The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCouncil Information Memorandum 11-09-1989CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM November 9, 1989 RECYCLING CASH DRAWING November 8/9: No Winner NEXT WEEK: $200 UPCOMING MEETINGS AND EVENTS..... 1. TOWN MEETING -- Monday, November 13, 7:00 p.m. Town Meeting for Area 1 residents in the City Council Chambers. A copy of the agenda is attached. (M-1) 2. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY -- The HRA meeting originally scheduled for Thursday, November 16, at 6:30 p.m. has been cancelled. (M-2) 3. PLYMOUTH DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL -- Wednesday, November 15, 7:30 A.M. The Plymouth Development Council will meet in the City Council Chambers. A copy of the meeting notice is attached. (M-8) 4. LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES LEGISLATIVE CONFERENCE -- Thursday, November 16. The League of Minnesota Cities' annual policy adoption meeting at the Hotel Sofitel in Bloomington. Registration 8 a.m., sessions on environmental issues at 9:00 a.m., open meeting law at 9:45 a.m., and property tax legislative issues at 10:30 a.m., luncheon at 12 noon, concluding with the policy adoption session at 1:45 p.m. Meeting agenda is attached. (M-4) 5. EMPLOYEE HOLIDAY PARTY -- Employee Holiday Party, Friday, December 1 at the Sheraton Park Place in St. Louis Park. As a reminder, the deadline for reservations is November 16. If you plan to attend, contact Laurie or Judy. 6. MEETING CALENDARS -- Meeting calendars for November and December are attached. M-6 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447. TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM November 9, 1989 Page 2 FOR YOUR INFORMATION.... 1. BEACON HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL - ARSON - I have received a report from the Public Safety Department about a fire call at the Beacon Heights School which occurred on Saturday, November 4. It appears that a series of fires were set both within and outside of the school. The fires were not serious and were promptly brought under control by our Fire Department. It appears that the building has been broken into and vandalized on more than one occasion and further, that additional vandalism and/or arson may be anticipated. I have alerted School Superintendent Landswerk to this situation in order that he may become aware of the situation and the need to take actions either to more appropriately secure the building or perhaps have it demolished. I have also asked Blair Tremere to have building inspectors visit the site to determine whether or not the state of the former elementary school is such that it has reached a point where the building should, as a matter of public safety, be demolished. I will keep the Council informed on this matter. 2. ELECTIONS -- Attached is a memorandum from City Clerk Laurie Rauenhorst reporting on the November 7 election. Voter turnout in Plymouth was considerably higher than in past years with a 24 percent turnout, compared to 9 percent in 1987 city election. Because of the School District 281 question and split precincts in Plymouth, this election was difficult to administer in eight of our precincts. Laurie's memo explains in detail the problems encountered in these precincts. Overall, I believe the election and the return reporting process were well organized and administered. (I-2) 3. COMMUNICATIONS ACTIVITIES -- A report from Helen LaFave on communication activities for September and October is attached. (I-3) 4. TRANSIT INFORMATION UPDATE -- A "Transit Information Update" report from the Regional Transit Board is attached. (I-4) 5. REVIEW OF SALE RESULTS OF G.O. WATER REVENUE BONDS AND IMPROVEMENT BONDS -- Steve Apfelbacher of Ehlers and Associates has prepared the attached recap of our November 6 bond sales. Also included is an explanation of how favorable our rate is compared to bond sales for Edina and Hennepin County which occurred on the same day. (I-5) 6. DIAL -A -RIDE RIDERSHIP REPORT -- Attached is a copy of the October ridership statistics for the Dial -A -Ride service. (I-6) CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM November 9, 1989 Page 3 7. PLYMOUTH METROLINK - OCTOBER REPORT -- Shown below is a table for October 1989 displaying our average daily ridership for the commuter/reverse commuter service for each week. Also is a table on the year to date average compared with the target to be achieved. The "Total System" column includes transfer passengers. To compare with previous years, the column "Without Transfers" should be used. Actual ridership is reflected under the "With Transfers" column. MONTHLY PLYMOUTH METROLINK DAILY RIDERSHIP AVERAGES BY WEEK BY SERVICE TYPE OCTOBER 1989 YEAR TO DATE RIDERSHIP AVERAGE SERVICE TYPE 529 TARGET 413 % OVER/(UNDER) TARGET Total S stem 28% Reverse Without With Commuter Commuter Transfers Transfers Transfers WEEK OF: 10/2 - 10/6 380 49 91 435 526 10/9 - 10/13 354 57 96 451 547 10/16 - 10/20 375 50 97 426 523 10/23 - 10/27 380 42 112 422 534 10/30 - 10/31 427 48 103 473 576 ----------------- 1,916 ----------- 246 ---------- 499 --------- 2,207 --------- 2,706 MONTH LONG ---------- AVERAGE 383 49 100 441 541 YEAR TO DATE Item Without Transfers With Transfers YEAR TO DATE RIDERSHIP AVERAGE 414 529 TARGET 413 % OVER/(UNDER) TARGET +.02% 28% CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM November 9, 1989 Page 4 8. GRAND OPENING SIGNAGE - On November 2, David Sommerfeld stopped by City Hall to express his concern about the City's zoning ordinance sign regulations. Mr. Sommerfeld has leased space at the Ryan Water- ford Plaza, 10100 6th Avenue North, to operate a dry cleaning estab- lishment. He asked the landlord, Ryan Development, whether or not he could conduct a grand opening sale, including signage. Ryan advised him that one of the four events with signage allowed by ordinance had taken place at this site. Upon speaking to Mike Kulczyk, Assistant Building Official, he found that four events with signage had previously taken place. Under the City's existing code, this shopping center would not be eligible to any additional grand openings with signage until 1990. Mr. Sommerfeld believes that the existing ordinance with a maximum of four events with signs per year represents a particular hardship to large multi -tenant buildings which are treated as a single property for the purposes of the ordinance. Mr. Sommerfeld's grand opening would have been November 15 at the earliest, or during the week of November 20. He is not barred from having a grand opening; he cannot have external signs for it, however. DAILY RIDERSHIP AVERAGES BY MONTH FOR CALENDAR YEARS 1984 - 1989 Commuter/ Commuter/ Reverse Commuter Reverse Commuter (Without Transfers) (With Transfers) MONTH: 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1989 January 330 307 351 429 433 496 --- February 310 292 350 394 426 461 --- March 307 311 338 397 418 467 --- April 301 295 354 365 408 405 --- May 295 298 332 350 392 388 564 June 276 314 349 358 409 362 525 July 277 297 328 345 361 356 515 August 266 292 328 345 377 376 534 September 275 322 354 348 396 383 495 October 276 312 384 365 430 441 541 November 271 311 396 398 437 December 265 320 412 391 409 ---------- YEAR LONG ---------------------------------- ------------------------ AVERAGE 287 306 356 374 408 414 529 8. GRAND OPENING SIGNAGE - On November 2, David Sommerfeld stopped by City Hall to express his concern about the City's zoning ordinance sign regulations. Mr. Sommerfeld has leased space at the Ryan Water- ford Plaza, 10100 6th Avenue North, to operate a dry cleaning estab- lishment. He asked the landlord, Ryan Development, whether or not he could conduct a grand opening sale, including signage. Ryan advised him that one of the four events with signage allowed by ordinance had taken place at this site. Upon speaking to Mike Kulczyk, Assistant Building Official, he found that four events with signage had previously taken place. Under the City's existing code, this shopping center would not be eligible to any additional grand openings with signage until 1990. Mr. Sommerfeld believes that the existing ordinance with a maximum of four events with signs per year represents a particular hardship to large multi -tenant buildings which are treated as a single property for the purposes of the ordinance. Mr. Sommerfeld's grand opening would have been November 15 at the earliest, or during the week of November 20. He is not barred from having a grand opening; he cannot have external signs for it, however. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM November 9, 1989 Page 5 To my knowledge, this is the first complaint of this nature that we have received and it is noteworthy that a tenant is raising the concern, not the landlord who is familiar with the ordinance. As more tenants move into this and other shopping centers, we may receive more. The Council should determine whether or not it wishes to consider revision of this ordinance. I advised Mr. Sommerfeld that I would include this question in the November 9 Council Information Memo to determine whether the Council wished to discuss the matter further. If I receive no response from the Councilmembers, I will assume that you are comfortable with the existing ordinance and communicate the same to Mr. Sommerfeld. Otherwise, at Council option, this item could be scheduled for further discussion at the November 20 forum, or for review by the Planning Commission. Amendments to the ordinance require a hearing by the Planning Commission. I have attached an excerpt from the existing zoning ordinance on this topic. (I-8) 9. CORRESPONDENCE: a. Letter to A. M. Clausnitzer, 10705 40th Avenue North, from Blair Tremere, concerning the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission's finding of not requiring a Service Availability Charge for the Favors -N -Flavors yogurt shop in the Oakwood Square Shopping Center. (I -9a) b. Letter from Michael Trossen, Trossen Wright & Associate Architects, providing a revised project schedule for Fire Station 1. (I -9b) c. Letter from Ronald Ray, Advance Machine Company, to Dick Carlquist, concerning the SARA TITLE II meeting of public safety and Plymouth reporting businesses. (I -9c) d. Letter from Charles Lenthe thanking Frank Boyles for his city safety program presentation at the MPWA Public Works Maintenance Program on October 30. (I -9d) e. Letter of appreciation from Scott Harr, Assistant Public Safety Director, City of Chanhassen, to Dick Carlquist, for assistance with an animal control situation provided by Police Service Supervisor Steve Correll, and Community Services Officers Warren Kulesa and Phil Sykes (I -9e) f. Letter to Laurie Hayes, Rider, Bennett, Egan & Arudel Law Firm, from City Manager, conveying City documents relating to the Chelsea Woods Homeonwers Association fire of November 27, 1986. (I -9f) g. Letter responding to teff and Debra Hodroff regarding their letter of November 1 on the City's participation in holiday programs. The Hodroff's November 1 letter is also attached. (I -9g) CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM November 9, 1989 Page 6 10. DEVELOPMENT SIGNAGE -- On Friday, November 17, one development sign will be placed at Southwest Corner of Zachary Lane and Old Rockford Road (Old County Road 9. Medicine Lake Lutheran Church is proposing a rezoning, site plan, conditional use permit, and variance. The rezoning is from FRD (Future Restricted Development ) District to R-lA (low Density Single Family Residential District. The site plan and conditional use permit is for the construction of a church together with a private school. The conditional use permit is also to exceed the height limitations of the R-lA District in order to have a steeple on the church as high as 66 feet. The variance is to allow for only a portion of the Ordinance required parking to be constructed at this time. (89086) This request will be heard by the Planning Commission at their Wednesday, November 29, 1989 meeting. James G. Willis City Manager 0 TOWN MEETING AGENDA AREA 1 November 13, 1989 7:00 p.m. I. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS A. Streets B. Sewer C. Water D. Buildings II. PARKS A. Neighborhood Parks B. Trails C. Community Center III. DEVELOPMENT A. Staged Growth Plan Amendments and Development Moratorium B. Hennepin County purchase of Elwell Property IV. PUBLIC SAFETY A. Police/Fire Report B. Police/Fire Alarm Permits C. Neighborhood Watch Program D. Animal Control V. OTHER ITEMS A. Public Transportation - Plymouth Metrolink/Dial-a-Ride B. Local Government Cable Access Channel 37 C. Solid Waste Recycling Program 1A- l CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: November 1, 1989 TO: Plymouth Development Council FROM: Bob Burger, President SUBJECT NOVEMBER 15 DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL AGENDA The next meeting of the Plymouth Development Council will be held on Wednesday morning, November 15 at 7:30 a.m. in the Plymouth City Council Chambers. The following items are scheduled for discussion. You may wish to bring up other items as well: I. Status of Automated Building Permit System Conversion - Joe Ryan II. Sanitary Sewer REC and Water REC Fees - Joe Ryan III. 1989 Erosion and Siltation Control Monitoring and Enforcement - Fred Moore IV. Status of 1990-1994 Capital Improvement Program Adoption - Fred Moore V. Comments on Update of City Comprehensive Plan and Development Moritorium - Blair Tremere VI. Implementation of Tree Preservation Policy - Blair Tremere, Mark Peterson VII. Other Business. I hope to see you at the meeting. My phone number is 473-5507. BB:kec cc: James G. Willis, City Manager Blair Tremere, Director of Planning & Community Development Fred Moore, Director of Public Works Joe Ryan, Building Official Dick Carlquist, Public Safety Director Frank Boyles, Assistant City Manager S.F. 11/14/89 League of Minnesota Cities October 20, 1989 183 University Ave. East St. Paul, MN 55101-2526 (612) 227.5600 (FAX: 221-0986) TO: Mayors, Managers, and Clerks FROM: Donald A. Slater, Executive Director xl-, �1, OCT 2 51 1989 CITY 0, rod)UTII A RE: 1990 Proposed Legislative Policies and Priorities I am very pleased to transmit to you a copy of the League of Minnesota Cities' 1990 Proposed Legislative Policies and Priorities These policies will be considered for final adoption by the membership at the League's Policy Adoption Meeting on November 16, 1989, at the Hotel Sofitel in Bloomington. An agenda and registration form are attached for your information. The League of Minnesota Cities owes a great debt to the dedicated city officials who worked as members of the League's policy committees on the 1990 legislative policies. They spent many hours developing this policy document. The Legislative Committee, which is comprised of the board of directors and each policy committee chair, reviewed and approved the committee's recommendations. The Legislative Committee sends the 1990 Proposed Policies and Priorities to the membership for their consideration. I strongly encourage your city to attend the Policy Adoption Meeting on November 16. The meeting begins with sessions on environmental issues (at 9:00 a.m.), open meeting law (at 9:45 a.m.), and property tax legislative issues (at 10:30 a.m.). Come to hear first hand from legislators what their plans will be for the 1990 session. The Policy Adoption Meeting will conclude with the policy adoption session which begins at 1:45 p.m. To register for the Policy Adoption Meeting, please return the attached registration form to the League of Minnesota Cities, c/o Finance Department, 183 University Avenue East, St. Paul, MN 55101. == OVER == � League of Minnesota Cities :. Policy Adoption Meeting < Thursday, November 16, 1989 Hotel Sofitel, Minneapolis 8:00 a.m. Registration 12:00-1:45 p.m 9:00-9:45 a.m. Environmental issues Commissioner Gerald Willet, Pollution Control 2:00-4:30 p.m. Agcnc}' Mike Robertson, Director, Office of Waste Management 9:45-10:15 a.m. Open meeting law Mari: Anfirinson, Counsel, Minnesota Newspaper Association Senator Randy Peterson 10:15-10:30 a.m. Break 10:30-11:45 a.m. Property' tax issues Due to the uncertainty in the property tax area, the League is unable to provide tentative speakers for the property tax issues session. Our goal is to have the chairs of the House and Senate Tax Committees. * invited to sneak November 16, 1989 Lunch -- Transportation issues Commissioner Len Levine, DLpartment of Transportation Adoption of LNIC legislative policies Opening remarks -- LMC )'resident Millic MacLeod, Other business Adjournment LMC Policy Adoption Registration Form City: Contact Person: Hotel Sotiitel, Minneapolis Telephone 4 _ A.C. Name Title Address Zip Code Registration per person: $25.00 Make checks payable and MAIL TO: League of Minnesota Cities, 183 University Avenue East, St. Paul, MN 55101 Name Representing Address _ City Mona Day Yev A,rival 13.1, Check in time 3:00 p.m Housing reservation form MAIL TO: 5601 W. 78th Street Minneapolis, MN 55435 -3899 (612)835-1900 League of Minnesota Cities Policy Adoption Meeting November 16, 1989 To insure space/rate availability, please respond prior to November 1, 1989. Please specify: 65 + Tax Single (One Person) 65 + Tax Double (Two People) _State Zip I will arrive after 4:00 p.m. Please guarantee the reservation with: A iv.ITimr Month LAY Y°•' (Credit Card) Depanw. o.i. Check out time 12:00 noon Pltotic: Number and Expiration Date Councilmember, Moorhead Adoption of rules governing die policy adoption meeting Consideration of proposed legislative policies and priorities 1. Development strategics 2. Elections and ethics 3. General legislation and personnel 4. Land use, energy, environment, and transportation 5. Revenue sources 6. Federal lcgislative Other business Adjournment LMC Policy Adoption Registration Form City: Contact Person: Hotel Sotiitel, Minneapolis Telephone 4 _ A.C. Name Title Address Zip Code Registration per person: $25.00 Make checks payable and MAIL TO: League of Minnesota Cities, 183 University Avenue East, St. Paul, MN 55101 Name Representing Address _ City Mona Day Yev A,rival 13.1, Check in time 3:00 p.m Housing reservation form MAIL TO: 5601 W. 78th Street Minneapolis, MN 55435 -3899 (612)835-1900 League of Minnesota Cities Policy Adoption Meeting November 16, 1989 To insure space/rate availability, please respond prior to November 1, 1989. Please specify: 65 + Tax Single (One Person) 65 + Tax Double (Two People) _State Zip I will arrive after 4:00 p.m. Please guarantee the reservation with: A iv.ITimr Month LAY Y°•' (Credit Card) Depanw. o.i. Check out time 12:00 noon Pltotic: Number and Expiration Date League of Minnesota Cities 183 University Ave. East St. Paul, MN 55101-2526 (612) 227-5600 (FAX: 221-0986) LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES POLICY ADOPTION MEETING RULES 1. Registration. V\- Registration shall remain open from the previously announced opening of conference registration until completion of policy adoption. 2.yoting Privileges Only one delegate per city shall be permitted to vote on policy proposals, priorities, or motions. Each current LMC member city shall designate one official as delegate (and may select another city official as an alternate) for voting purposes. Only those officials with voting cards for their cities shall be eligible to vote. Possession of the voting card of the city and the signed voting card register shall be evidence that the holder of the voting card is the city's delegate for purposes of voting. 3. Committee Reports The chair or vice chair of each committee shall present the committee report and move adoption of the policy statements. After adoption of policy language, the chair or vice chair shall move adoption of priority rankings. The chair shall place on the agenda for discussion, a proposal to make a substantive change in the language of a proposed policy, change a priority, or to take a position which the appropriate policy committee chair or representative states was not considered by the committee. The text of nonprocedural motions and amendments, other than changes in policy priorities, must be submitted in writing to the chair prior to debate. 4. Disputes Disputes regarding eligibility to vote shall be referred to the LMC General Counsel and may be appealed to the conference. Such reports or appeals shall be a special order of business and may be taken up at any time a new question (main motion) is in order. 5. Limits on Debate Each speaker shall be limited to three minutes on any debatable question. The chair may extend the debate limits in order to consider an issue if numerous delegates request to be heard on the issue. == OVER == Policy Adoption Meeting Rules (cont'd) 5. Limits on Debate lcont'd The chair may reduce the time allotted for debate in order to complete policy adoption, but in no case shall the length of time be reduced to less than three minutes per side. 6. Parliamentary Procedure Precedence. The policy adoption process shall be governed by the LMC Constitution, these rules, and Roberts Rules of Order, Revised. The conference shall be its own judge of these rules and Roberts Rules of Order. Appeal of the Chair. Debate of the motion "appeal of the ruling of the chair", rule #6 notwithstanding, shall be limited to two minutes by the appealer and two minutes by the chair. Either may designate another eligible voting delegate (or LMC officer or board member) to speak in his/her place. Changes. Motions to "rescind" and "reconsider" shall require a two-thirds vote of delegates present and voting. 7. Number of "A" Priorities A motion to change a proposed policy's priority to an "A" priority must also propose another "A" proposed policy, within that same section, to be reduced below an "A" priority. The final number of "A" priority policies shall not exceed the number proposed to the conference by the Legislative Committee. rr i W O z F m N N S - A N c F co 14 c a - W M W ; r .- N to O�++ M O � •7 r. O Fr N M zO N 01 t0 N M f m N N so M—ko Q N O l0 M O th N M 2 r OD t1f N O y ¢ LL � N N C n W = N N 00 2 W ON N W 3 W ? W M N /My� W ~ 0 W > z e ro ,O O N f Cn z M O ,r- a Lil U W N i t LL p Q LL- cl 00 S i pLL� C:) V) r� rr i W O z F m N N S - A N c F co 14 c a - W M W ; r .- N to O�++ M O � •7 r. O Fr N M zO N 01 t0 N M f m N N so M—ko 0 Q y ¢ C 00 /My� LOQ In r-1 r W > Cn N Lil U W LL p Q LL- cl pLL- w pLL� C:) V) LL 2 t- OJ 0 V U M N H > C7 0 n z N Q O Pa i Lij > U U Cy .. H r-+ in F' W"+� i ¢ LL_ p a p U- LLJ CC 1 r ►-+ O N J O (0 a � N•�� Q w� o a UCD a 0 Ln coo U) LU Z M .. z Z cl H Z ^ H LUa¢c� LO N d7 c� 00 waw N N a CD w F- U ~ LLJ LL! 00 N N J J U Z Ur U i a. z ZD z p uCD W,.,� CD ¢^ M \¢� O J tcx Cl U3 C3 LLJO wo M 3¢r- �J �� r -F- N�ce� N Q Z D (n V 1 Ln 04 y ti cc �2 o n N N In � M tD LL N 00 ct W m 5W U LU O y N co M= N M Q p r tlD N M ED 3 N N 7 n N N O 2 Z 0 .M- O n O N N X. h M N Q Y D Q 0 2 2 Q Q cl cr LL. LO N d7 00 y z m w 3 H W a W W a It CC r QM M/•�� co Qmoa Lo U O a O W " LD M O z n Z •• CD M H n Z W => Z Z MoQ� la. O �Q� �LL. f N N aM z Z: oCD Lt_ Lu O a DC) �- � o CD m ^ N J J a U� UE <Ln } Z O d a Z d i W m} U Q O 00 Q►-� D 0 U O O U O u L- W z M .. M � Li (n 0 J^ �J^ C) => 00r Lo F - M Q z O N M T-� CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: November 9, 1989 TO: Frank Boyles, Assistant City Manager FROM: Laurie Rauenhorst�ity Clerk SUBJECT 1989 ELECTION The following are observations following the 1989 Election: 1. There were several problems with the Hennepin County records relative to the School District 281 boundaries. I have forwarded a letter to Hennepin County and the School District asking that they correct the errors so that if the City runs an election again for the School District, we won't be faced with similar problems. (Copies of letters attached.) 2. One precinct ran out of City ballots for approximately five minutes - more were delivered to the precinct. 3. Two precincts ran out of School District ballots - more were delivered to the precincts by the School District. 4. In Precinct 12 several voters were told to leave the polling place. The voters were discussing candidates and issues at the voting booths, which is clearly in violation of state law, and were asked more than once to stop. When they would not, a judge told them they would have to leave the precinct. 5. I received several complaints that judges would not explain candidate positions or explain the District 281 question. The judges legally can provide no information of this type, except to read the ballot aloud to the voter and assist with marking the ballot, if asked. I was pleased to hear that judges were strictly following instructions by only pointing out the sample ballots. 6. This was a very difficult election for the judges and the staff because of the District 281 question and split precincts in Plymouth. No other city in 281 had this problem. In essence, the judges had to determine for each voter entering the precinct: 1) whether the voter was registered; 2) whether the voter was in the correct precinct, and 3) whether the voter was in District 281. After this determination was made, the voter was given a numbered Voter Certificate with either a (1) or (2) at the top. This Certificate, when handed to the ballot judge by the voter, indicated whether the voter received (1) or (2) ballots. The ballots were then deposited in separate ballot boxes as required by law. Election Report November 9, 1989 Page 2 The precinct was handled as though there were two separate elections taking place in the same precinct. There were two sets of ballots, voter certificates, and new registrations to count and Justify when the polls were closed; thus, the longer than normal reporting time. The first precinct arrived at the City Center with returns around 9:30 p.m. The last arrived at 12:30 a.m. I believe the District 281 ballot, double counting, and necessary justifications resulted in at least a two hour delay in results. 7. To accommodate the problem of the split 281 precincts, I hired election judges the week before the election to highlight the names of all voters in 281 on the precinct lists. Several precinct chairpersons told me this was an excellent method of identifying those voters in a particular school district. Should the problem of split precincts occur again, this method will be used. I would be very concerned, however, if we had to run an election for more than one school district at a time because we have some precincts in three school districts. I suppose we would be looking at highlighting the precinct lists in three different colors, with three ballots, voter certificates, and new registrations to count and justify. This would be confusing, inefficient, and possibly unmanageable. The fear is that at some point we lose accuracy and control of the process, which is the most critical thing in an election. We will very likely be faced with this scenario in the future with Uniform Election Day. 8. We received quite a few calls from residents who were upset because they could not vote on the 281 question. These were individuals who do not live in District 281, but their children attend school there. They felt they should have been allowed to vote on the 281 question. Voters can only vote in the District they live in. Also, a number of voters stated they received calls encouraging/ discouraging them to vote on the 281 question and directing them to vote at the their normal school precinct. I contacted District 281 the day before the election when we started receiving these calls. Voters thought they would have to go to two different locations to vote separate ballots. The District said other "misinformation" was being distributed and the designated callers for the district did not provide this information. This may have caused some voter confusion. Z .211 Elections Report November 9, 1989 Page 3 9. We had a 24% voter turnout which is very heavy for a Plymouth City election. In 1987 we had a 9% city-wide turnout. We prepared for this expected higher than normal turnout by hiring additional election Judges and stocking additional ballots and supplies. We received at least ten times the usual number of absentee ballots for a local election. 10. I received several calls from residents commending election Judges in various precincts for their helpful, professional service. I also received compliments from two neighboring City Clerks who visited several of our split precincts during the day. They are trying to prepare for the situation when it occurs in their cities and are using Plymouth as their model. 11. Returns reporting after the polls closed went well. The switchboard remained open until 1:00 a.m. (one-half hour after the last precinct reported in). We had one incoming extension which several of the candidates used, with two outgoing public phones. The switchboard answered questions from the public on the returns. Coffee and cookies were served in the Council Chambers with a complete tally board and Channel 37 monitor with vote totals. Within ten minutes of each precinct arriving at the City Center, the vote totals were updated on Channel 37. Please let me know if you want me to respond to specific questions or concerns. November 7, 1989 CITU OF Marge Christianson PLYMOUTH+ Election/Voter Registration Supervisor Hennepin County Government Center 300 South 6th Street Minneapolis, MN 55487 Dear Marge: Thank you for your help with the November 7 election by providing precinct lists, precinct finders, and master lists in such a timely manner. The election went well considering the cumbersome process and confusion of dealing with the split School District 281 precincts. We encountered several problems related to the District 281 boundaries where the precinct finder and precinct list showed certain addresses to be in District 279, when they are, in fact, in District 281. On election day I used our assessing records to determine the correct district for some voters after they were turned away from the 49th Avenue area precinct. Several voters were then allowed to vote this ballot. Please check and correct the following situations: 1. Precinct finder shows: 14301 - 15099 41st Avenue as District 281 and 14701 - 17800 41st Avenue as District 284. I believe the first entry should read: 14301 - 14699 to avoid the overlapping addresses. Please thank Ellen for her help on election day on this one. 2. Precinct finder shows: 4300 Fernbrook as District 284; should be 281. 3. Precinct finder shows: North side of 49th Avenue North from Saratoga Lane to the cul-de-sac to the west (approximately 10200 - 10500) in District 279. This section of 49th Avenue North is south of Schmidt Lake Road, and both sides are in District 281. After we receive the precinct lists back and review them, we will forward to Ellen the minor changes received by the election judges at the precincts. Again, thanks for your assistance. Sincerely, 4-ezl�_ Laurie Rauenhorst City Clerk cc: dames G. Willis, City Manager School District 281 Sharon Reisinger, Voter Registration 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 November 8, 1989 Monica Campbell 10500 49th Avenue North Plymouth, MN 55442 Dear Ms. Campbell: Thank you for your call today to inform me of problems you encountered attempting to vote on the School District 281 question on November 7. You requested that I verify that you do, in fact, live within the School District 281 boundary and that a similar problem will not occur in the future. Unfortunately, similar problems occurred to your neighbors living on -the north side of 49th Avenue from Saratoga Lane to the cul-de-sac. I learned of this problem at about 4:00 P.M. on election day when Larry Geyerman called stating he had been allowed to vote a City ballot but not a School District 281 ballot at his precinct. All election records generated by Hennepin County both at the City Center and at the precinct indicated he lived in District 279. I then contacted the School District 281 office and asked if they could verify he lived in their district so that we could provide him with a ballot. They were unable to verify that he was in their district and suggested that the fudges would just have to use the information provided by Hennepin County - He would not be able to vote. I then checked the assessing records which clearly indicate that Mr. Geyerman is in District 281. The precinct chairperson and I decided that even though the County records indicated otherwise, we would allow him to vote because we could prove that he lives in District 281. I'm not sure how many people were denied the opportunity to vote on the 281 ballot, but Mr. Geyerman and several others returned to the precinct and voted the District 281 ballot. In response to your requests: 1. I have checked your address with the assessing division and can verify that you are within School District 281. 2. I have forwarded a letter to Hennepin County and requesting that they correct this situation for Apparently the school district has never identified and it only came to light now because the City was for the district for the first time ever. Please let me know if you have any further concerns. Sincerely, 4LUri� Rauenhorst City Clerk School District 281 future elections. this problem before running the election 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 November 8, 1989 Larry Geyerman 10400 49th Avenue North Plymouth, MN 55442 Dear Larry: CIN OF PLYMOUTFF Thank you for your call on election day describing the problem you encountered In attempting to vote on the School District 281 question. Because of your persistence, you and four of your neighbors were able to return to the polls and vote on the District 281 question. The City's assessing records clearly show that properties on the north side of 49th Avenue from Saratoga to the cul-de-sac are in School District 281. However, as you were told at the polls, all the Hennepin County election records show these properties in District 279. We attempted to correct the problem when you called. The precinct chairperson and I decided that even though the County records indicated otherwise, we would allow residents to vote the 281 ballot. I appreciate the effort you made in encouraging your neighbors to return to the precinct to vote the 281 ballot. I have forwarded a letter to Hennepin County and School District 281 requesting that they correct this situation for future elections. Apparently the school district has never identified this problem before and it only came to light now because the City was running the election for the district for the first time ever. Sincerely, Laurie Rauenhorst City Clerk 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 November 6, 1989 Martha Stebelton Election Coordinator Robbinsdale School District 281 4148 Winnetka Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428 Dear Martha: Administration of the November 7 election has gone well considering the different voting systems and number of cities you had to coordinate with. You have been very helpful in resolving problems and questions that have arisen. Previously you and I agreed to the following: 1. Each jurisdiction would provide and pay for their own forms, envelopes, ballots, and sample ballots. 2. Each jurisdiction would arrange and pay for their own legal ads. 3. Each jurisidiction would retain their own ballots and returns for the required retention period. 4. The City would coordinate highlighting of the precinct lists by election judges to depict those voters in District 281. District 281 would pay the election fudge wage of $4.50 per hour for this job. This is a unique situation because no other cities in District 281 have split precincts. 5. The School District will waive the custodial and use fees for three schools used as polling locations and will attempt to provide voter parking: Robbinsdale Armstrong High School, Pilgrim Lane Elementary School, and Zachary Lane Elementary School. Precinct list highlighting was done by three election judges the week of October 30. You will receive an invoice from our Finance Department in the amount of $42.75 (9.5 hours x $4.50 per hour = $42.75). This was much less than we originally anticipated. As I indicated by telephone, in future years, particularly with the introduction of Uniform Election Day, we will want to discuss responsibility and cost sharing for such things as: 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447. TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 Martha Stebelton November 6, 1989 Page 2 Election Judge Hiring and Wages Election Judge Training Polling Place Confirmation and Fees Optech IIIP Maintenance Agreement Optech IIIP Ballot Printing Postage for absentee ballots, registrations, and voter verification Staff wages, including necessary overtime Set-up and Tear Down of voting equipment Cost for Computerized Precinct Lists and Master Lists Administration of Absentee Balloting It is particularly important that these items be addressed because in the City of Plymouth we are dealing with added costs and responsibilities of elections for four school districts, not just one. By addressing these items before the next election occurs, we will be better able to develop cost and responsibility sharing that is fair to the City and each of the school districts. Sincerely, Laurie Rauenhorst City Clerk cc: Linda Powell, Superintendent James G. Willis, City Manager S.F. 3-1-90 COMMUNICATIONS ACTIVITIES --During November and December 1989 the following communications projects were completed: CABLE TELEVISION: -covered 4 City Council meetings -Northwest Cities program on fall recreation programs with Mary Patterson -Northwest Cities program on Dial -A -Ride with Frank Boyles -Northwest Cities program on Fire Station 3 open house/Fire Prevention Week -worked with League of Women Voters on Candidates Forum & Community Center Forum -videotaped Bob Renner's presentation on the Minnesota Property Tax System for use on cable television. He spoke to the Heritage Highlands HOA on October 26 PUBLICATIONS -wrote two Rock Reports, the employee newsletter -wrote and edited November/December Plymouth on Parade -developed handout for housing rehab grant program using Ventura -developed invitation for Station 3 opening using Ventura OTHER ACTIVITIES -news releases: weekly recycling drawing results; watermain flushing; Fire Prevention Week; Fire Station 3 open house -coordinated employee campaign for United Way. Raised over $7,000, up 16 percent from 1988 -worked with Dick Pouliot on household hazardous waste collection -submitted 2 articles to Twin West newsletter -provided requested budget info. on Comprehensive Plan maps and cost of producing a 4 -page newsletter -worked with Lyle Robinson on the ribbon cutting for Station 3 -took photos at Station 3 opening -took photos of Metrolink for Regional Transit listing -investigated various character generators to replace our Portec -wrote script for Police Explorers videotape -attended meeting of cable TV coordinators on Sept. 27 -attended meetings of Northwest Community TV Board on Oct. 4 & Oct. 11 -toured city with other city employees -wrote Mayor's speech for Station 3 opening -wrote several letters for the Mayor -attended Minnesota Community Television Awards on Oct. 14. Plymouth won in the government/municipal category for "A Dog's Day;" A second program, "Managing Minnesota's Cities," which was a cooperative effort of the Cities of Plymouth, St. Louis Park and Edina also won Minnesota Community Television Award. -developed a promotional plan for DARE. TRANSIT INFORMATION UPDATE REGIONAL TR4NSfT MMRD Regional Transit Board, Mears Park Centre, 230 E. Fifth Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101, (612) 292-8789 NEW SERVICE In August, the RTB approved its updated Five -Year Plan, which is the guideline that establishes the direction, priorities, timing and funding for various elements of the metropolitan transit system. This plan must be revised every two years. In determining specific service enhancements, the RTB conducts analysis of changing conditions in specific areas or market segments. Needs assessments may be initiated by the RTB or at the request of a community. Needs are determined by an analysis of key transit needs indicators including population, employment, transit dependents, travel desires, congestion and available transit. Manyfuture subur- ban transit services are being designed around "transit hubs" such as shopping malls. Some transit improvements included in the Five -Year Plan are an 1-394 Timed -Transfer Service Plan, 1-494 service including improved local crosstown service tied to the mall of America, 1-35W Corridor improvements, rural alternate serv- ice in southern Dakota County, and dial -a -ride services in developing suburban communities. Implementation of the specific initiatives will depend on community interest and financial support along with legisla- tive appropriations. Communities are encouraged to work with the RTB on assessing and developing specific services that best meet their needs. METRO MOBILITY Since 1987, we witnessed a tremendous growth in the num- ber of trips delivered by the Metro Mobility program. During the first six months of 1989, the program provided over 110,000 trips per month, with an all-time high of 123,290 trips in March 1989. The rapid demand on ridership has created financial drains and trip denials to the system. Both the RTB and the legislature are looking for ways to make the system both cost- effective, while providing the greatest level of service pos- sible. Two reports are due to the legislature at the end of this year. The RTB will be providing the legislature with an overall analysis of the Metro Mobility program, while the State Plan- ning Agency is examining the use of Metro Mobility by human service based agencies. The State Planning Agency will examine other possible ways of providing agency -based trips more cost-effectively. TRANSIT FUNDING In the current fiscal year, the operating costs of the regular route transit systems came from the following sources: Property Tax 50% Fares 35% State Grants 8`/0 Federal Grants 7% The Minnesota Legislature passed transportation funding legislation in 1989 that increased the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax (MVET) to 35%. Of this amount, 25% goes to transit programs, with 80%of these funds staying in the metropolitan area. Metro transit will recieve approximately $25 million each year of the 1990-91 biennium; $9.6 million comes from the general fund and $15.3 million from the MVET fund. This money was appropriated to the following programs on an annual basis: Regular Route $11.2 million Metro Mobility $11.5 million Small Urban, Rural and Replacement $ .9 million Planning and Administration $ 1.3 million An additional $3.4 million was appropriated for each year of the biennium for light rail activities. This money is available on a 50/50 match basis and can be used for all aspects of light rail transit, with RTB approval. LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT Getting ready for light rail transit (LRT) will be a major activity for the RTB during the next several years. Currently, the RTB is preparing a Regional LRT Plan comprised of a Develop- ment and Financial Plan and a Coordination Plan. AJoint LRT Advisory Committee was created by legislation to assist the RTB in planning LRT facilities and services, as well as in coordinating the LRT activities of regional railroad authorities and the MTC. The Development and Financial Plan is due to the legislature in 1990. This plan will determinethe staging for LRT development and what type of state financial commit- ment maybe necessary for LRTdevelopment. In addition, the RTB will continue its LRT public education campaign. Ehlers and Associates, Inc. L E A D E R S I N P U B L I C F I N A N C E November 7, 1989 Mr. Jim Willis City Manager 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 K�. NO Mr. Dale Hahn _. Finance Director 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 T � Re: City of Plymouth, MN; Review of Sale Results of $4,285,000 G.O. Water Revenue Bonds and $715,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds Dear Jim and Dale: Monday we took bids for the above bond issues. On November 6, the regional tax-exempt index was 6.81% compared to 6.77% on September 25 when we drafted your financing report for the bond issues. Bids for these issues compare to our projected rates as follows: Projected NIC Projected Cost Awarded NIC Awarded Cost $715,000 G.O. Imp. Bonds 6.53% $203,233.88 6.17% $191,811.60 $4,285,000 G.O. Rev. Bonds 6.55% $1,747,168.38 6.3379% $1,690,417.15 You will note that the City received bids substantially better than our estimate but significantly better than other Aa or higher rated credits. OFFICES IN MINNEAPOLIS AND WAUKESHA 2950 Norwest Center • 90 South Seventh Street • Minneapolis, MN 55402-4100 • 612-339-8291 • FAX 612-339-0854 Mr. James Willis and Mr. Dale Hahn November 7, 1989 Plymouth, MN Page 2 Following is a recap of Plymouth rates compared to recent similar Minnesota tax-exempt bond sales: Plymouth Plymouth Edina Henn. County Maplewood November 6 November 6 November 6 November 2 October 19 Moody's Aa Moody's Aa Moody's Aal Moody's Aaa Moody's Aa $4,285,000 $ 715,000 $12,970,000 $27,325,000 $1.470M /$1.385M Year G.O. Rev. G.O. Imp. G.O. TIF Ref. G.O. Imp. G.O. Imp./G.O.TIF 1991 5.90% - 6.00% 6.40% 5.90% 1992 5.90% 5.90% 6.10% 6.40% 6.00% 1993 6.00% 5.90% 6.15% 6.40% 6.00% 1994 6.00% 5.90% 6.20% 6.40% 6.10% 1995 6.05% 5.90% 6.30% 6.40% 6.15% 1996 6.10% 5.90% 6.40% 6.40% 6.20% 1997 6.20% - 6.45% 6.40% 6.25% 1998 6.20% - 6.50% 6.40% 6.30% 1999 6.20% - 6.60% 6.50% 6.40% 2000 6.20% - 6.70% 6.60% 6.50% Avg. Coupon Rate: 6.075% 5.90% 6.34% 6.43% 6.18 Discount: .9879% .9882% .9895% .991% .99% The Plymouth issues were bid better than Aaa-rated credits. Edina and Hennepin County's bonds were not sold as designated qualified bonds because they exceeded $10 million which increased the yield 5 to 10 basis points since it affects the taxability of bonds bought by financial institutions. Even with this adjustment the City traded better than the Aaa credits. Harris Bank had sold almost all of the Plymouth bonds the day after the sale. The underwriting/investment community obviously recognizes Plymouth as a solid, well-managed "Aaa" community. Congratulations on the great work! As always, we enjoyed working with you on this project and are proud to have the City of Plymouth on our client list. We will be contacting you shortly to finalize the bond closing details. Very truly yours, EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Steven F. Apfelbacher President SFA:nad 1747a :..:j; . $4,285,000 General Obligation Water Revenue Bonds of 1989 City of Plymouth, Minnesota SALE: Monday, November 6, 1989 AWARD: HARRIS TRUST AND SAVINGS BANK 9 1989 r - y,. Wll tJi �L)Itri�fJi RATING: Moodv's "Aa" BBI: 7.24% COUPON NET INTEREST COST NAME OF BIDDER RATE YEAR & RATE PRICE HARRIS TRUST AND SAVINGS BANK 5.90% 1991-1992 $1,690,417.15 $4,233,187.85 Chicago, Illinois 6.00% 1993-1994 BEAR, STEARNS & COMPANY 6.05% 1995 6.3379% Chicago, Illinois 6.10% 1996 Hutchinson, Shockey, Erley & Company 6.20% 1997-2000 La Salle National Bank Shawmut Bank of Boston United Missouri Bank of Kansas City, N.A. DEAN WITTER REYNOLDS, INC. Chicago, Illinois SHEARSON LEHMAN HUTTON, INC. Chicago, Illinois CLAYTON BROWN & ASSOCIATES, INC Chicago, Illinois BLUNT, ELLIS & LOEWI, INC. Chicago, Illinois GRIFFIN, KUBIK, STEPHENS & & THOMPSON, INC. Chicago, Illinois 6.00% 6.05% 6.10% 6.15% 6.20% 6.25% 6.375% 6.50% 6.125% 6.20% 6.25% 1991 1992-1993 1994 1995 1996-1997 1998 1999 2000 1991-1992 1993-1998 1999-2000 $1,706,368.96 6.3977% $1,711,360.72 6.4164% $4,252,795.10 $4,231,531.45 2950 Norwest Center Ehlers and Associates, Inc. 90 South Seventh Street Minneapolis. MN 55402-4100 L E A D E R S I N P U B L I C F I N A N C E (612) 339-8291 FAX (612) 339-0854 $4,285,000 General Obligation City of Plymouth, Minnesota Monday, November 6, 1989 Page 2 Water Revenue Bonds of 1989 f =-S- NAME OF BIDDER COUPON RATE YEAR NET INTEREST COST & RATE PRICE CRONIN & COMPANY, INC. 6.00% 1991 -1992 $1,720,589.38 $4,250,720.00 Minneapolis, Minnesota 6.05% 1993 MILLER, JOHNSON & KUEHN, INC. 6.10% 1994 6.4511% Minneapolis, Minnesota 6.15% 1995 SMITH BARNEY, HARRIS UPHAM 6.25% 1996 & COMPANY, INC. 6.30% 1997 Chicago, Illinois 6.35% 1998 THE NORTHERN TRUST COMPANY 6.45% 1999 Chicago, Illinois 6.50% 2000 PIPER, JAFFRAY & HOPWOOD INC. 6.00% 1991 $1,744,138.75 $4,242,150.00 Minneapolis, Minnesota 6.05% 1992 American National Bank & Trust Company 6.10% 1993 6.5393% Robert W. Baird & Company, Inc. 6.20% 1994 Craig Hallum, Inc. 6.25% 1995 Park Investment Corporation 6.30% 1996 Peterson Financial Corporation 6.35% 1997 Moore, Juran & Company, Inc. 6.40% 1998 6.50% 1999 IN ASSOCIATION WITH - 6.55% 2000 NORWEST LNVESTMENT SERVICES, INC. Minneapolis, Minnesota FBS CAPITAL MARKETS GROUP Minneapolis, Minnesota John G. Kinnard & Company, Inc. :.._:� �• s $715,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1989 City of Plymouth, Minnesota SALE: Monday, November 6, 1989 AWARD: HARRIS TRUST AND SAVINGS BANK AN I UN CM&... NAME OF BIDDER HARRIS TRUST AND SAVINGS BANK Chicago, Illinois BEAR, STEARNS & COMPANY Chicago, Illinois Hutchinson, Shockey, Erley & Company La Salle National Banc Shawmut Bank of Boston United Missouri Bank of Kansas City, N.A. CLAYTON BROWN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Chicago, Illinois BLUNT, ELLIS & LOEWI, INC. Chicago, Illinois GRIFFIN, KUBIK, STEPHENS & THOMPSON, INC. Chicago, Illinois CRONIN & COMPANY, INC. Minneapolis, Minnesota MILLER, JOHNSON & KUEHN, INC. Minneapolis, Minnesota SMITH BARNEY, HARRIS UPHAM & COMPANY, INC. Chicago, Illinois THE NORTHERN TRUST COMPANY Chicago, Illinois DEAN WITTER REYNOLDS Chicago, Illinois SHEARSON LEHMAN HUTTON, INC Chicago, Illinois COUPON NET INTEREST COST RATE YEAR & RATE PRICE 6.00% 6.05% 6.10% 6.15% 6.25% 6.05% 6.10% 6.15% 6.20% 1992-1996 1992-1996 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1992-1993 1994 1995 1996 $191,811.60 6.1700% $193,450.25 6.2227% $196,651.25 6.3257% $198,456.87 6.3838% $706,604.65 $708,074.75 $709,280.00 $707,135.00 Ehlers and Associates, Inc. 2950 Norwest Center 90 South Seventh Street Minneapolis, MN 55402-4100 40LEADE FIS IN PUBLIC FINANCE (612) 339-8291 FAX (612) 339-0854 $715,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1989 City of Plymouth, Minnesota Monday, November 6, 1989 Page 2 NAME OF BIDDER 01 COUPON NET INTEREST COST RATE YEAR & RATE PRICE PIPER, JAFFRAY & HOPWOOD INC. 6.05% 1992 $199,633.12 Minneapolis, Minnesota American National Bank & Trust Company 6.10% 6.20% 1993 1994 6.4216% Robert W. Baird & Company, Inc. 6.25% 1995 Craig Hallum, Inc. 6.30% 1996 Park Investment Corporation Peterson Financial Corporation Moore, Juran & Company, Inc. IN ASSOCIATION WITH - NORWEST INVESTMENT SERVICES, INC. Minneapolis, Mvmesota FBS CAPITAL MARKETS GROUP Minneapolis, Minnesota Jolui G. Kinnard & Company, Inc. $708,565.00 31 -Oct -B9 -------------------- PLYMOUTH DIAL -A -RIDE -------------------- 1989 MONTHLY COST SUMMARY 1989 DAILY RIDERSHIP REPORT Subsidy/ Recovery Total Cost Revenue Deficit Passengers Passenger Ratio October 16,123.25 2,203.00 (13,920.25) 1944 $7.16 13.7% Septeeber 11,603.00 1,687.30 (9,915.70) 1541 $6.43 14.5% August 12,756.13 1,889.75 (10,866.38) 1638 $6.63 14.8% July 11,669.63 1,657.00 (10,012.63) 1399 $7.16 14.2% June 12,243.63 1,703.45 (10,540.18) 1532 $6.88 13.9% May 12,279.50 1,354.00 (10,925.50) 1245 $8.78 11.0% April 4,592.00 465.50 (4,126.50) 402 $10.26 10.1% ------------------------------- Accusulated ---------------------------- Totals 81,267.14 ------------------------------- ------------------------------- 10,960.00 (70,307.14) 9,701 --------------------------- ---------------------------- $7.25 13.5% 1989 DAILY RIDERSHIP REPORT --------------- Weekly Statistics ---------------- Rides Rides -------------- Rides Per Day ----------------- Total Wkday Wkend Ava.Trip Per Wkday Per Wkend Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Rides -------------------------------------------------- Avg. Avg. Dist. Hour Hour October, 1989: ---------------------------------------------- Wk of 10/01 - 10/07 B 48 76 99 64 7B 37 430 77.0 22.5 8.75 2.4 2.6 10/08 - 10/14 13 61 B5 93 BO 83 42 457 80.4 27.5 8.33 2.5 3.2 10/15 - 10/21 19 64 70 B3 99 75 38 44B 7B.2 28.5 6.33 2.4 3.5 10/22 - 10/28 12 65 72 90 B2 101 33 455 82.0 22.5 8.43 2.5 2.6 10/29 - 10/31 12 65 77 154 71.0 12.0 10.03 2.2 1.5 Monthly Totals ---------------------------------------------- 64 ---------------------------------------------- 303 380 365 345 337 150 -------------------------------------------------- 1944 -------------------------------------------------- 78.6 23.6 8.5B 2.4 2.8 PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE Section 10, Subdivision A maintenance, and ultimate removal of the sign. Setback requirements may be waived for such signs, provided that they are located on y private property wih theexpressconsent of the property owner, and provided that the do not impede safetyby g vision of pedestrians or motor vehicle operators. 5) Temporary Signage for commercial announcements such as grand openings and special events, may be mounted on a portable stand, with a maximum surface area of 32 sq. ft., or may be wall signage subject to the same standards as the permanent wall signage allowed for the enterprise. Such signs may be used not more than four _times per calendar year, and for a period of not more than 14 da s per time or of the dura�{on of the event romoted b the sign messa a whichever is less. The sign, sign suppo and portable stand shall be removed from public view at the end of the period. Multi -tenant buildings shall be considered as a single property forpurposes of this paragraph, and the use of the sin le temporary sign b tenants on the ro ert shall be the res onsibilit of the ro ert owner or desi nated mana er who shall endorse in writing all applications for sign permits. The owner or manager of the sign and the owner of the property shall be equally responsible for the proper location, maintenance, and removal of the sign. Setback requirements may be waived for such signs provided they are located on private property with the express consent of the property owner and provided that they do not impede safety by obstructing vision of pedestrians or motor vehicle operators. (Amended Ord. 89-14) 6) Temporary Signs for non-commercial announcements by civic groups shall be a maximum 32 sq. ft. in surface area, provided that a maximum of three such signs may exceed 32 sq. ft., to a maximum 300 sq. ft., in surface area provided that the larger signs are for city-wide and free community events. Temporary Signs for non-commercial announcements by civic groups shall be removed when the intended purpose has been fulfilled. Signs with a surface area greater than 32 sq. ft. are allowed for a maximum of ten days. The owner or manager of the sign, the owner of the land, or the sponsoring civic group shall be equally responsible for the proper location, maintenance, and ultimate removal of the sign. Setback requirements may be waived for such signs provided that they are located on private property with the express consent of the property owner, and provided they do not impede safety by obstructing vision of pedestrians or motor vehicle operators. (Amended Ord. 86-26) 7) One temporary sign for transient merchants and transient produce merchants. The sign shall not exceed 16 sq. ft. in surface area, and shall not exceed 6 ft. in height. The sign shall be setback at least 20 ft. from the street right-of-way line and shall be erected only during the period of transient sales. (Amended Ord. 86-07) 4. B-2 (SHOPPING CENTER) _05—TRU-0. Signs are accessory to permitted and conditional uses in the B-2 District; only the following signs are permitted in this district, unless otherwise specifically provided in this Subdivision. 10-6 November 7, 1989 Mr. A. M. Clausnitzer 10705 40th Avenue North Plymouth, MN 55441 Dear Mr. Clausnitzer: �l CITY OF PUMOUTR Z-CkCA�-- I have a copy of your November 1, 1989 letter to the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (Attention Don Blume). I also called you and left a message on your recorder asking that you confirm for me Mr. Blumes's official response regarding the apparent finding that your actual approved seating at the Favors -N -Flavors yogurt shop would not require a Service Availability Charge. You are aware that we collect Service Availability Charge for the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. Your letter suggests that the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission has determined no Service Availability Charge would be required because of the approved number of seats. This needs to be verified by them so that the City can obtain the credit from them if the charge you paid is to be refunded by the City. Your permit shows that the Sewer Availability Charge was $550 and that the check you paid the City in the amount of $1,510.15 also included the local City charges (water residential equivalency charge and sewer residential equivalency charge), the building permit fee, plan check fee and State of Minnesota surcharge. Therefore, I understand your request at this time is to have the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission and the City consider the circumstances of your permit and determine whether the Sewer Availability Charge was appropriate; if it is determined that it was not appropriate, then you desire a refund. I will await your response from the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission and I will have Building Official Joe Ryan develop information regarding the calculation of the fees and charges which you paid. Please call me of Joe Ryan should you have any questions regarding this. Sincerely, 4-" Blair Tremere Community Development Director cc: City Manager James G. Willis Councilmember Sisk Building Official Joe Ryan 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MANSCO INVESTMENTS 4020 MINNETONKA BOULEVARD • MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55416 - rte' �y Novemer 1, 1989 d Metropolitan Waste Control Comm. 230 East 50th St. Paul, MN. 55101 Attn: Don Bloom Dear Mr. Bloom. sgs-I- Yo2. TELEPHONE (612) 927-4011 + p / -6,\ 1 I writing in regard to our telephone conversation of 10-30-89 regarding the SAC charge to Favors -N -Flavors. This charge was made by the city of Plymouth at the time I made application to build a Yogurt Shop in that city. The charge was $1,510.15 on September 1, 1989. I am enclosing a photo copy of the check. This was based on an application for 35 seats in the shop. The city than required me to go to the City Council again after I had paid the SAC/WAC charges. They finally only approved seating for 19 seats. I am enclosing a copy of the final plan as approved by the Plymouth City Council. The reduction in seating was caused by the City because there was to many eating establishments in the center for the number of parking spaces. This was the explanation given to me by the city staff. I then attempted to get my monies returned, because I called the Waste Control office and was told with only 19 seats there would be no SAC/WAC charges. I got nowhere with the city personnel including the Mayor. His comment was "We don't charge it or set the fees, there is nothing you can do about it, its a different department Finally Councilman Sisk was kind enough to getme the information to me, so I at least could get something started. I realize this does not guarantee that the city will reimburse me, but I can deal with them on a more local basis. Thank You for your help. Respectfully, A. M. CLAUSNITZER AMC/b j c CC: Councilman Sisk City Manager Willis If there is any correspondence mail it to me at 10705-40thAVe Plymouth, MN. 55441 __.._>_....,.:,.,.......a..•s+,n..r.•..:s.•.....r..-..,irr.•...-..«.-........._:„,,i.:__..._........._�..._...-amu.. ... ...............:.�._�_._..........�..,w..:.:.;....-�.-»-..._...._. .. .... .. �. ..�._ _. ..... -,r—..eo:..www,.�-,r-_.-ax...�.Rua.�_�.me..msc._�-,.--r-_—••;dwree,r,r� _ - - PAY TO TH E ORDER OF MANSCO INVESTMENTS 4020 MINNETONKA BLVD. ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 /1 ly P First Bank Plymouth Plymouth •tl,' National Association Plymoouth BoulevArd • •«�,a,F,.e.. Plymouth, AA 7 r • n 002 38i� •x.0 9 10000 2 21. 52232058230 2538 19 �� 17-2/910 il' 0 0 0'L( i 5 10 1511 -M —� a w`` rn . �a V..J v.,,r 'a w; -f .ii �” vri � . _..�. T „ 3 > (� � :�� •.�, '� ,• t� a a In a a a a N r t0 X LL Q a r a a a N r so 0 V, O N Q f 0 N W Z Z_ J Q n H W O O a W H 5 0 F N } W J f0 N II O TR EN WRIGHT AND ASSOCIATE ARCHITECTS MEMO ab DATE: October 26, 1989 TO: Mr. Frank Boyles Assistant City Manager L City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 FROM: Michael A. Trossen - TWAA RE: Revised Project Schedule for Fire Station #1 October 23 - Formal approval of program of needs by City. Finalize November 10 Schematic Floor Plan and Site Plan with City Staff and Fire Department. Preparation of submittals to DRC. November 13 - DRC review process. December 8 December 11 Legislative approval process involving City Council and January 12 Planning Commission. January 15 - Design Development Phase. February 15 February 15 - Construction Document Phase. March 30 April 1 - 30 Bidding and negotiation. Application for building permits. Demolition of existing station. May 1 - Construction Phase. September 1 September 15 Occupancy. MAT/tb.FB cc: Jim Willis Lvle Robbinson -7 � . cmC-, October 31, 1989 Mr. Richard Carlquist Public Safety Director City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Blvd Plymouth, MN 55447 Dear Dick: I appreciate the opportunity for Advance Machine Company to hold the next SARA TITLE III meeting of the Public Safety and Plymouth reporting businesses. I believe that it is this joint cooperative effort that can make our community a better and safer place to work and maintain that intangible benefit of business and government working together. I will however, be unable to attend, in that I have a need to travel to our Welsh manufacturing plant. In my absence I have asked Kenny Page, Plant Manager Buildings #2 and #3, to attend along with Bob Priller. Both of these individuals are extremely involved in our daily operations and planning routines. They can be of value during your meeting. Again, I am sorry I will be unable to attend. I look forward to Bob's and Kenny's report. Sincerely, ADVANCE MACHINE COMPANY Roinald G. Ray V. P. Manufacturing RGR/ jb cc: Kenny Page Bob Priller ■ Advance Machine Company, 1460021st AVE NORTH, PLYMOUTH, MN, 55447-3408, TELEX: 497-5061 ADV -UI • FAX: (612)475-9718 *PHONE: (612)1473-2235 City of Blaine 9150 Central Avenue N.E., Blaine, Minnesota 55434 November 6, 1989 Mr. Frank Boyles Assistant City Manager City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Blvd. Plymouth, MN 55447 Dear Frank: (612) 784-6700 FAX (612) 784-6740 Thank you very much for your presentation at the MPWA Public Works Maintenance Program on Monday October 30th. Your presen- tation, "Designing an Effective Safety Program," started off the program in an effective and meaningful manner. I thought your presentation was excellent, contained quality material, was mean- ingful to the audience and it was obvious you had spent consider- able time in its preparation. Your time and effort is most appreciated and the residents of Plymouth are well served by having you on their staff. Sincerely, Charles Lenthe, P.E. Public Works Coordinator/City Engineer CL:cr October 31, 1989 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 0 FAX (612) 937-5739 Police Chief R. Carlquist Plymouth Police Department 3400 Plymouth Blvd. Plymouth, MN 55447 Dear Chief Carlquist, I am writing to express our appreciation for the recent assistance provided by Police Services Supervisor Steven Correll, Community Service Officer Kulesan, and Community Service Officer Sykes. All three assisted us with an unusual animal control situation. Because none of the neighboring Jurisdictions had animal tranquilizing equipment, when we,`were confronted with a doberman pinscher in excess of 100 pound' that had apparently gone mad, we had no choice but to seek assistance from another jurisdiction that had the proper equipment',-nd personnel. The above listed individuals responded prompty, courteously, and professionally, providing the necessary assistance to 'remedy this situation. Particularly in light of the fact that Plymouth and Chanhassen are not adjacent communities, we are particularly grateful for the assistance. I hope7you will pass our appreciation on to these officers, and accept our thanks. S er 1y, Scott Harr, Assistant Public Safety Director SH:lf - cc: Plymouth Mayor Virgil Schneider Chanhassen Mayor Don Chmiel Jim Chaffee, Chanhassen Public Safety Director �� x. ' CITY OF PLYMOUTR November 7, 1989 Laurie Ryan Hayes Legal Assistant Rider, Bennett, Egan & Arundel 2000 Lincoln Center 333 South 7th Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 SUBJECT: CHELSEA WOODS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION FIRE - NOVEMBER 27, 1986 Dear Ms. Hayes: Enclosed are copies of the materials which you requested in your letter of October 26. Yours truly, c attachment cc: Laurie Rauenhorst, City Clerk Jim Thomson, City Attorney Litigation File 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447. TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 RIDER, BENNETT, EGAN & ARUNDEL ATTORNEYS AT LAW WILLIAM T. EGAN EDWARD M. ARUNDEL DONALD R. BACKSTROM DAVID F. FITZGERALD LARRY R. HENNEMAN- JOHN P. FLATEN DAYTON E. SOBY DAVID J. BYRON RICHARD J. NYGAARD JOHN C. UNTHANK ALFRED SEDGWICK STEVEN J. KLUZ RICHARD H. KROCHOCK GENE C. OLSON OGER R. ROE, JR.• R GREGORY M. WEYANOT• ERIC J. MAGNUSON RONALD S. LAHNER• JOHN B. LUNSETH II JOAN S. MORROW GENE H. HEN NIG SHERYL RAMSTAD HVASS KEVIN CDOOLEY MARK W.. SCHNEIDER♦ JOHN D. SAUNDERS PATRICK J. SAUTER PATRI CIA A. BURKE FRANK B. BENNETT KEITH J.KERFELD BRIAN A. WOOD• ANN BARRY BURNS - BARRY F. CLEGG DAVID M. BOLT JEREMIAH P. GALLIVAN MARTHA M. SIMONETT JANE S. WELCH STEPHEN P. WATTERS LOUISE A. DOVRE JILL FLASKAMP HALBROOKS JAMES L. FORMAN JEFFREY O. CARPENTER KENNETH S. GUENTHNER KEVIN D. HOFMAN BRUCE L. TALEN JAN M. GUNDERSON ROBERT A. AWSUMB JANETTE K. BRIMMER• ANDREA BRECKNER NIELSEN October 26, 1989 Mr. James G. Willis City Manager City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Blvd. Plymouth, MN 55447 WILLIAM J,EGAN LAURA TUBBS BOOTH THOMAS G. ROCK TERRIL.GROEN JONATHAN N. JASPER ANNE BRYANT WIGHT DAVID T. KLAPHEKE ANDREA MITCHELL WALSH PAULA G. FORBES* CRAIG R. KIEFFER GENE F. BENNETT (1926-1983) OF COUNSEL STUART W. RIDER, JR. KENNETH R. JOHNSON .ALSO ADMITTED IN WISCONSIN 'r _q 1 -3 -- 2000 LINCOLN CENTRE 333 SouTH SEvENTH STREET MWNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 Re: Chelsea Woods Homeowners' Association, et al vs. Woodsmen Builders, Inc. Date of Fire: 11/27/86 Our File: 6/R04308 Dear Mr. Willis: TELEPHONE (612) 340-7951 TELECOPIER (612) 375-0701 WRITERS DIRECT DIAL NUMBER 340-7999 Through the plaintiffs in the above -referenced action, we have obtained a number of documents generated by you and members of your staff. I have a copy of a January 8, 1987 memo from Mr. Frank Boyles, Assistant City Manager to the Mayor and City Council concerning a January 5 meeting with the Chelsea Woods Homeowners' Association. The memo references memoranda or reports generated by the City Attorney, the Public Safety Director and the Planning and Community Development Director. We would like to obtain copies of these reports. We of course will be happy to reimburse reasonable photocopying and charges for staff time associated with locating these documents. Thank you. Very truly yours, RIDE LRH:bll CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: January 8, 1987 for City Council Meeting of January 12, 1987 TO: Mayor & City Council i�,� FROM: Frank Boyles, Assistant City Manag4 SUBJECT CHELSEA WOODS HOMEOWNERS REQUEST SUMMARY: At the January 5 meeting, Mr. Tom Barker and Mr. Ken Plant, on behalf of the Chelsea Woods Homeowner Association, requested "an immediate inspection of all its (Chelsea Woods) homes by the City of Plymouth, to see if they comply with the Building Code of 1973." Following discussion intended to clarify the scope of the inspection work desired, the purpose for such inspections, the resources required to conduct the inspections, and cursory review of the liability issues associated therewith, the City Council directed that the staff and City Attorney expeditiously evaluate and provide a report with recom- mendations on this subject. The Council directed that staff focus primarily upon proactive measures that the City should take to assist Chelsea residents. This report summarizes the issues and provides staff recommendations with respect to the Council directions. Memorandums are attached from City Attorney James Thomson, Public Safety Director Dick Carlquist, and Planning and Community Development Director Blair Tremere, providing detailed information on the various aspects of the issues which the Chelsea Woods request entails. Staff recommendations are also provided. Judging meeting, by the turnout and tenor of the comments at the January 5 a large number concern that their living because of the residents commonwall separations ar which each building was areas of resident conce of Chelsea Woods residents have genuine units may expose them to greater fire danger assumptions that the fireplaces, chimneys and e inadequate when compared to the Code under constructed. Ken Plant stated that the two rn are: fire spread horizontally via the commonwalls, and fire spread vertically through the chimney chase. The first issue to be addressed is, does historical data support the claim that there is disapportionally higher fire hazard for residents living in Chelsea Woods than in other multi or single family livinq units in the City? The attached memorandum from Public Safety Director Dick Carlquist states in the first paragraph that, "I have researched the records and statistics (since January, 1981) that we keep regarding fire loss in the City of Plymouth. I could find no records of a townhouse fire such as that experienced recently in CHELSEA WOODS HOMEOWNERS REQUEST January 8, 1987 Page two , c� Chelsea Woods occurring. In fact, the majority of fire loss was to detached single-family homes." For the last five years, the records confirm that no townhouse fires have occurred. The lack of incidence of fires at townhouse units does not suggest a greater than average exposure to fire to the inhabitants of such units. A second question raised was whether or not Chelsea Woods residents should refrain from using their fireplaces, assuming that there may be flaws in the construction of each. Based upon Director Carlquist's memorandum, "Fireplaces or wood auxiliary heating appliances, careless smoking, and faulty electrical wiring are the three major causes of home fires..." in Plymouth. He further states that, "Our experience is no different than the rest of Minnesota in that these appear to be the three leading causes of residential fires." In light of these observations, the use of any fireplace should be undertaken with care. Mr. Carlquist also states that, according to Fire Inspector Scofield, ".....everything is related to proper maintenance, cleaninq and usage of the (fireplace) unit, especially staying within heat maximums recommended by the original manufacturer. Regular cleaning and maintenance are essential as well." Based upon the shared concern of Chelsea Woods residents about the fireplace issue, it seems reasonable to assume that at least a fair number of units are equipped with fireplaces. Assuming further that the residents use their fireplaces at least periodically, and the fact that a fireplace fire has not occurred at this location for the last five years, suggests that there is not a higher exposure to a fireplace fire at Chelsea Woods than any other single or multi family unit in the City. Residents also expressed concern about fire spread from unit -to -unit. Whenever units share a commonwall, there is reason for concern about horizontal fire spread. Chief Carlquist states, "The final analysis of the great property loss damage suffered at the Chelsea Woods fire was really a function more of 'time' than any other variable. From the recent movie that I showed the City Council regarding residential sprinklers, I am sure that they have a better understanding of what four or five minutes will do in the delay in reporting a fire. In the particular case in question, there appeared to be much more of a time delay!" The bottom line is that there is a direct correlation with the amount of time a fire is given to develop and the likelihood of its breaching a fire rated wall. The above observations are intended to establish perspective on the Chelsea Woods situation and not address the issue of inspection. The attached City Attorney's opinion clearly suggests that any Inspection undertaken would be most prudently accomplished by a third party. The City Attorney indicates, "Based upon the CraCraft decision, it is my opinion that the City has no liability to property owners of Chelsea Woods if the units were not constructed according to the Building Code." January 8, 1987 Page three The City Attorney's opinion further indicates that, "I am not aware of any statutory mandate, either in building code or otherwise, that requires the City's building inspector to reinspect units after they have been constructed." Only in instances where a clear public hazard has been demonstrated, does an obligation exist. Consequently he states that, "Based upon the facts and circumstances that are known to date, it is my opinion that the City has no legal duty to inspect the remaining units." He adds that, "If the City inspects the units at Chelsea Woods that have not been damaged by fire, the City is poten- tially increasing its exposure to liability by assuming a duty that does not exist either statutorily or at common law." It would also be inappropriate for the City to directly undertake the inspections if the results are used ultimately to bring action against the developer and/or City. It would represent the City of Plymouth investigating itself which is questionable from an objectivity stand- point. Besides being legally inadvisable for the City to reinspect the structures, we do not have a sufficient number of staff personnel nor the expertise necessary to accomplish such a comprehensive inspection without adversely impacting upon our daily workload as indicated by Blair Tremere in the attached memorandum. Director Tremere has outlined the total estimated costs of conducting the necessary inspec- tions of the fireplaces and commonwalls. Based upon quotations received by Building Official Ryan, the cost of demolition and repair required to inspect each unit, would be $26,000 in the case of one bidder, and almost $45,000 in the case of another. These quotations do not include re -painting and panel finishinq - only rough finish- ing. The actual inspections range from a low of S4,875 for one vendor, to $8,000 - $9,000. For quotation purposes, it was assumed the work includes fire separation inspections and fireplace inspec- tions and that all units would receive inspection. A one or two unit inspection of fire damaged units is not sufficient in Mr. Tremere's view to reach conclusions that can be reliably extrapolated to all other units. However, a sampling of commonwalls coupled with inspection of all fireplaces would provide sufficient data to reach conclusions while reducing total inspector costs. Total inspection costs will be less if sampling of commonwalls is used in lieu of inspecting each. The content of each inspection is included in Blair's memorandum. RECOMMENDATIONS To be of assistance to the Chelsea Woods homeowners, the following steps would be appropriate for the City: t11LLJL/l f1VVV0 (IVIILVIII\LI\J 1\L�VL�JI January 8, 1987 Page four 1. The Building Inspection Division should assemble all appropriate Building Code provisions, and related documentation and inter- pretation issues, and supply them to a Homeowner Association representative. Prior to the inspection, the Building Official will be available to meet with Homeowner Association represen- tatives as time is available to review with them generic concerns with respect to code issues as they relate to townhouse and the two memos he has already supplied. This would not include the on-site inspections or evaluation of units by city employees. 2. The City's Fire Inspector, who is familiar with the specific fire prevention needs of Chelsea Woods residents, will tailor the already scheduled education session to address the specific concerns of Homeowner Association representatives, including housekeeping, smoke detectors, exiting drills, fire extinguishers, alarm and sprinkler systems, and fireplace maintenance and operation. Follow up sessions and individual consultation will be made available as time permits to assist property owners in obtaining the information they need to take fire prevention measures. 3. The Building Inspection Division will collect the plans avail- able from the Chelsea Woods Association to assure that the plans are evaluated against the requirements of the 1973 Building Code, recognizing that they are not necessarily as -built plans. This information, together with that provided in Recommendation No. 1 above will provide the basic data the contractual inspector will require to perform inspections and should help to keep inspection costs to a minimum. 4. The Building Inspection Division will assist Homeowner Association representatives in securing more specific inspection quotations based upon the actual work which homeowners may be willing to accomplish themselves to reduce total costs. Any contract for inspections should be between the Homeowner Association and private inspection contractor. The Council should recognize that as a our community ages, requests of a similar nature will likely arise for whatever reason. The staff does not recommend financial participation by the City. A copy of this memorandum together with the attachments have been provided to Mr. Tom Barker and Mr. Ken Plant of the Chelsea Woods Homeowners Association. I expect that they will be present at the meeting to further discuss these matters with the City Council. FB: fm attach -T--: c)-3, q CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: January 7, 1987 TO: Frank Boyles, Acting City Manager FROM: Richard J. Carlquist, Public Safety Director SUBJECT CHELSEA WOODS MEETING WITH CITY COUNCIL, JANUARY 12, 1987 I have been associated with the Plymouth Fire Department since January, 1981. From that time, until the present, I have researched the records and statistics that we keep regarding the fire loss in the City of Plymouth. I could find no records of a townhouse fire such as that experienced recently in Chelsea Woods occurring. In fact, the majority of fire loss was to detached single-family homes. This was especially true with respect to the loss of life. Six persons lost their lives in fires during this time frame. There has been a total of approximately $2.25 million in damage to single family homes durinq the aforementioned six year time frame. In investigating the cause of these fires in the single family residences, there appeared to be three predominantly different causes of the fires. Fireplaces or auxiliary wood heating appliances, careless smoking, and faulty electrical wiring were the three major causes of home fires. I should point out that our experience is no different than the rest of Minnesota in that these appear to be the three leading causes of residential fires. One of the house fires that we did have in 1982, was found to be an arson. Otherwise, the bulk of our fires are found to be accidental. On January 15, 1987 at 7:30 p.m., Fire Prevention Inspector Stan Scofield will be presenting to the Chelsea Homeowners Association a fire prevention program. This program is basically the same one that we offer to all homeowner associations. It will deal with such subjects as: housekeeping, smoke detectors, exiting drills, fire extinguishers, and fireplace maintenance. I asked Mr. Scofield how long it would take to do a fire prevention audit in a home, and he replied, it would take approximately two hours. The two hours would be required to inspect the fireplace to determine if cleaning was necessary, and if there appeared to be proper installation. We have not provided in-home inspections up to this point because we do not have the manpower budgeted to respond. There is also added liability associated with approving a fireplace which is subsequently identified as the source of a fire. I asked Mr. Scofield whether there is a higher than usual likelihood of the problem with zero clearance fireplaces. He replied, that virtually everything was related to the proper maintenance, cleaning ILLJL/l I1 VVU-) FILL,l — ••i••• —, , _ v••a.i �, �•�•�v•�•�� .L, .i v/ January 7, 1987 Page two and usage of the unit, especially staying within heat maximums recom- mended by the original manufacturer. In other words, all things being equal, there did not appear to be a higher danger caused by using the fireplace unless one would exceed the fire and heat capacity of the unit. Another factor Mr. Scofield mentioned was the settling of the fireplace and this also includes masonry. He said that, in some instances, there could be a pulling away of the unit from where wood would be exposed to direct heat. In those cases, there is a distinct possibility of flame escaping from the fire box and touching the wood directly. Homeowners, whether in multi -family or single family units, are well-advised to hire a professional to periodically evaluate the condition of their free-standing zero clearance or masonry fireplace. The final analysis of the great property loss damage suffered at the Chelsea fire was really a function more of "time" than any other variable. From the recent movie that I showed the City Council regarding residential sprinklers, I am sure that they have a better understanding of what four or five minutes will do in the delay in reporting a fire. In the particular case in question, there appeared to be much more of a time delay! The bottom line then appears to be that we have to get the message to the public through our fire prevention and public education to call the Fire Department immediately on the first discovery of fire. RJC:Jm L(TO erg Leflt•t }:rnncci� O'Lrif•n �• llrat\ 7 2000 First Bank Place West January 8, 1987 Minneapolis Minnesota 55402 Telephone !6121 3330543 Telecopier 16121 333-0540 Clayton L. LeFevere Herbert P. Lefler J. Dennis O'Brien Mr. Frank Boyles John E. Drawz Assistant City Manager David J. Kennedy CITY OF PLYMOUTH John B. Dean Glenn E. Purdue 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Richard J. Schieffer Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 Charles L. LeFevere Herbert P. Lefler Ill James J. Thomson, Jr. RE: Chelsea Woods Fire Thomas R. Gait Dayle Nolan Brian F. Rice Dear Mr. Boyles: John G. Kresse' Lorraine S Clugg The City Council requested at its January 5, 1987 meeting James M. Strommen that I provide them with a letter addressing the legal Ronald H. Batty William P. Jordan ramifications to the City for the fire that occurred at Kurt J. Erickson Chelsea Woods on November 27, 1986. The subsequent William R. Skallerud investigation by the City Building Inspector indicated a Rodney D. Anderson Corrine A. Heine possibility that the exterior separation walls between David D. Beaudon the units were not constructed according to the 1973 Paul E. Rasmussen building code, which was in effect at the time of Steven M TaGen construction. The Chelsea Woods Homeowner's Association has requested the City Council to authorize the Building Inspector to inspect other units in the complex to determine whether they comply with the 1973 building code. The legal issues affecting the City include: 1. What potential liability exists if the units were not constructed according to the 1973 building code? 2. Does the City have a legal duty to inspect the remaining units in Chelsea Woods for possible building code violations? 3. Assuming that the City has no legal duty to inspect the remaining units, what additional potential liability is incurred by the City if the Building Inspector inspects the units? Z93 Mr. Frank Boyles January 8, 1987 Page 2 APPLICABLE LEGAL PRINCIPLES In order for the City Council to fully understand the answers to the questions that have been raised, I believe that it is important to summarize briefly the general legal principles applicable to this situation. First of all, it is important to note that the legal principles that apply to personal injury or property damage occurring on public property are not applicable. Consequently, the general rules of negligence, which apply to both private parties and governmental entities, are applicable and need to be briefly explained. In order for a person to demonstrate that another party is liable for negligence, the person must first demonstrate that the other party owed a duty to act in accordance with a certain standard of care. Second, the person must demonstrate that the other party did not follow that standard of care. Third, there must be legal causation between the breach of the standard of care and the injury suffered by the person. Finally, the injured person must suffer damages. The legal issues associated with this case focus on the first two factors. That is, does the City owe a legal duty to the Chelsea Woods residents, and if so, what is the extent of that duty? POTENTIAL CITY LIABILITY FOR UNDISCOVERED BUILDING CODE VIOLATIONS THAT MIGHT HAVE OCCURRED AT THE TIME THE UNITS WERE CONSTRUCTED The principal case in Minnesota regarding liability of municipalities for building code and fire code violations is Cracraft v. City of St. Louis Park, 279 N.W.2d 801 (Minn. 1979). In that case the Minnesota Supreme Court thoroughly analyzed the issue, which arose as a result of a fire at Benilde - St. Margaret's High School on October 27, 1974. The city's fire inspector had inspected the premises on September 13, 1974. The plaintiffs alleged that the fire resulted from the igniting of duplicating fluid that had been stored on a loading dock in a 55 gallon drum, which was a violation of the fire code. In determining whether there was any liability for the actions of the fire inspector, the court concentrated on the issue of whether the fire code created a legal duty on the part of the City to act in accordance with a certain standard of care. The court noted that the purpose of building inspections is "to make sure that construction within the corporate limits of the municipality meet the standards established." Id. at 804. Mr. Frank Boyles January 8, 19£7 Page 3 The court then observed that building codes and building inspections "are not meant to be an insurance policy by which the municipality guarantees that each building is built in compliance with the building codes and zoning codes." Id. The court then observed that such inspections are not undertaken for the purpose of insuring either the person inspected or third parties that the building is free from all fire hazards or building code violations. In Cracraft the court concluded that building codes, fire codes, and municipal ordinances requiring inspections do not impose a legal duty on a municipality that would give rise to potential liability for negligence. The Cracraft decision reaffirmed the court's earlier holding in Hoffert v. Owatonna Inn Towne Motel, Inc., 199 N.W.2d 158 (Minn. 1973) that the building code does not impose upon municipalities a duty to protect the personal or property interests of individuals, and therefore does not give rise to potential municipal liability for injuries that occur due to undiscovered building code violations. Based on the facts that are known to date, it appears that the building inspection that occurred at the time the units at Chelsea Woods were constructed was a standard building inspection that is routinely performed at the time of initial construction. Based on the Cracraft decision, the City has no liability to the property owners at Chelsea Woods for any building code violations that were not discovered as part of that inspection. CITY'S DUTY TO REINSPECT FOR BUILDING CODE VIOLATIONS There is no mandate in the Uniform Building Code that requires the City's building inspector to reinspect units after they have been constructed. The Code permits post -construction inspections whenever the building inspector has reasonable cause to believe that a building code violation exists that would make a building "unsafe, dangerous or hazardous." UBC §202(c). The purpose of such an inspection is to require the building owner to correct the unsafe conditions. Because the Uniform Building Code contains no mandatory post -construction inspection requirement, if any such duty exists it exists as a result of general common law legal principles. In Cracraft, the court stated that in determining whether a municipality has a duty to act in any given situation depends on all of the facts and circumstances. For example, a municipality owes a duty to avoid increasing the risk of harm to a particular person. In addition, reasonable reliance by individuals on a municipality's representations and conduct could impose a special duty. Mr. Frank Boyles January 8, 1987 Page 4 Also, actual knowledge of a dangerous condition can tend to impose a duty to inform others of the dangerous condition. Based on the facts and circumstances that are known to date, it is my opinion that the City has no mandatory legal duty to inspect the remaining units. The City probably does have a legal duty to disclose the information that has been learned as a result of the inspections conducted by the public safety department and building department. POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL LIABILITY IF THE CITY INSPECTS THE REMAINING UNITS The Uniform Building Code states that the Code is not to be construed to mean that an inspecting agency assumes any liability "by reason of the inspections authorized by this code." UBC 5202(f). That provision has not yet been interpreted by the Minnesota Supreme Court. It can be argued that an inspection based solely on the request of a property owner is not authorized by the Code unless the Building Inspector first determines that the building is "unsafe, dangerous or hazardous." The Minnesota Supreme Court stated in Cracraft that if a party assumes a duty that does not otherwise exist, the party has an obligation to exercise that duty in a reasonable manner. In other words, in situations where a party has no mandatory legal duty to act, the party can actually increase its potential liability by assuming such a duty. If the City inspects the units at Chelsea Woods that have not been damaged by the fire, the City is potentially increasing its exposure to liability by assuming a duty that does not otherwise exist. For example, if the City were to inspect the units and conclude that there is no building code violations, the City could potentially be liable if that determination is erroneous and is relied upon by the property owners. Although there is no legal duty to inspect the remaining units, there is no legal prohibition against such an inspection based upon the request of the property owners if the City Council deems it to be in the best interest of the City to do so. Such an inspection does not mean that the City will be an insurer of the units, however, it might increase the City's potential liability for any conclusions that are relied upon by the homeowners. There are ways that the City can attempt to limit its liability in this regard. For example, the City could contract with a third party to perform the inspection. Mr. Frank Boyles January 8, 1987 Page 5 CONCLUSION In summary, I do not believe that there is a basis for liability against the City as a result of the construction of the units. The City probably has no legal duty to inspect the remaining units but the City Council, in the exercise of its discretion, can choose to do so. The City Council should be cognizant of the fact, however, that by inspecting the units the City may potentially be increasing its exposure to liability. Sincerely, LeFEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY, ( O'BRIEN & DRAWZ -77 %� r �mes homson, Jr. JJT/kjj CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 MEMO DATE: January 7, 1987 TO: Assistant City Manager Frank Boyles FROM: Community Development Director Blair Tremere SUBJECT REQUEST FOR INSPECTIONAL SERVICES BY CHELSEA WOODS HOME OWMERS SUMMARY: The City Council directed that staff prepare a report based on research regarding the proposal by Chelsea Woods homeowners that the City conduct an inspection of the attached dwelling units. This report deals with the research and conclusion I have conducted with my staff with respect to the role of the Building Inspection Division and the Codes which are maintained and enforced by that Division. I recommend that the information be reviewed carefully and in the context of observations by the City Attorney and by the Public Safety Department. 1. BACKGROUND: A fire occurred in one of the townhouse clusters at the Chelsea Woods complex on Thanksgiving Day and severely damaged several dwelling units in that cluster. The source of the fire was a prefabricated fireplace and the fire spread from the originating unit to others in the cluster, apparently through the walls and attic. Homeowners in the Chelsea Woods complex have questioned whether the attached dwellings in this development were built according to the Code, at least with respect to the fire separation walls and fireplaces (those installed with the original construction). The Homeowners Association President has requested the City Council to direct the inspection of all attached units in the Chelsea Woods complex to determine whether they were constructed in compliance with the 1973 Building Codes. 2. SHOULD THE CITY UNDERTAKE THE REQUESTED INSPECTIONS? The policy question of whether the City should respond to the request with the inspection services sought by the homeowners should be deliberated by the Council in light of information to be provided by the City Attorney. =(Z� :�T- Page two Memorandum to Assistant City Manager Frank Boyles January 7, 1987 2. Continued: I have approached the question from the standpoint of how the City might under- take the inspections, if the City Council deems it appropriate `to do the inspections. The State law and State Building Code provide that the City must conduct certain inspections of new construction which is authorized under the Code. The Build- ing Code and the Uniform Housing Code (adopted by reference by the City of Plymouth) provide that inspections also should be conducted of premises where there is reasonable cause to believe there exists a condition or violation that renders the premises unsafe, dangerous, or hazardous. The City is not otherwise obligated to conduct building or housing inspections of existing buildings. The requested inspections should be conducted on behalf of the property owners. I recommend that a qualified firm or individual be retained to make the inspec- tions, and to report the findings. I recommend this because of the limited resources of the City staff, particular- ly in light of the ongoing inspection load of new construction which is the pri- mary activity of the Inspection Division at this time. Moreover, the necessary preparatory and restorative work, i.e., removing and replacing sheetrock and related materials, is beyond the scope of the duties and expertise of the Inspection Division personnel. Also, it seems appropriate to not cast the present City Inspection Staff and the City Building Official in an adversarial role of determining whether construc- tion performed at an earlier date, under a different Code, and enforced by a different staff, was appropriate, adequate, and in compliance with the former Code. The credibility of the inspection results would be substantially enhanced, particularly in the eyes of the homeowners, and of a court, if it were from a competent third party. 3. WHAT INSPECTION WORK IS INVOLVED? Homeowners have expressed concern about the design and construction of the fire separation walls and blocking, with respect to vertical and horizontal fire spread; and, they have expressed concern about the design and construction of the prefabricated fireplace units. Inspection of the fire separation wall design and construction would involve re- moving an area approximately 16 inches by 16 inches directly through each wall and examining the composition of the walls and support structure. The opening would be located between 2 -stud spaces in order that the existing construction materials could be replaced, or that new materials could be provided. Once re- paired, the opening would then need to be re -taped and sanded, prior to painting or other decorative restoration. Page three Memorandum to Assistant City Manager Frank Boyles January 7, 1987 Inspection of the fire separation in the attic access panel found in each unit, to allow space. This involves visual verfication of materials. No physical alteration and repair space involves entering an attic for an inspection of each attic the wall separation design and should be necessary in this area. Inspection of the design and construction of the prefabricated fireplaces would involve removing the exterior sheathing and siding material for each fireplace chase, approximately 5 ft. above the base of the fireplace opening along the three sides of the fireplace chase. The inspection would include the clearances around the chimney; the installation and location of framing components includ- ing headers; installation of firestopping, if required; and, the setting of the firebox. The materials would be reinstalled once the inspection investigation was completed. Fireplace design and construction would require examination of every unit to include the determination of whether all units were installed with original construction, or whether units were installed later or perhaps installed as replacement units. The inspection of the separation wall design and construction could be done on a sample basis, whereby one or possibly two test areas could be examined in each cluster of units. Inspection of the attic space could be done for each unit. 4. WHAT IS THE ESTIMATED COST OF PERFORMING THE REQUESTED INSPECTIONS? A precise cost is difficult to set now, because the type of inspection is not standard and the ease of performing the inspection is not known. Also, the cost would vary depending upon the resources committed, both in terms of who would do the inspection and, in terms of the actual manpower required. There are twenty-five clusters of attached dwelling units in Chelsea Woods and there are a total of 129 attached dwelling units in Chelsea Woods, inclusive of the one cluster and four units damaged in the fire. Manpower costs could be determined as a conservative estimate on a per unit basis, subject to actual physical discovery and requirements which would become known as the inspections proceeded. Two construction companies were contacted for rough cost estimates to do the preparatory work. The estimates were requested verbally on the basis of doing one test per cluster or doing one test per dwelling unit. The preparatory cost per unit on a 25 dwelling unit basis would be $225 to $380 for an approximate cost range for 25 units of $5,500 to $9,500. The preparatory -osz per unit for 129 dwelling units would be $200 to $344 for a total estimated range of $25,800 to $44,400 for all 129 units. That is the estimated cost for the preparatory work alone and it does not include a specific dollar amount for final finish work when the openings are closed and repaired, i.e., repainting or replastering, as the case may be. The work noted above is the preparatory work. The cost of inspection can be estimated and we obtained verbal rough estimates from two firms which can conduct such inspections and which would provide an individual report stating Page four Memorandum to Assistant City Manager Frank Boyles January 7, 1987 the results of their investigation. That would include a statement as to whether the construction met the minimum requirements of the applicable Code. The estimates were requested on the basis of one test per cluster or on test per dwelling unit. The cost to do inspections on 25 dwelling units, i.e., one per cluster, would be approximately $950 to $2,000; the cost to do an inspection on each of the 129 dwelling units would be approximately $4,850 to $9,000. 5. OTHER SERVICES THAT CAN BE PROVIDED? The Homeowner Association representative indicated that some of residents had copies of construction plans at least for their individual units. The City could assure that available plans are reviwed and evaluated against the require- ments of the 1973 Building Code. We can assist the homeowners with the preparation of a quotation request for professional inspection services. Photocopies of applicable code and other records relative to Chelsea Woods can be provided; they are public information. The City does not have copies of the approved construction plans for the Chelsea Woods units. 6. WHAT IS THE APPARENT INTERPRETATIVE QUESTION ABOUT FIRE SEPARATION WALLS? The Uniform Building Code required and requires on exterior wall design of a one-hour fire rating from foundation to roof for detached dwellings, when the dwelling is closer than three feet to a property line. The Code also requires and required a separation wall with a fire rating of one-hour between attached (apartments) dwelling units. The apparent dilemma for some Building Officials was whether to treat townhouse attached dwelling units as apartments -- and require a one-hour rated separation wall between units -- or, as detached dwellings -- and require a one-hour rated separation wall for each unit, for a total two-hour rated separation between the units. If the interpretation were made that townhouses are apartments, a separation wall with a less restrictive fire rating and design would be found in the wall construction of a townhouse unit. This dilemma does not exist today, at least in the City of Plymouth, and has not for several years. A fire rated separation wall is required for each unit from foundation to roof. That is not to say that the apparent interpretation of over a decade ago that the Chelsea Woods units were apartments, would render those units in violation of the Code or unsafe. The actual fire separation construction of all attached units in Chelsea Woods is not known, except for those units which were damaged by, and, thus, which had walls exposed by fire. We do not have knowledge of the specific interpretation by the Building Official at the time, nor do we have copies of the approved construction plans. January 13, 1987 Kenneth Plant Chelsea Woods Home Owners Assoc. 1835 Black Oaks Lane Plymouth, MN 55447 Thomas Barker Chelsea Woods Home Owners Assoc. 1505 Yuma Lane Plymouth, MN 55447 Dear Ken and Tom: In accordance with the Council's direction at last night's meeting, we are anxious to get together with you to talk about how we can most expeditiously accomplish our objectives as set forth in my January 8, 1987 memorandum (copy of recommendations page attached). Please contact me at your earliest convenience in order that we can set a meeting together with the Planning and Community Development Director and Building Official to review this subject. It would be helpful if you could begin providing us with typical plans for the units in order that review may begin as soon as possible. We look forward to assisting you in your efforts to identify areas where property owners m,4y make enhancements to the safety of their dwelling units. Yours vey-,tru Frank Boyles Assistant City Manager FB:dma attach. cc: Blair Tremere, Director of Planning and Community Development Dick Carlquist, Director of Public Safety Mayor and City Council 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 5592800 c �\, 7 ;—, January 8, 1987 Page four 1. The Building Inspection Division should assemble all appropriate Building Code provisions, and related documentation and inter- pretation issues, and supply them to a Homeowner Association representative. Prior to the inspection, the Building Official will be available to meet with Homeowner Association represen- tatives as time is available to review with them generic concerns with respect to code issues as they relate to townhouse and the two memos he has already supplied. This would not include the on-site inspections or evaluation of units by city employees. 2. The City's Fire Inspector, who is familiar with the specific fire prevention needs of Chelsea Woods residents, will tailor the already scheduled education session to address the specific concerns of Homeowner Association representatives, including housekeeping, smoke detectors, exiting drills, fire extinguishers, alarm and sprinkler systems, and fireplace maintenance and operation. Follow up sessions and individual consultation will be made available as time permits to assist property owners in obtaining the information they need to take fire prevention measures. 3. The Building Inspection Division will collect the plans avail- able from the Chelsea Woods Association to assure that the plans are evaluated against the requirements of the 1973 Building Code, recognizing that they are not necessarily as -built plans. This information, together with that provided in Recommendation No. 1 above will provide the basic data the contractual inspector will require to perform inspections and should help to keep inspection costs to a minimum. 4. The Building Inspection Division will assist Homeowner Association representatives in securing more specific inspection quotations based upon the actual work which homeowners may be willing to accomplish themselves to reduce total costs. Any contract for inspections should be between the Homeowner Association and private inspection contractor. The Council should recognize that as a our community ages, requests of a similar nature will likely arise for whatever reason. The staff does not recommend financial participation by the City. A copy of this memorandum together with the attachments have been provided to Mr. Tom Barker and Mr. Ken Plant of the Chelsea Woods Homeowners Association. I expect that they will be present at the meeting to further discuss these matters with the City Council. FB:Jm attach November 8, 1989 teff & Debra Hodroff 2630 Garland Lane North Plymouth, MN 55447 Dear Hodroff Family: 0 - Thank Thank you for your letter of November 1, addressed to Councilmember Sisk with regard to your views on two of our programs. The United States Supreme Court has provided guidance to the public as to the matter of the separation of church and state. We seek to obey not only the law, but the interpretation of the Constitution as handed down by our Supreme Court. I believe the matters you refer to on page 40 of the November/ December issue of Plymouth on Parade do not violate the law or rulings of the Supreme Court. We continually seek to keep in mind the diversity of our community, and recognize the sensitivities of many with respect to the celebration of religious events and/or holidays. The decorating of the old Plymouth Village Hall, or the holiday events conducted in the building, are not done in a fashion which conveys a religious theme. Similarly, the decorating of the tree in the Plymouth City Center is done without any religious connotation and is, in our view, appropriate. While I appreciate your sensitivities on these matters, I am not able to agree that their continuation is either inappropriate, or a violation of the law. I am sharing your letter with all members of the City Council to alert them to your views on this topic. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and concerns with me. Yours truly, rmes G. Willis ci y Manager OW:kec 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800 All Ages Santa and Mrs. Claus will be on hand for an Old Fashioned Christmas. Old Fashioned Christmas in Plymouth Sto.nday. Dec. 10. 2-5 p.m. "Over the river and through the woods to Grandmother's house we go" It's not quite Grandma's, but it's close. Visit Santa in the Plymouth Historical Society Building all decked out for the occasion. "The horse knows the way to carry the sleigh through the white and drifting snow;' in Plymouth Creek Park, 3625 Fernbrook Lane. Even the smells of hot cider and holiday cookies will remind you of celebrations past. Join your neighbors for holiday stories by Bob Gasch, music by the Armstrong High School Madrigal singers, old fashioned activities and fun for children of all ages. There will be a small fee to help defray the cost of the sleigh ride. _ Trim The Tree At -City Center If you are looking for a way to celebrate the holidays with your family or youth group, come meet Santa and join the Plymouth KANI WIN GA Camp Fire group as its members decorate a holiday tree at the Plymouth City Center, 3400 Plymouth Blvd., from 3:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. on Thurs., Dec. 7. Individuals, families and area youth groups are welcome. Bring along some decorations to hang. Handmade ornaments are preferred. Refreshments will be served. If you will be bringing a large group, please notify Barbara in advance at 559-3099. 40 JEFFHODROFF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUATTANT 41, November 1, 1989 Councilman Jerry Sisk Plymouth City Council Plymouth, MN Dear Councilman Sisk: Our family was somewhat surprised at our city's apparent participation in certain holiday activities that seem to be religious in nature. Enclosed is a copy of page 40 of the Nov/Dec issue of PLYMOUTH ON PARADE. The two activities listed on that page certainly celebrate Christmas. Both the Historical Society and City Center Buildings are the public places being used. As a non-Christian family, we think it is insensitive to use these public places to celebrate Christian Holidays. While suggesting equal time for other faiths might be a solu- tion, that wouldn't be fair to others. We hope you will keep in mind that many of Plymouth's citizens are members of religious minorities and the use of public facilities for religious purposes imposes uncomfortable feelings on those minorities. We ask that these activities be moved to private settings and that the City of Plymouth doesn't covertly endorse the religious activities of one faith over another. Thanks,'in advance, for your consideration. Sincerely, The Jeff & Debra Hodroff Family 608 Tu'CL'e Oaks Center i 15500 Wayzata Boulevard / Wayzata, MN 55391 / Phone (612) 473-9669 ;:: C4_7 HE AA4ERICA^, INSTITUTE AND A41NNESOTA SOCIETY OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS