT MOUNTED SNOWBLOWER
YEAR MAKE; I hiODEL
III. FRONT P.T.O.
DESCRIPTION I BID PRICE
YEAR MAKE; MODEL DESCRIPTION BID PRICE
IV, 72" ROTARY MOWER
YEAR I MAKE I MODEL. I DESCRIPTION RID PRICE:
-2-
V. SICKLE BAR MOWER
YEAR MAKE MODEL--_ --DESCRIPTION ---_ BID PRICE
VI. FRONT END LOADER
YEAR MAKE MODEL _ DESCRIPrioN - -- _ BID PRICE
VII. ALLOTMENT FOR TRADE-IN OF 1963 INTERNATIONAL TRACTOR
MODEL #2544-3000 FRONT END LOADER WITH A 60" WICKET.
*The Mounds View City Council will he taking the trade-in
allotment into consideration before awarding the bid for
the purchase of a new 1984 tractor. The City's 1963 Inter-
national tractor may be viewed during regular working hours
7:00 a.m. - 3:30 p.m. by contacting City Mechanic Dick
Schmidlin at the public wurks garage at 784-3055, ext. N30. t.
YEAR
MAKE
MODEL
DESCRIPTION
TRADE-IN ALLOT
1963
Int.
2544
3000 loader w/ 60" bucket
V111. REFERENCE LISPS - REFERENCES A minimum of three (3)
references are required for the purchase of your main
tractor unit, preferably municipalities or organizations.
NAME CONTACT PERSON ` PHONE NO.
2.
3.
IX. FIRM DELIVERY DATE:
X. IS MANUFACTURER'S LITERATURE: ENCLOSED? ( )Yes ( )No
XI. PLEASE OLITLINI: THE PARTS AND LABOR WARRANTY.
MEMO TO: Clerk -Administrator and city Council
FROM: Engineering/Planning TcVhnicirur Fif-
DATE: December 1, 19113
SOB.IECT: PROGRAMMED LAND REAPPORTIONMENT
Attached please find a revised assessment reapportionment for the
recent Programmed Land Subdivision which was figured using lot
square footages and not lot frontages as previously calculated.
These revised sheets are in response to the Council's concern as
voiced at the November 21st Agenda Session. Tt should be noted
that the figures given in the resolutions for Auditor's Number
1005 ($5,218.63) and for Auditor's Number 1408 ($10,069.07) are
on final assessment figures for Lot 2, Block 3, Programmed Land
1st Addition. These figures are not the current halances (amount
left to be paid). The current halances are as follows:
Auditor's Number 1005 $1,826.54
Auditor's Number 1408 $1,006.91
Reapportioning these "balance due" figures gives the following
amounts which will be assessed to each lot:
Auditor's Number 1005
Auditor's Number 1408
Total for Each Lot
Parcel
59-59510-010-01
(Uotee! Site)--
$ 842.31
$ 492.18
$1,334.49
Parcel
59-59510-020-01
(Lot 2, Block 1).
$ 984.23
$ 514.73
$1,498.96
Also attached is an agreement which is being sent to the owners
of both Lots 1 and 2, Programmed Land 2nd Addition requesting
their signatures of approval to the method of calculating the
assessments.
If you have any questions as to the method by which these
lease contact me.
assessment reapportionments were calculated, p
F.1K/bc
Attachments
ASSESSMENT REAPPORTIONMENT AGREEMENT
1, (Norb yenish/Wayne Bachman), owner. of (Lot 1, Block I/
Lot 2, Block 11 Programmed Land 2nd Addition hereby agree to the
reapportioning of assessments as indicated on the attached pages
and also agree to waive the right: to object to the reapportioning
as shown.
(Norb yenish/Wayne Bachman)
Date ^-------------
is
Resolution Number:
1605
Date:
Division Nwnber: 58302
'
Name ei Assessment:
SaniLary
Sewer and Water Improvement
1909-4
Auditor's Number:
1005
DaLa Procossing Number:
85
original AssensmeoL
(A) Parcel 59-59500-U2U-03
Programmed Land 1st Addition
I.ut 2, ➢lock 3
Carew ProlicUicu, 111C.
TOTAL ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT
Apportionment
(1) Parcel 59-59510-010-01
Programmed Land 2nd Addition
LuL 1, Uluck 1
Carew Properties, Inc.
(2) Parcel 59-59510-020-01
Programmed Land 2nd Addition
Lot 2, ➢lock 1
Carew Properties, Inc.
TOTAL APPORTIONED ASSESSMENT
Swr. Ftg. 284.92
Str. Ptg. 284.92
Area
SWr. JVLV.
Total Swr. Imp.
Area 97,422
Swr. Serv.
,Total Imp.
Area 101,886
Swr. Serv.
Total Swr. Imp.
$ 3,538.70
1.,384.72
295.21
$ 5,218.63
$ 5,218.63
$ 2,406.57
$ 2,406.57
$ 2,516.85
295.21
$ 2,812.06
$ 5,218.63
0
Resolution Number: 1685 Date: Division Number: 58302
Name of Assessment: Street Improvement 1973-6
Auditor's Nund:er: 14U8 UaLa Processing Number: 98
Original Assessment
(A) Parcel 59-59500-020-03 Wtr. Ptg. 284.92
Programmed Land Irt Addition Stm. Swr. 284.92
WL 2, Block 3 SLr. Canal. 2114.92
Carew I'rapertius, Inc.
Total Imp.
TUTAI, ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT
Apportionment
(1) Parcel 59-59510-010-01 Area 97,422
Programmed Land 2nd Addition
Lot 1, Block 1
Carew Prcperties, Inc.
Total imp.
(2) Parcel 59-59510-020-01 Area 101,886
Programmed Land 2nd Addition
WL 2, Block 1
Carew Properties, Inc.
Total Imp.
TOTAL APPORTIONED ASSESSMENT
$ 2,998.78
1,934.47
5,U85.82
$ 10,069.07
$ 10,069.07
$ 4,921.77
S 4,921.77
$ _ 5,147.30
5,147.30
10,069.07
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
November 14, 1983
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Hwy. 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Mounds View City Council was called to order by 1. Call to Order
Mayor McCarty at 7:30 PM on November 14, 1983.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Councilmembers Blanchard, Doty,
Linke, Hankner and Mayor McCarty.
ALSO PRESENT: City Attorney Meyers, Clerk/Admini-
srrator Pauley and Public Works/Community Development
Director Johnson.
Motion/Second: Doty/Linke to approve the October 24,
TgET minutes as corrected.
5 ayes 0 nays
Don Hodges, 5086 Eastwood Road, asked why the roads
were not graveled and resurfaced down Long Lake Road,
and particularly on the street in front of his home.
He pointed out that if the cracks are not filled
before winter, it will cost a lot more to repair the
roads in the spring. He also pointed out that the
cracks could be patched.
Director Johnson explained that the City had taken
the available funds and seal coated as far as the
money allowed, and that the areas that weren't covered
this year will hopefully be covered next year. He
added that they could patch this year, but do not have
the necessary equipment. He explained that the money
was budgeted in the revenue sharing account for 1983
but he has been having trouble getting bids on the
equipment.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley stated he could place the
item on the agenda for the next agenda session.
Mayor McCarty asked that Items C and F, be removed
for discussion.
Councilmember Doty asked that Items I and L be
removed for discussion.
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of
Minutes:
October 24, 1
Motion Carried
4. Residents
Requests and
Comments from
the Floor
5. Approval of
Consent Agenda
Mounds View City Council; F November 14, 1.983
Regular Meeting '
Page Two '
-------------------------------------------------- -----------------------
Motion/Second: McCarty/Linke to approve the consent
.agenda, minus Items C, E, I and L, and waive the
rc:iding of the resolutions.
5 ayes 0 nays
Mayor McCarty pointed out that on Item C, the fees
are proposed to be taken out of the contingency fund,
and he reviewed the assessment to the City, with the
assessed share of the cost being due in the fall, but
the City would not know what the franchise fee return
would be until spring, and the fees may not be suffi-
cient to cover the cost in the spring.
Motion/Second: McCarty/Blanchard to table Resolution
No. until such time as Staff may rework it to
account for the franchise fee being payable in the spring.
5 ayes 0 nays
Mayor McCarty questioned Item E, reviewing the request
for a wetland alteration permit, whether the City was
telling Mr. Morgan to restore the area, as specified
in the proposed resolution, and then having Staff work
with him to follow the guidelines of the ordinance, and
then allow him to go back and do the same thing later
within the confinds of the ordinance.
Director Johnson explained that Mr. Morgan will clean
up what has been started, but he is not being directed
to return it to its original condition.
Hotion/Second: McCarty/Blanchard to anprove Resolution
o, authorizing interim wetland alteration permit
for Roger Morgan at 7395 Knollwood Drive, and waive
the reading of the resolution.
5 ayes 0 nays
Councilmember Doty asked for a clarification of Item I.
Motion/Second: Doty/Hankner to approve Item I of
tie consent agenda, for the final ppayment to Allied
Blacktop Company in the amount of M ,031.06, with
the final acceptance date set as October 14, 1983.
5 ayes 0 nays
Councilmember Doty questioned Check No. 012411, in
the amount- of $1,696.00 to Bolger. Publications for
the Charter Commission.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained that the pay-
ment is actually for the City Newsletter and that
the incorrect reference had been listed on the
print-out.
Motion Carried
Motion Carried
Motion Carried
Motion Carried
Mounds View City Council ,November 14, 1983
Regular Meeting — Page Three
------------------------
Notion/Second: Doty/Linke to approve Item L of the
consent agenda, Resolution No. 1681, approving just
and correct claims against the City funds, and
correcting Check No. 012411 to read for the City
Newsletter, and waive the reading of the resolution.
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carried
Motion/Second: Linke/Blanchard to approve Reso- 6. Approval o1680
Iutio��80, commending the Irondale Knights Commending the
girls soccer team as State girls soccer champions. Irondale Knigh
Girls Soccer
5 ayes 0 nays
Team as State
Girls Soccer
Champions
Motion Carried
Mayor McCarty read Resolution No. 1680, and
presented it to Coach Anderson.
Motion/Second: Doty/Blanchard to appoint to the 7. Consideration
of Police
positioHof Police Chief, Timothy Ramacher, who is CandidatesChief
an investigator for the City Police Department in Certified by th
Mounds View. Civil Service
Councilmember Blanchard - aye Commission
r,,,nniimPmher Doty - aye
Councilmember Linke - aye
Councilmember Hankner - aye Motion Carried
Mayor McCarty - aye
Discussion occurred before the vote was taken, with
Councilmember Hammer reading a prepared statement,
saying that she would like to state that prior to
certification of the candicates to the Council, the
only screening procedure was a 20 minute interview
of each applicant. Because of the very limited
screening process, only two members of the Council
requested further interviews, tests and psychological
evaluations for the purpose of selecting from among
the three final candidates. Neither the Council nor
the Commission as a group set any criteria for
selection, and the Councilmembers have been left with
setting their own individual criteria. She stated
that in her opinion, none of the three candidates
fully meets her criteria, and therefore, it is very
difficult for her to vote for any candidate, but in
considering Attorney Meyer's opinion regarding
Chapter 419, she has no choice but to vote for a
candidate, against her better judgement. She added
that during the past week, a number of residents had
spoken with her of their concerns about the process
q an I .r, -
Mounds View City CouncilNovember 14, 1983
Regular Meeting _ _._ Page Pour' '
_
or lack thereof, and have expressed a desire to
pursue legal action, and that she feels that in
the future the process used should be more open
and fully analyzed. She added that although she
has reservations in voting in favor of a candi-
date, she will support the newly appointed chief.
Motion/Second: Linke/Hankner to amend the previous
motion n and set guidelines for the appointment of
the Police Chief and have a probationary term of
12 months, with reviews given at the beginning of
the fourth, seventh, and twelth months, based on a
list of goals and policies set forth by the Council,
to be determined at the next agenda session, on
November 21, 19E3.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Councilmember Linke suggested four policies that be
included, and stated he feels there should be some
type of criteria for the Police Chief, to base his
accomplishments on.
Mayor McCarty reviewed Chapter 419.05, which concerns ,
the duties of the Civil Service Commission.
Attorney Meyers stated that the rules of the Civil
Service Commission provide for a probationary period,
and read applicable sections of the code. He added
that the ro,,,,ril mav, with the approval of the Civil
Service Commission, reject an appointee. He added
the Council should be making evaluations during the
probationary period, and if a candidate is not
meeting with approval, they can certify it to the
Civil Service Commission.
Mayor McCarty stated he agreed to a point with
Councilmember Linke's concept of the previous motion,
that goals and policies should be set, in cooperation
with the Civil Service Commission, but he could not
vote for a list of goals and policies that the Council
had'not seen.
Councilmember Blanchard stated she agreed, to a point,
with Councilmember Linke's motion, but that specific
guidelines should not be set out in a motion at this
time, as the Council needs time to review them.
Councilmember Hankner stated she was in favor of
having goals and policies included, as they need to
set forth what the Council expects of the new Police
Chief, and it would be appropriate at this time, prior
to taking the position, so ;he new Chief would know
what is expected of him,
November 14, 1983
Mounds View City Council Page Five
Regular Meeting
------------------------------------
John Blackstone, 8333 Knollwood Drive stated he was
not speaking for or against any candidate but rather
against the process, and that to an uninformed
observer, the selection process that has been used
appears to be political, biased and discriminatory,
and that he feels it allowed unqualified candidates
and eliminated qualified candidates.
He requested that the Council defer making an appoint-
ment and that the Civil Service commission review the
rules and guidelines and have the entire process
reopened. Ile added that if the Council does not defer,
there is a group of Mounds View citizens who have con-
sulted an attorney and are ready to take legal action.
upon questioning, Mr, Blackstone identified the group
as Citizens for a Fair Selection Process for a Police
Chief of Mounds View.
Mayor McCarty replied that the process has taken
the direction, as set forth by State law, and the
Council was advised by him at the very beginning
to convey their thoughts and ideas to the Civil
Service Commission, for their use in the selection
process.
Dick Paradise, 5091 Eastwood Road, identified him-
self as the chairman of the Civil Service commission,
and stated they conducted many open meetings in the
Council chambers and spent many months in the selection
process. He added it was tough job, andhey would the etings
they held were open to the prlubl--
And have
accepted their input at any time. He stated he did
not feel it was very kind to have a statement such as
Mr. Blackstone's made at this time. He stated he had
only received one phone call from a citizen during the
whole selection process, and he and the other Civil
Service Commission members were available for anyone
to address.
Howard Nisson, 5150 Irondale Road, stated he had
followed the selection process and he is very happy
with the selection of Timothy Ramacher, and he stated
he felt the Civil Service Commission had made the
best choice possible.
Don Hodges stated that during his past service to the
City, he had observed the beginning of the Police
Civil Service Commission, and he feels the City's
Police Department is one of the best in the State.
He added he felt the Civil Service Commission had done
a very good job, and he also reminded people that the
past Police Chief had come to the City as a machinist,
and what a good job he had done as a Police Chief.
Councilmember Doty stated he had voted in favor of
the motion, as Mr. Ramacher had lived in the area
most of his life and he has served commendably for
Mounds View City Counc�l November 14, 1983
Regular Meeting f �d ea u _ Page Six '
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
the City as a member of the Police Department, and
his testing proved him to be a highly recommended
individual, capable of being trained in areas that
he does not now possess the skills the Council feels
he might need more training in.
Mayor McCarty pointed out that from the very beginning,
the process, as set forth by State law, was followed,
and that opportunity was provided for public input,
as well as that of elected officials, and that he is
concerned with a negative response that does not con-
sider the positive side. He stated he believes in
the democratic process, where everyone has their day
in court, and that he feels the City has a very good
new Chief of Police. He added the Council will be
getting together with the Civil Service Commission
and make it work well for the City.
Councilmember Linke called for the vote on the main
motion, of appointing the Police Chief.
Motion/Second: Linke/Hankner to call for the vote,
and have a rollcall. vote.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Iti
Clerk/Administrator Pauley reviewed the suggested 8. Considera
advertisement for the position of Director of of Staff Memo
Public Works/Community Development. Regarding Ad-
vcrtiu inn finY
b - -
Motion/Second: Blanchard/Linke to authorize Staff the Director
to advertise a to for the position of Director of Public of Public Works
Works/Community Development. Community
Development Pst
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carried
Motion/Second: Linke/Hankner to have the first 9. 1st Reading of
reading o Ordinance No. 350, amending Chapter 48 Ordinance No.
of the Municipal Code of Mounds View, entitled 350, Amending
"Wetland Zoning Ordinance", and waive the reading. Chapter 48 of
the Mounds View
Municipal Code
Entitled, "Wet-
land Zoning
Ordinance"
Mayor McCarty expressed concern with protecting
the integrity of the ordinance, as in the case of
other type 2 wetlands in the City. He stated that
on October 23, Staff requested Barr, Braun and
the Ramsey County Sn:l. and Watcr Conservation
Mounds View City Council November 14, 1983
Regular Meeting Page Seven
-----------•-------------------------------------------------------------
District (RCS&WCD) to address specifically the state-
ment that 1-22 does not fully function as a wetland,
and that while the City has received responses from
them, none of them directly prove that 1-22 is not a
wetland, lie reviewed the Barr Engineering letter of
November 7, 1983, the terminology used in the response
from Braun Engineering, and the fact that RCS&WCD
states that the area does exhibit approximately 1.1
acres of type 2 wetland habitat. He stated he does
not feel the City has sufficient proof to show that
1-22 is not a wetland.
Councilmember Linke reviewed statements made in the
Braun report, that to be considered a wetland would
be stretching the point.
Councilmember Doty stated there is no statement from
the experts, stating that it is no longer a wetland,
and they must determine what type of wetland it is,
not its function.
Councilmember Hankner stated that in the ordinance,
it refers to a functioning wetland and protection of
that functioning wetland and the value of the wetland,
and they must decide if it is best to protect that
wetland or if a proposed development would provide a
better quality of life for wildlife habitat. She
pointed out that the Miller proposal calls for the
creation of another wetland, and they must discuss
the value and function of the wetland.
Mnum- Mrr:,rtv nnintorl nit- Yin Qntnnt of the nrdin_nnnn
is to protect the wetland, and they still do not have
proof from the consultants that this is not a wetland.
Councilmember Blanchard questioned if the new boundries
are set whether it would reduce the size to a point
where it would no longer be effected, or below the
criteria for being on the wetlands map.
Director Johnson replied that if it is left on the map,
the boundries would be adjusted according to expert
opinion, but that the size would remain the same, the
area would just be redeliniated.
Mayor McCarty stated he was concerned that anyone who
owns a type 2 wetland could come in, based on action
the Council might take on this item, so they must be
careful in setting a precedent. He added they need
proof positive whether or not 1-22 is a wetland.
Attorney Meyers advised that whatever criteria is used
in this case mustt be used in future cases, and the
question seems to be the word "functioning", and the
liberal versus strict interpretation. He advised the
Council they must require definite evidence if a wet-
land is no longer a wetland.
Mounds View City Councir� November 14, 1983
Regular Meeting Page Eight
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Motion/Second: McCarty/Doty to amend the previous
motion to table Ordinance No. 350 for an indefinite
period of time, and give the developer time to
bring in the necessary documentation that this is
not a wetiand.
3 ayes 2 nays Motion Carried
Councilmemhers Linke and Hankner voted against the
motion. Councilmember Hankner reminded the Council
they are under a time restriction on this development.
John Miller also reminded the Council of the time
line, and he reviewed Chapter 48.01, Sub. 3 A, re-
garding the criteria of a functioning wetland.
Mayor McCarty replied that the experts have not said
it is not a functioning wetland. Mr. Miller stated
he would contact his consultant.
Jim Miller stated that under the same section, 48.01,
Sub. 3 A, it states the City is to adopt a map
designating the existing functional wetlands that are
to be protected. He pointed out it does not mention
anything about the type of wetland, and he read from
the letter of November 2 from RCS&WCD, which clearly -'
states there is little, if any, functioning wetland,
He also pointed out the ordinance asks a question of
value, referring to those that are to be protected.
Mr. Miller pointed out the October 31 letter from
Braun Engin0uiing states very clearly that the area
does not function as a typical wetland, and does not
perform the functions of a wetland.
Councilmember Hankner questioned how far the protection
of a wetland goes, and pointed out there is so much
garbage on the land in question, that it could not
possibly function as a wetland.
Jim':tiller also referred to the Barr letter, stating
that 1-22 does not function as a wetland. He added
that in their proposal for the entire parcel of land,
they have two complete wetlands identified on the
property, with one wetland alteration permit applied
for. He stated they would like to replace the 1-22
designated area and establish an area on the eastern
portion of the property as a functioning wetland
habitat of a larger size, with all wetland functions,
and that the new wetland would be functioning on a
460 acre upland drainage area. He added they are
trying to provide some type of vehicle to provide
a wetland area, and they have been advised by Staff 1
of the steps needed to be taken.)
Councilmember Linke suggef:.ed that instead of tabling
the ordinance, have the .st reading, in order to keep
Mounds View City Council November 14,
Regular Meeting Page Nine
--------------------------------------------------------------------
the process going, and then require the proof needed
before the second reading.
Councilmember Doty replied they would be moving on
an ordinance change, and then possibly changing their
minds later, which could result in legal reprocussions.
Councilmember Linke pointed out the Council has done
that several times in the past on other ordinances.
Councilmember Blanchard stated she had voted in favor
of tabling action but reminded the Council they are
set to time limits.
Final vote on main motion as amended:
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion/Second: McCarty/Doty to table this action, 10
to co uicide with Item 9 on the agenda.
2 ayes 3 nays
Councilmembers Linke, Blanchard and Hankner voted
against the motion.
John Miller asked that the Council please move on
this item.
Councilmember Hankner stated it was clear in her
mind what boundaries should be set, and she did not
feel action should be delayed.
Mayor McCarty stated he felt the two ordinances
go hand in hand.
Councilmember Linke pointed out the Council had
originally requested that the two area, 1-22 and
1-23 be treated separately, and stated he concurs
with the Braun delineation.
Councilmember Doty stated there is nothing stating
specifically where the boundries should be, just
cohere they could be.
Director Johnson reviewed a map of the proposed
changes. He stated that it would supercede any
previous documents in accuracy.
Councilmember Doty stated that Barr Engineering gave
the City a map of the wetland boundries that differs
somewhat from the Braun report, and the Council
1983
Motion Carried
1st Reading of
Ord. lio. 351
Amending Chapter 48
of the Mounds View
Municipal Code
Entitled "Wetland
Zoning Ordinance"
Motion Failed
Mounds View City Counci f November 14, 1983
Regulag Meeting 4 Page Ten
---- _------------------- W-'--`'-_ "- --_* - -'-r- ---------------------
+w
could come to some type of compromise and not take
the most liberal position.
Councilmember Hankner questioned what criteria
could be used to determine where the boundries are.
Councilmember Doty replied they could take half the
difference.
Mayor McCarty stated the ordinance does not contemplate
readjusting the boundries without certain proof, and
the stated the Council should require it.
Councilmember Linke stated that in 1-23, Braun has
come back with delineations, stating there was an
error in the original map. He pointed out that the
City hired Braun, so they should go with their
recommendation.
Councilmember Hankner reminded the Council that a
few months ago, when they were trying to determine
boundries, they decided they needed a firm other
than the developers firm, so they paid $5,000 for
the Braun report, and they now have information from
three reports, and questioned why the Council cannot
determine where the boundries are.
Mayor McCarty replied that the Council's action on
hiring a consultant was well thought out, and the
money came from the SWM fund, which is paid by
developers, but that the consultants have not
provided the City with the information needed.
Councilmember Linke pointed out that on 1-23, the
Council asked them to redelineate, according to
the information they gathered in their work. Fie
added that it is time the City accepts their
redelineation, as the old one has been proven wrong
three times by three different engineering firms.
Councilmember Hankner stated she felt the Braun
report was the most accurate, with the most facts
and information.
Councilmember Blanchard stated she agreed, and that
the City had paid for the Braun report and they
should accept it.
Councilmember Doty stated they should take the
different recommendations and then compromise, and
suggested Mr. Miller draw the lines. Mr. Miller
replied that he did not consider himself qualified.
Neil Loeding stated the Council has three different 440
expert opinions, and there is latitude. Ile warned
the Council they might well be advised to take a
more conservative into �retation, in the best interest
of the City, or they 1.d be turning the ordinance
Mounds View City Council November 14, 1983
Regular Meeting --Page Eleyen
------------------------------------------------------ -------------
into a scrap of paper, and cutting it to shreds.
He added it has been suggested whether the Council
consider if the development is in the best interest
of the City, and asked what evidence there is that
this would be in the best interest of the City. He
added that he does not feel that what has been pro-
posed is in the best interest- of the ordinance. lie
added it should remain the way it is until the
ordinance is changed. lie stated that at one time it
was possible for naive Council members to take the
position that development was in the best interest
of the City, but that only fools on the Council
could automatically assume every development was in
the best interest of the City. He added they should
learn more about what a developer is proposing before
putting a stamp of approval on wholesale gutting out
of the ordinance.
Councilmember Hankner replied the Council cannot take
the opinion of naive residents who portray themselves
as experts. She stated she has spoken to all who are
involved in the reports, and the most tangible evidence
is what is presented in the Braun report, and that
while it might be a bit more liberal than the others,
it would not compromise the ordinance.
Mayor McCarty stated he would not allow emotions to
get carried away and would use his gavel as necessary.
Councilmember Blanchard expressed her displeasure at the
character assasination from the audience.
Jim Miller pointed out the Barr Engineering wetland
alteration permit application clearly stated in a
detailed manner what the developer plans to do, and
most of the people involved understand the development
they are attempting to set forth. He added that the
Planning Commission and City Council had asked that
a conceptual development plan on Phase II of the rest
of the property be provided, which has been extensively
detailed for them.
Mr. Miller stated that as far as the difference in
where the experts draw the lines, Barr Engineering
is in concurrance with the Braun report, and the
Barr identification of the wetlands was part of the
development proposal, and the Braun report was
totally committed to identifying the wetland
boundries.
Mr. Miller stated that there are a number of places
where the ordinance is open minded enough to set the
criteria with the wording "as determined by the City
Council", and the ordinance gives the Council the
credit they are due in understanding the concepts that
are put in front of them.
November 14, 19.83
PIounds View City Coun it --- ,-i Page Twelve
Regular Meeting -----------
---------
------- eetin-------,------------------ ---c-,�;; -
several
es
Councilmember Ldiscussion. thee stated tdevelopmentmhasdbeeng
the brought
up , and 1
brought up, pointed out that the ordinance does
not contemplate a development, but rather acontemplates
an amendment of the wetlands zoning
ordinand map
which has been shown in error. lie added that
the City hired a consu].taut to give site specific
refer
boundaries, and LhaC because of that information, the
ordinance was brought forth. ilieeadhired by tle ed lie would City
to have the report of tile engineer
used, and he does not want to make it a practice of
contradicting e119ineers.
the
Mayor McCarty stated is of thecernd ordinancel, and thater-
vation of the integ Y
for 1-22, they asked for didfnotsreceive. Headded
the consultant, which they
that 1-22 and 1-23 go hand in hand.
n is inade
Councilmember Doty stated that if a theoordinance
this evening, there is a possibility
would fail tonight also.
John Miller stated again that he would like to get on
with the process.
Attorney Meyers
shadvised
that the
votest reading of
ould
John Miller replied that that was a procedural
question, and he felt a majority was required for
the firs- reading.
Motion/second: Linke/Hankner to have -he first
48
rea ing o Ordinance No. 351, amending Chapter
of the Mcunds View Municipal Code entitled of theland
Zuniug ordivance", aic! waive the reading
ordinance.
Councilmember Linke pointed dout that
all thet motion
was doing is accepting e
Wands
1-23, the delineation as given by the engineer the
City hired to determine it.
Councilmember Doty stated the engineer came up
with
the most liberal delineation, and there is some
question in taking the most position
ithnon
some
the boundaries, and they
type of compromise,
Councilmember Hankner sr ested ].o--Iki.:ig at the Braun
Mounds View City Council November 14, 1983
Regular Meeting Page Thirteen
=------------------------------------------------------------------------
report as being the most accurate, with the most
evidence supporting it.
Mayor McCarty stated the City is asking for proof,
which Lhe 1eLLur from Braun did not provide, and
the Council must protect the integrity of the
ordinance, and should take the time to get the proof.
John Miller reminded the Council he has already
spent four and a half years to get to this point.
lie pointed out that Barr has accepted the Braun
report, with Braun making the in-depth study. He
stated they were told to find out exactly where the
wetlands are, and that is what they did, and
reminded the Council that he would like to get on
with the process, and lie feels very up in the air
as to where lie is at. He added the City has more
than enough documentation to back up the change in
the boundaries. He also stated that he has spent
a great deal of time and money in trying to develop
his property, while paying taxes on it, and stated
he feels the City owes him some consideration in
proceeding with the development of his property.
He stated he can do nothing with the property at
this rate and pointed out the City was regulating
his property without compensation.
Mayor McCarty replied he is well aware there
were lengthy periods of time in which Mr. Miller
did not come before the City, as well as the
two year moritorium. He added the City has
legally been regulating the property, according
to state law.
Motion/Second: Linke/Blanchard to call fui Lhe
question on the previous motion.
5 ayes 0 nays
Final Vote on Main Motion:
4 ayes 1 nay
Councilmcmber Doty voted against the motion.
Councilmember Doty explained he voted against the
motion to have the first reading of Ordinance No.
351 because with all the expert data, there is no
reason to take the most liberal boundary delineation,
even though it was from the consultant the City hired.
Mayor McCarty stated the second reading of Ordinance
No. 351 is scheduled for November 28, and he would
Motion Carried
Motion Carried
Mounds View City Council November 14, 1983
Regular Meeting I , Page Pourteen '
------------------- ------------'-`=------,�_------------------------
like to once again look at the proof offered by
the consultants, that the boundaries should be
changed on the basis that certain areas were not
wetlands. He stated the developer and the consultants
should come forward and meet with the Council, and
show that the area that has been subtracted is not
wetlands, and provide proof, along with 1-22.
Councilmember Linke asked what extent of proof
would be required. Mayor McCarty replied it would
be discussed with the developer and consultants.
Director Johnson stated that since the second reading
is schedule for November 28, they could, in the
interiim, schedule a meeting with Braun, Barr and
RCS&WCD.
Jim Miller stated that the evidence has been given
by all the experts already for exactly what the
ordinance asks.
Councilmember Hankner stated that in looking at all
the information received, the wetlands map is based
on the RCS&WCD survey, and it has been pointed out
over and over that it is very general in nature, and
if site specifications are required, they must be
obtained from specialists. She replied that the
Braun report is simply taking site specific information
and applying it to the property.
John Miller reminded the Council that they must con-
sider that when the City made the wetland map, it
was done by biology students, not professionals, and
a professional engineering firm is redefining it now.
He stated the City should go back to Braun and ask
for substantiation, which would be the proper
procedure.
Mayor McCarty stated they are just asking for proof.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley stated that authorization
would be required if any additional money is expended
in asking for clarification or proof from Braun.
Mayor McCarty replied that he is not willing to invest
any more of the City's money, from the SI%IM fund, and
that it is the developer's responsibility.
Councilmember Linke stated he was against spending any
further funds as the engineering report has come back
with the delineation of 1-23, which is exactly what
the City asked for, r
I
Councilmember Hankner stated she was against spending
any further money as she does not feel the City or
anyone else needs to incur the ex.;nse, as they already
have enough information fnva the � s.
0
November 14, 1983
Mounds View City Council E,,,
Page Fifteen
Regular Meeting ------------------------------------
-------------------- -------------
----
It• was agreed that the item would be placed on the
for
agenda for the November 21 agenda session,
the
'
discussion, and that Staff should contact
fees, and
consultant to find out any additional
LhaL Mr. Miller should advise if he would like
a representative from Barr present.
Park Director Anderson presented the Council with
11, Conof siderataff tion
emo
a memo concerning the bids received for the explained
them. explained
Regarding 1984
City Newsletter, and reviewed
that the low proposal was submitted by Mounds View
y
City Newsletter
BidyProposals
Printing, 2282 County Road I, but that it is a
feel
very small operation and the owner does not
the required 5% bid bond,
should could come up with
as they do not have that type of capital. He
explained that the City has worked with them before,
and they do an excellent quality of work, and
the January/ ebruary
suggested thatthey be awarded
if it works out well, they hen be
newsletter, and
awarded the entire year, but that Sexton, which was
the second low bid, be kept as a back-up in case
Mounds view Printing does not work out.
Mayor McCarty stated he was concerned about keeping
Meyers explained
the bid bond of Sexton. Attorney
that once the contract is awarded, the City must
release Sexton's bond.
Motion/Second: McCarty/Blanchard to direct Staff
to negotiate with Mounds View Printing to print
the
the January/February City Newsletter as per
bid bond of Sexton
bid specs, and to retain the
a formal contract is generated, and waive the
until
requirement for a bid bond from Mounds View Printing.
Motion Carried
5 ayes 0 nays
Park Director Anderson informed the Council that
this was the third year in a row the price has
decreased for the printing of the City Newsletter.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley added that it was due
to the increased quality of readiness the City
Staff has the material in, as it is photo ready.
Director Johnson reviewed the memo of November 14 12. Report of
Director of
from Building Inspector Rose, regarding the request Public Works/
of Norb Yenish for a grading permit. Community Dvlp.
Mayor McCarty stated he was concerned with granting
a partial permit rather than the complete permits.
Director Johnson explained that the building permit
would approve the grading. Clerk/Administrator
Pauley stated that to address the concerns, it
Mounds View City Council �, Vn' November 14, 1983
Regular Meeting Page Sixteen -
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
would be appropriate for Staff to issue a grading •
permit only, with the appropriate escrow, with no
Wier permits being granted until applicaLion for
a full permit was received. fie added they could
put the requirement in that the final permit must
be applied for within a certain amount of time or the
City could go in and seed and return the property to
its natural state.
The Council agreed that Staff could issue the
grading permit and require the appropriate fees.
Director Johnson stated lie would be attending a
water resources seminary on November 17 and 18.
He reported he will be giving the Council a
complete update on all projects underway, at the
next agenda session.
Attorney Meyers had no report. 13. Report of
Attorney
Councilmember Blanchard had no report.
14, Reports of
Councilmember Doty reported he would be attending
the Personnel Pension Labor
Councilmelfs
Relations committee
meeting on November 17.
Councilmember Linke reported the Festivities
Commission has voted to have the parade on the
Saturdav before the Festiva' the ll-..k.
+ in u�c Park allu
tie it in with the various tournaments being held.
Councilmember Linke reported the Ramsey County
League meeting will be held November 16, at Robert
Lee's, and the December meeting will be a banquet
on December 14 at the Maplewood Holiday Inn.
Councilmember Hankner had no report.
Mayor McCarty reviewed the schedule of meetings
for the Anoka County Airport issue, and updated
the Council on what occurred at the meeting that
was held at Westwood Jr. High. He explained he
had made several requests for information to the
Met Council, and had received a letter from their
Counsel, refusing to answer the questions as
the City is in litigation with them.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley reported he had re- 15. Report ofW
ceived a phone call from the Staff representative Administrator
of the Governor's select committee on the MWCC,
and he has been asked to ; atify before them on
Mounds View City Council November 14, 1983
Regular Meeting --------= Page Seventeen
--------------------------------------------
Wednesday evening, November 16.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley advised the Council he
will be presenting them with proposals for draperies
for his office at the next agenda session.
Moti6on/Second: Linke/Doty to adjourn the meeting at 16. Adjournment
Ib�PP1
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carried
Respectfully submitted,
Donald P. Pauley
Clerk/Administrator
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
November 29, 1983
i Mounds View City Hall
2401 Hwy. 10, Mounds View, Mid 55112
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Mounds View City Council was called to order by 1. Call to Order
Mayor McCarty at 7:34 PM on November 28, 1983.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Councilmembers Blanchard, Doty, 2. Roll Call
Linke, Hankner and Mayor McCarty.
ALSO PRESENT: City Attorney Meyers, Clerk/
A ministrator Pauley and Public Works/Community
Development Director Johnson.
Ed Latendre and Jim Quick of the Mounds View Jaycee's 3. Residents
presented a special award to the Council, the Presi- Requests and
dential Award of Honor, explaining it was the highest Comments from
honor that could be given in the Chapter. They also the Floor
presented a Sound Citizen Award and a Guest Speaker
Award, both in honor of Officer Dave Brick.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained the minutes of 4. Approval of
the November 14, 1983 meeting would be presented to Consent Agenda
the Council at the next agenda session.
Motion/Second: Linke/Blanchard to approve the
consent agenda as presented, and waive the reading
of the resolutions.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
John Miller presented the Council with a letter
5. 1st Reading of
from himself, dated November 29, 1983.
Ordinance No.
350 Amending
Motion/Second: Blanchard/Linke to have the first
Chapter 48 of
rea ng o rdinance No. 350, amending Chapter 48
the Mounds Vie
of the Mounds View Municipal Code entitled "Wet-
Municipal Code
land Zoning Ordinance", and waive the reading of
Entitled "Wet -
the ordinance, and include the Staff's synopsis
land Zoning
of the consultants reports, dated November 23, 1983,
Ordinance"
and the letter from Mr. ?filler dated November 29, 1983,
as part of the minutes.
i
Councilmember Blanchard - aye
Councilmember Doty aye
Councilmember Linke - aye
Councilmember Hankner - aye
Motion Carried
Mayor McCarty - aye
November 29, 1983
Mounds View City Council page Two
Regular Meeting ---------------------------- W------
Considerable discussion tool: place before the vote
was called for on the previous motion.
Councilmember Linke stated he was in agreement with
the supporting data outlined in the memo from Director
Johnson, dated November 23.
Councilmember Doty stated that in the supporting docu-
mentation for eliminating 1-22 as a wetland, he did
not feel it gave adequate reason for eliminating it.
He pointed it out it deals with a culvert that does
not work, and was put in 50 years ago, and the culvert
has no bearing on the wetland in its present conditions.
Be added it compares this wetland with other non-
specific wetlands, not the same size, and he did not
feel the terms were specific enough, nor the documen-
tation sufficient to say the wetland does not function
specifically as a wetland.
Mayor McCarty stated it was his understanding from the
discussion at the November 14 meeting and the last
agenda session that the Council was to receive specific
data, preferrably a comparative analysis to support
the generalizations the City has received so far. He
added he was also looking for something from the
developer that would provide comparative data, with
specifics, and requested Mr. Miller outline Phase II.
Mr. Miller replied that Phase II is conceptual in
nature, and has nothing to do with Phase I.
Mayor McCarty replied he must have a comparative
analysis.
Councilmember Hankner stated the Council has that
comparative analysis from the three reports that
have been received. She reminded the Council that
they paid $5,000 for an engineer's report, and
he has provided site specific information to the
City, as requested. She reviewed excerpts from
the Braun Report, from their letter of October 31,
concerning 1-22 not functioning as a wetland.
She also pointed out that the culvert has been the
cause of 1-22 being in the condition it is in.
Councilmember Hankner stated she felt the Council
has the information they have requested, and it is
very specific and adequate enough to redelineate
the lines for 1-23 and eliminate what has been
classified as 1-22.
Mounds View City Council ' November 29, 1983
Regular Meeting -- Page Three
------------------ -`-=='--==----------------------------------
�� Councilmember Linke referred to excerpts from the
Jctober 31 letter from Braun Engineering, stating
that they have enough supporting data to state that
in looking at Chapter 49, it's intent is to protect
the existing functional wetland, and there is
enough data to say that it does not function as a
wetland.
Mayor McCarty stated he is looking for data that
will say the wetland does not function to a degree.
Councilmember Linke pointed out it is the City's own
engineer that has supported the data, and he has
stated it is not a functioning wetland.
Mayor McCarty reviewed the criteria listed in the
Braun letter of October 31, and stated it could fit
every type 2 wetland in the City, and that he was
concerned with setting a standard.
Jim Miller read from portions of the Braun letter of
October 31, concerning the size of: a potential wetland,
with larger than 9/10th of an acre being required, and
with 1-22 being considerably less in size. He also
read portions of the Barr letter of November 7.
Mayor McCarty stated he was still concerned with
establishing criteria and statistics to take sound
action on the motion, and that in lacking technical
data, they must take the conservative approach.
Councilmember Doty stated he would have to vote against
the motion in order to preserve the ordinance.
Councilmember Linke reviewed the criteria in Ordinance
No. 318, and Chapter 48.01, sub 3, then reviewed the
data received from the experts.
Mayor McCarty stated he agrees that it does state that
the area does not function as a typical wetland, but
that anyone could make that statement, and they need
a more complicated approach to the data.
Councilmember Linke pointed out that it was the engineer
the City hired that provided the information and data.
Jim Senden stated the Council is trying to determine
whether the area is a wetland, and the ordinance says it
must be an existing, functional wetland, and reviewed
the Braun letter of October 31. He pointed out that if
it is a functioning wetland, it should be included on
i the map, but if it is not, it should not be included on
the map. He stated that if the Council feels the
ordinance is too weak, they should strengthen it, hilt
that they could not deny the developer because they feel
it would weaken the ordinance in future developments.
Mounds View City Council November 29, 1983
Regular Meeting 1 L Page Your
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Loeding stated that in reviewing the experts
reports, weasel words are easy to spot, and those
words are present in their reports.
Mr. Senden stated that the science of defining a
wetland is not as specific a science as mathematics,
and the wetlands are defined and labeled based upon
the type of plants that appear. He stated that
conditions change continually, and the boundries could
change at any time, depending upon when the reading
was taken. Ile stated the experts must take the data,
analyze it and make the best decision they can. He
pointed out the City is asking a consultant to do
something that is not possible, as it is not that
exact a science.
Mr. Loeding questioned if the technical people could
not state it is not a functioning wetland, how could
the Council.
Mr. Senden replied the Council's job is to act as
responsible decision makers and weigh the evidence,
and they cannot always make the case with 100 percent
sureity, as there are gray areas. He stated the
Council is saying they are basing their decision on
whether it would affect future decisions down the
road, and if so, then they should change the
ordinance.
ayor warty �t 'CCd h^ .v,ccrnCd 'th ��tting
precedence by the action that would be�taken ythis
evening.
Attorney Meyers reviewed sections of the ordinance
and reviewed excerpts from the letters received
from the experts. He advised the Council that if
Braun Engineering is determined to be contracting
with the City of Mounds View, their report would
be very persuasive and would be given weight by
a judge. Pe pointed out a judge would be the one
to make a decision in a court case, and he would
review the documentation and call experts and make
his decision based upon the information given him.
He also pointed out that the question of precedence
is not relevent.
Councilmember Doty stated he now feels he has enough
data to realize this is not a functioning wetland,
but he would still like a specific statement from
Braun Engineering.
Motion/Second: Linke/Blanchard to call for the
question.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Mounds View City Council r November 29, 1983
Regular Meeting �)' �� Page Five
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
ouncilmomber Blanchard stated she voted in favor of
the main motion as she concurred with the technical
data received from Braun.
Councilmember Doty stated he voted in favor of the
main motion as he concurs the wetland does not function
but that he does not feel the data received is
specific enough, and that a specific statement should
be required of one or more of the engineers involved.
Councilmember Linkc, Councilmember llankner and Mayor
McCarty stated the reasons for their vote had been
given by them earlier.
Motion/Second: Linke/Hankner to have the second 6
rea in�g an adoption of Ordinance No. 351, amending
Chapter 48 of the Mounds View Municipal Code entitled
"Wetland Zoning Ordinance", and waive the reading of
the ordinance.
Councilmember Blanchard - aye
Councilmember Doty - nay
Councilmember Linke - aye
Councilmember Hankner - aye
Mayor McCarty - aye
Councilmember Linke explained the reason for his
motion was that the ordinance takes the report of
the engineer hired by the City, who has done site
specific surveys of the property, and gives the
delineation, and that he is very comfortable with
the information given.
Councilmember Doty stated that even though the
ordinance uses the Braun delineation, he would
prefer the Barr report, as he does not feel the
Council needs to take the most liberal position
in splitting the boundries.
Motion/Second: Doty/Blanchard to have the first
rea ing o Ordinance No. 352, amending the Municipal
Code of Mounds View by repealing Chapter 40 entitled
"Zoning" and Chapter 43 entitled "Mobile Homes" and
adopting a new Chapter 40 entitled "Zoning", and
waive the reading.
5 ayes 0 nays
Attorney Meyers advised that he had discussed the
natter with Staff, and that whenever there is a text
change to an ordinance, since this will have impact
on certain property, the City should have a public
hearing, and that notice should be published to have
a public hearing before the second reading.
2nd Reading of
Ord. No. 351
Amending Chapt
48 of the flour,
View Municipal
Code Entitled
"Wetland Zonin
Ordinance"
Motion Carried
7. 1st Reading of
Ord. No. 352
Amending the
Municipal Code
of Mounds View
Motion Carries(
Mounds View City Council November 29, 1963
Regular Meeting Page Six
----------------------------W `"'r------------------
Motion/Second: Doty/llankner to set a public hearing ` '
or w Deeember 12 at 7:50 PM.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Motion/Second: McCarty/Blanchard to authorize the 8. Consideration o
purchase of three portable units and accessories from Memo from Polic
Capitol Electronics, not to exceed $2,565.00, with the Chief Regarding
billing and delivery to be after January 1, 1984. Purchase of
Mobile Radios
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carried
Motion/Second: Doty/Blanchard to authorize the 9. Consideration o
e ivery ot the City Newsletter through the third Staff Memo Re -
class carrier route pre-sort at an individual cost garding Review
of 7.4C per delivery, to the routes as outlined of City News -
in Park Director Anderson's memo of November 23. letter Delivery
Procedure
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carried
Director Johnson reviewed his memo to the Council 10. Report ofr
of November 29, regarding sidewalk snow removal. for of Pu
Works/Commu
There was discussion regarding the policy other Development
Citys use of requiring the residents to clear their
own sidewalks. Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained
the situation and why the City would be cleaning the
walks.
Director Johnson reported that while they were
slightly behind schedule, they would be starting
to drain and inspect the ground resevoir this week.
Attorney Meyers had no report. 11. Report of
Attorney
Councilmember Blanchard questioned if the Council 12. Reports of
should give direction to the representative to Councilmembers
Group W, before their next meeting.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley updated the Council on
the situation with Group W.
The Council expressed concern with both the con-
struction and the question of the payment, with
getting the billing in the Pall and the money in
the Spring, and directed Clerk/Administrator Pauley
to get in touch with Jerry Skelly.
Mounds View City Council (, November 29, 1981
Regular Meeting Page Seven
--------------------------- ----===-----i---'---------rz------------------
Councilmember Doty reported he was on jury duty for
,'�':he week.
Councilmember Linke reported the Ramscy County League
Christmas banquet would be held on December 14 at
the Maplewood Holiday Inn, with reservations due in
by December 12.
Councilmember Haukner reported she had spoken with
Representative Voss regarding the outcome of the last
airport hearing, and that once the Council has had an
opportunity to discuss the matter, he would like to
get together with them to discuss strategy.
Mayor McCarty reviewed the status of the airport
issue, and recommended the Council have a session with
Attorney Meyers to go through the details. It was
tentatively set for 6:30 PM on December 6, with a
final decision on that date to be made at the next
agenda session on December 5.
Director Johnson reported a formal response is in
the mail on the MSA hearing, and that he will be
requesting a MnDOT representative to be present
at the next agenda session to discuss the response
with the Council.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley reported that per the 13. Report of
discussion at the last agenda session, Staff pre- Administrator
pared and had signed by the property owners, a
petition for the improvement of the Fairchild Avanue
right-of-way. He stated the feasibility report
would be ready for the first agenda session in January.
Motion/Second: Doty/Linke to adopt Resolution No. 1689
Declaring Adequacy of Petition and Ordering Preparation
of Feasibility Report.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carrie
Clerk/Administrator Pauley asked authorization to
retain Jill Stevens as a part-time clerk/typist in
the Police Department while Linda Meyer is on
maternity leave.
Motion/Second: McCarty/Blanchard to authorize Staff
to hire Jill Stevens at $4.99 per hour, for
approximately 15 hours per week, as a temporary
part-time typist in the Police Department.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carrie
:ouncilmember Doty reported he had received complaints
regarding the quality of the snow plowing done
recently. Clerk/Administrator Pauley admitted the
quality was not as good as was usually experienced
and explained the situation.
Mounds View City Council November 29, 19..18
Regular Meeting Page Eight
------- -------- ------------�IL_1�l-r'--'-=-------------------------------
MuLiuu/5ecund: Uuly/Ilanlumr Lo adjourn Lhe mceling 14. AJjournme"^
;it M.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Respectfully submitted,
Donald P. Pauley
Clerk/Administrator
L+