HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Information Memorandum 06-27-1986r
a cif[:
R
�{ CITY OF
PLYMOUTR
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
June 27, 1986
UPCOMING MEETINGS AND EVENTS.....
1. PLANNING COMMISSION -- Tuesday, duly 1. The Planning Commission
Forum is scheduled for 7:15 p.m., with the Regular Planning
Commission meeting following at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
Agenda attached. (M-1)
2. CITY OFFICES CLOSED -- City offices closed Friday, duly 4.
3. NEXT COUNCIL MEETING -- The next regular meeting of the City Council
is scheduled for Monday, duly 7.
4. MUSIC IN PLYMOUTH -- Wednesday, duly 9, 6:30 p.m.
5. REMINDER -- Employee picnic - Tuesday, duly 15. Contact Laurie if
you plan to attend.
6. CANCELLATION OF GROUNDBREAKING CEREMONIES -- I was contacted Friday
afternoon by a representative of Honeywell that their groundbreaking
ceremonies for the office building at the Plymouth Point Corporate
Center, 9th Avenue and Forestview Lane, has been cancelled. No
explanation was given, nor was an alternate date suggested.
FOR YOUR INFORMATION....
1. MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION (MLC) -- At Thursday's MLC
Operating Committee, I was nominated to be Vice Chair for the next
year. Mayor Larry Donlin of Minnetonka was selected to be nominated
for Chairman. These recommendations of the nominating committee
will be presented to the Board of Directors at their meeting which
is scheduled for Thursday, duly 31.
We were also informed that Bob Renner, one of the two chief
lobbyists for the MLC, will be leaving the Larkin, Hoffman, Daly
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
June V. 1986
Page two
f
firm and Joining the law firm of Messerli and Kramer effective this
coming month. Bob's expertise lies primarily, in my view, in the
area of fiscal maters, and he is well connected particularly to the
IR side of the aisle. The committee indicated that it was
particularly concerned that its lobbying efforts not be disrupted
unduly by this change. The committee therefore decided to solicit
proposals from both the Larkin, Hoffman, Daly and Messerli and
Kramer firms for lobbying services for the period of August 1, 1986
through July 31, 1987. These proposals are to be submitted
reflecting two approaches. The first approach would be for each
submitting a proposal whereby they would act as the sole lobbyist
for the MLC. The second approach would be a combined effort on the
part of the two firms to represent the MLC. A committee to be
representative of the full Board is to meet with both firms prior to
the July 31 Board of Directors meeting and hopefully have a
recommendation for the full Board at that meeting. I'm not
personally acquainted with the Messerli, Kramer firm, although I
understand that they have four lawyers whose primary Job is
lobbying. They have represented the City of Bloomington in
legislative matters, independent of the MLC, before the
legislature. I will keep the Council advised as this matter
develops.
2. THE DEMISE OF FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING -- In a letter dated May 13,
1986, the Office of the Secretary of the Treasury, officially
advised us that federal revenue sharing is discontinued effective
September 30, 1986. This means that the City will be receiving its
last increment the second week of October this year. The final
increment may also be affected by the Gramm-Rudman. On the other
hand, the Supreme Court decision with respect to this bill, could
increase our last payment if Gramm-Rudman is found to be
unconstitutional. In order to retain our revenue sharing funds
already received, we are required to "use, obligate or appropriate
all revenue sharing funds before October 1, 1987."
3. MWCC COMMUNITY MEETINGS -- On June 25, Frank Boyles attended a
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission community meeting to discuss
the 1987 MWCC budget. The 1986 MWCC budget is $95,560,000. The
proposed 1987 budget is $99,986,000. Attached are two graphics
showing the MWCC operating budgets for 1986 and 1987 by program and
by summary accounts.
The proposed 1987 budget is 4.63 percent greater than the 1986
budget. In order to fund the 1987 budget, a 3.49 percent average
rate increase will be required in 1987. In the case of Sewer Area
One, which includes Plymouth, the rate will increase 3.24 percent in
1987. The SAC charge will change from $475 to $500 in 1987.
Industrial strength charge costs are expected to increase by 2.7
percent. The major source of increase in the MWCC operating budget
is additional debt service costs which account for half of the
increase.
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
June 27, 1986
Page three
The capital budget was also discussed at the meeting. The proposed
capital improvement program for the MWCC contains 68 projects, for
which $383,906,857 has been authorized during the past several
years. Six projects are expected to be closed out in 1986, leaving
the total expenditure of $234,713,242. Revenues to fund the MWCC
projects include $24 million in federal grants, $19 million in state
grants, $1.3 million in interest earnings, $60,000 from local
governments, a miscellaneous income of $50,000, and a fund balance
as of December 31, 1985 of $15,400,000. This $60,600,000 in
revenues, minus the $234,700,000 project costs, results in a deficit
fund balance of about $174,100,000. This deficit will be funded
through future bond sales. MWCC representatives were quick to point
out that federal funding sources which historically have provided up
to 80% of capital project funds, are rapidly drying up and that
future capital project costs will increasingly be borne by system
users.
From Plymouth's perspective, the capital budget is significant in
two respects. First, the Elm Creek interceptor continues to be
excluded from the proposed five year capital budget as expected.
The second important point is that the Plymouth interceptor is
included in the development program. The project consists of
providing additional sewage interceptor capacity to the City by
installing new pumps, and constructing a parallel force main to meet
increasing capacity needs at Highway 55 and County Road 18. The
project will be under study for 1986 and 1987 to explore alter-
natives. Actual construction is not anticipated until 1988 or
1989. The total anticipated project cost is $5,350,000.
In addition to escalating sewer rates, municipal representatives
present at the meeting expressed concern about the magnitude of the
increase in SAC charges which the MWCC anticipates for the next five
years. Discussion also occurred with respect to combined sewer
separation and MWCC legislative proposals. (I-3)
4. OAKDALE WEST THIRD ADDITION -- Councilmembers may be aware that Mr.
Bill Pribble, an attorney, who lives immediately north of Don
Myron's Oakdale West Third Addition, has obtained a restraining
order to prohibit Mr. Myron from proceeding to construct a dike and
do dredging along the north line of the plat. The effect of the
dike would appear to adversely impact the Pribble property. The
attached letter from Sherm Goldberg deals with this matter and notes
that the approved plat did not contemplate the dike nor the
dredging. (I-4)
5. CABLE SERVICE FOR 2500 BLOCK OF TROY LANE -- dim Morrison,
Supervisor for cable installation, contacted me on Friday, dune 27
to confirm that cable has now been installed to serve all houses
along the 2500 block of Troy Lane. Construction crews did encounter
a resident who opposed the installation, but were ultimately able to
persuade the party to allow them to proceed with installation.
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
June 27, 1986
Page four
6. MINUTES FOR THE DUNE 19, 1986 TRANSIT SERVICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT
PROSECT MANAGEMENT TEAM -- Frank Boyles serves a member of the
Regional Transit Board's Transit Service Needs Assessment Project
Management Team which is in the process of analyzing transit needs
throughout the metropolitan area. The objective of the project is
to specifically define unmet transit needs in the metropolitan area,
develop a basis for matching service needs with service types, and
developing criteria for evaluation and equitable funding of transit
services. (1-6)
7. 40TH AVENUE STREET REPAIR -- Attached is a memorandum from Sherm
Goldberg regarding his discussions with Greg Begin on the repair of
40th Avenue. Mr. Begin has indicated he will repair that portion of
40th Avenue east of Fernbrook at the same time that he will be doing
the cul-de-sac at the east end of the street. This work would be
started in approximately two weeks. However, if complaints are
received from area residents, Mr. Begin will start work within one
or two days after the complaints. (I-7)
8. PLYMOUTH V. JEFF HOWARD -- Attached is a letter from City Attorney
Jim Strommen which includes a copy of the Order and Memorandum
issued by fudge Pam Alexander in the teff Howard trial. The order
denies a new trial or judgement of acquittal requested by Mr.
Howard's attorney. dim also reports on action being taken against
Jeff Howard with regard to the fence he built in his front yard.
(I-8)
9. LOCKUP INSPECTION OF PLYMOUTH POLICE HOLDING CELL -- Annually the
Hennepin County Sheriff's Department conducts an inspection of the
Plymouth Police Department holding cell area. On April 23, 1986 the
inspection was conducted. A copy of the Sheriff's Department report
is attached. Although Plymouth received an overall good rating,
there were three fire inspection deficiencies noted in the report.
Staff is in the process of complying with the orders issued. (1-9)
10. MINUTES -- The following minutes are attached:
a. Planning Commission, dune 25, 1986 (I -10a)
b. Park and Recreation Advisory Commission, dune 25, 1986 (I -10b)
11. AMM NEWSLETTER -- The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities
newsletter for dune focuses on its May annual meeting and election
of officers and board of directors. A copy is attached. (I-11)
12. ARTICLES OF INTEREST -- The attached articles discussing the federal
policy on housing on community development, and the future outlook
for the Community Development Block Grant Program were taken from a
recent issue of the National League of Cities newspaper. (1-12)
13. BOND NEWSLETTER -- A copy of the Ehlers and Associates bond
newsletter for dune is attached for your information. (I-13)
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
June 27, 1986
Page five
14. COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT REMINDER CARDS -- The following City staff
responses to Community Improvement Cards submitted by Council
members are attached:
a. Replacement of tennis net at Zachary Playfield - Bob Zitur
b. Repair of basketball backstop at Shiloh Park - Bob Zitur
c. Damage to curbs in Deerwood Estates Development - Dave Crain
(I-14)
15. CORRESPONDENCE:
a. Letter of appreciation to Mr. Kirk Klopfleisch, 15841 - 27th
Avenue North, from City Manager. Mr. Klopfleisch was observed
picking up litter along Vicksburg Lane by ferry Sisk earlier
this week. (I -15a)
b. Letter Rick and Deanne Vanderford, 2615 Zircon Lane, commenting
on the Council's decision to move the Green Oaks Park equipment
to a central location in the park. (I -15b)
c. Letter from Tad dude responding to an earlier letter from Frank
Boyles with respect to supporting state redesign of transit
funding mechanisms. (I -15c)
d. Letter from a battered wife relating her positive experience
with the Domestic Assault Intervention Program and Plymouth
Police Department. (I -15d)
e. Letter from the Suburban Rate Authority Counsel, Glen Purdue, to
SRA Directors and Managers, regarding the results of the
Authority's intervention in the 1985 NSP electric rate case.
(I -15e)
James G. Willis
City Manager
JGW:Jm
attach
PLAN14ING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY, DULY 1, 1986
WHERE: Plymouth City Center
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
CONSENT AGENDA
All items listed with an asterisk (*) are considered to be routine by the Planning
Commission and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of
these items unless a Commissioner, citizen or petitioner so requests, in which event
the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in normal sequence on
the agenda.
PUBLIC FORUM 7:15 P.M.
1. CALL TO ORDER 7:30 P.M.
2. ROLL CALL
3.* APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Planning Commission Minutes, dune 25, 1986
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Children's Learning Center, Inc. Conditional Use Permit to allow expansion of
the daycare facility at 105 Forestview Lane. (86067)
B. Russ and Rose Becker and Zaudtke Homes. Mixed Planned Unit Development
Amendment for increased lot coverage on Lot 8, Block 3, "Glen Echo Ponds",
generally east of Sycamore Lane and north of 12th Avenue North. (86077)
5. NEN' BUSINESS
A. Minneapolis Auto Auction. Site Plan and Variances for construction of parking
facilities on the east side of Nathan Lane at 1120 Nathan Lane. (86070)
B. Alan and Kathy Grundei and Meade and Marguerite Wetherbe. Lot Consolidation,
Lot Division and Variance east of Peony Lane and west of Olive Lane, generally
south of 19th Avenue North. (86079)
6. OLD BUSINESS
NONE
7. OTHER BUSINESS
8. ADJOURNMENT 10:00 P.M.
QD
LL:
co
�
U
Q
z
0
`'-'
U
V
U-)
a
W
�
Q
D
�
D
ur)
m
r
m
0
z
Q
cy-00"
W
CD
U
U
7
o
LL:
�
U
Q
W
`'-'
U-)
CD
o
z�
o
Qwo
O
LLJ
��
Q
O
U
0
O
wog
LO
co
J C
L(�
a <
U44
o
�
�
`'-'
0
W
o
o
Qwo
oN
Q`no
w
0
(Y-
J
co
U
W W
Qw�
0
O
w
0
U �
m cc O
w w rr)
o (-f) Aoct
0
Q 0
� 0
w
n O
O �5
z �
J �
r
z(D
O
z o
zo
Q -I-
J N
D- A:pr
0(no
z
woo
Q)
wcco
z a L
_ Ojw:f,
-3
J
0
>O
C O
J O
PO
_ co
�O
Li rr)
�-bc�
�I
0
00
U
Q
rnrnw
Q
Cn
0
Q 0-1
ry w
D _
z O
J Q
�wUCLOLJ
w� -<j
Ow0w
0
Qv
U)
Q ,
w LLJ 00
U z OD
m�
o
0
LLJ
�
0
0
U
m Cr cv
ED ro
O
o cr)-blcfl
�
0 CO
m
O
Q
wQQ
a0
o �
oz0
CLOo
wu
Q
N
ZQ �
LLJ
�
CL
—
0 tR
June 25, 1986
Mr. Don Myron
602 Twelve Oaks
15500 Wayzata Boulevard
Wayzata, Minnesota 55391
i
CITY O0-
PumbUTR
Subject: Oakdale West 3rd Addition (84097)
Dear Don:
We are in receipt of the following information relative to your grading work
for the above referenced subdivision:
1. $1,000 cash deposit for the erosion control guarantee.
2. Letter of Credit in the amount of $1,780 to cover the balance
of erosion control guarantee.
3. Grading plan signed by your engineer. The grading plan
indicates two items that were not shown on the grading plan as
approved by the City Council with the final plat. They are:
a. Dyke along the North property line of the plat.
b. Dredging the existing pond to an unspecified
depth.
Under the circumstances surrounding the grading of your plat, the fill area
across the North plat line in the pond, as well as the dredging of the pond,
will be deleted from the approved plan recently submitted by you. In the
meantime, if you want to do the dredging work, you should resubmit a plan to
the City for City Council approval as well as submit a plan to the Watershed
District for their approval. This seems to me the only prudent thing to do
under the circumstances.
Also, would you please check your silt fence recently installed for erosion
control protection as some of it looks like it should be anchored in in
order to function properly.
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD. PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447. TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
Mr. Don Myron
June 25, 1986
Page Two
If you have any questions
undersigned.
Yours very truly,
v/A
Sherman L. Goldberg, P.E.
City Engineer
regarding the matter, please contact the
SLG:kh
Enclosure
cc: Jim Thomson, City Attorney
James G. Willis, City Manager
Fred G. Moore, Director of Public Works
0
G
c
o•
C=
0
0
CS
o�
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
a
0
OFFICIAL RECEIPT
City of Plymouth
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD.
PLYMOUTH, MN 55447
(612) 559-2800
::j 198
t,,,�,i 1 �i�,�i H, f inAnc;G DI116dfiUf�
e
MINUTES OF THE
TRANSIT SERVICE NEEDS ASSESSMENT
P F1 rT M4NAGEM NT TFnM
Thursday, June 19, 1986
1:30 p.m., Metropolitan Council Conference Room D
Members Present
Frank Boyles
Karen Lyons for Nacho Diaz
Aaron Isaacs for Dennis Tollefsbol
Marcia Diers
Steve Grochala
Roger Huss
Dave Pesch
Donna Allan
Jim Daire
Others Present
Representing
City of Plymouth
Metropolitan Council
Metropolitan Transit Commission
Minnesota Rideshare
City of St. Paul
University of Minnesota
Medicine Lake Lines
Mn/DOT - Office of Transit
City of Minneapolis
Peter Fausch and Ferrol Robinson, Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc.; Judy Hollander,
Katherine Turnbull, Cindy Fish, Randy Rosvold, Roane Smothers, Regional Transit
Board (RTB)
I. Central City Test Case Areas
Katie Turnbull reviewed the two Central City Test Case Areas. These were
selected in meetings with Steve Grochala and Jim Daire. The St. Paul
test case area includes the neighborhood south of I-94 in a triangle
between the two rivers. The Minneapolis test case covers the area
bounded by I-94 on the north, Hennepin Avenue on the west, 38th Street on
the south and Hiawatha Avenue on the east.
Katie outlined the process to be utilized in these test case areas, which
follows that used in other areas and the overall approach to the service
needs assessment. A data inventory is being completed which will include
identification of major generators, travel data, population, employment,
socio-economic, demographic and transit dependent data and analysis of
the transit accessibility measures. Trail check information from the MTC
is being gathered for selected routes in the two areas. This includes on
and off passenger counts for all stops on a route.
On -board surveys may be conducted on selected routes to obtain further
detailed information on existing riders. Further input from the city
staff and others will also be sought. The unmet transit demands and
alternatives will be identified. Aaron Isaacs noted that the MTC has a
1983 route -by -route printout of routes in both areas which might be of
help in the analysis.
-2 -
II. Market Research Update
Katie handed out copies of the report outline for the telephone surveys
in the Northwest Sector and Western Crescent test case areas which was
prepared by Frank Koppleman (copies are attached for those not at the
meeting). Both surveys have been completed and Frank is in the process
of analyzing the results. The Northwest Sector survey is further along
as it was completed first.
Katie reviewed some of the preliminary results from the surveys. She
indicated that the results provide a wealth of information and resources
for the Transit Service Needs Assessment and for other purposes. The
results help identify the existing transit markets and new market
opportunities. Maintaining existing riders, while attracting new riders,
will be the test of any service i ®rovements.
Some of the preliminary results, such as women favor transit more so than
men even when they have a choice and transit ridership is higher among
lower to mid income and education levels, are similar to other past
survey results. Other findings wi-.'.ch rank the attributes of different
modes and peoples' reasons for cho ^sing different modes offer new
insight. The more detailed result_ should be available at the next PMT
meeting.
Aaron Isaacs suggested that past surveys seem to indicate that women
react more to transit costs while L -en react more to parking costs.
Ferrol Robinson noted that the surrey results, especially those from the
Northwest Sector, indicate that me st bus riders in both the peak and off-
peak are predominantly choice riders.
Peter Fausch noted that Frank Kopp7eman indicated that there have not
been any other studies of this type done in the country to compare the
results with.
Katie noted that Frank will be cor`feting the draft report by mid-July.
This will include the analysis of response to alternative transit
concepts which were included in the survey.
Aaron noted that he hoped the resu"-s would be viewed with some
skepticism, as people often say they will do something and then never do.
Katie indicated that the results rr `ll be looked at carefully. Frank has
built in some "traps" to double ch=:k individual responses. The
questions try to get at the underl_%-',ng resons why people act and what
influences their behavior. Ferrol =urther noted that the questions
identify the attributes people ra.-= highly for the different modes.
These attributes are then checked against responses to later questions to
help identify if the individual is -eally likely to act in the manner
indicated.
1
-3-
Aaron suggested that people may make choices based on their last bad
experience with a mode. If they took the bus and it was late and dirty
they probably will not use •it again. On the other hand, if they drove
and got stuck in a major traffic jam, they may not drive the next time.
Roger Huss noted that the marketing for the Route 52 service promotes
relaxation as a reason to use the bus. This should be used more often in
transit marketing. Frank Boyles stated that the video on the Plymouth
Metrolink System does promote the relaxing nature of the service, stress
relief and using your time more productively. Aaron noted that riders on
the Route 52 service perceive the service is faster than other methods.
Katie indicated that Frank Koppleman has stressed that the survey will
provide attribute ratings for the different systems. This can be used to
get people to try transit. However, if the service doesn't meet their
needs they will not stay. She also outlined the telemarketing activities
being initiated in a small demonstration on the I-394 project. This
demonstration, which appears to be the first time telemarketing has been
used for bus and rideshare, will provide interesting information.
In response to a question from Marcia Diers, Katie and Ferrol reviewed
the procedure used to select the sample for the telephone surveys. They
noted that the transit riders were selected through actual contact on the
bus. Representatives from the marketing research firm rode buses in the
two test case areas and provided cards for riders to indicate their
willingness to participate in the survey. The remainder of the samples
were selected randomly.
Peter stressed the importance and uniqueness of the survey. The results
will be very important in developing the alternatives for the different
test case areas and transit planning subareas.
III. Draft Final Product Outline
Katie noted that staff and the consultants would like to get the PMT's
reaction to a draft of one portion of the final product. The final
report will have a number of different sections, with one part dealing
with a summary of the key findings and the alternatives or options.
Copies of the draft outline were passed out (copies are attached for
those not attending the meeting).
Peter Fausch reviewed the draft outline. He indicated that the two pages
which have been developed so far would be used as a resource to bring
together the key elements and information. The outline would be prepared
for each of the 26 transit planning subareas identified in Phase I. The
first page would include a description of the basic dimensions, the
transit demand indicators, the travel characteristics, major travel
destinations and transit supply indicators. The second page would
include a description of existing transit services, market indicators,
potential service needs, levels of demand, range of costs and service
planning recommendations.
-4 -
Peter noted that these were still in draft stage and any suggestions for
improvements would be greatly appreciated. He stressed that this is only
one element of the final product, but it would be a very important tool.
Peter also handed out copies of a diagram from one of the Phase I SPG/PMT
meetings. The diagram uses circles to explain individual's desires ("I
want"), preferences ("I will use") and feasible services. He indicated
that the second page would identify the feasible services based on the
desires and preferences identified and analyzed in Phase II.
Aaron indicated that the hardest part will be the development of service
priorities. This could lead to "watering down" of transit services and
funding.
Peter and Katie explained that this section would contain the most
feasible alternatives based on the cost analysis and other factors. The
actual timing and priority to implementing service will be done in the
RTB's Implementation Plan.
C Aaron suggested that there are not many new things to be tried in
transit. He cautioned against deceiving ourselves. People are always
interested in things that are new and untried without concern for who
pays for it. A conservative and critical approach is needed when looking
at these.
Frank Boyles indicated that it was important to plan ahead and try new
things. Katie noted that there are a good deal of new and innovative
transit concepts. While funding is obviously a concern and a limiting
factor, there are different funding approaches which could be taken.
Steve Grochala asked what task this activity fell under. Peter responded
that it was the outcome of task 7, but was again only one small part of
the final report.
IV. Cost Model
Katie reviewed the activities which have been completed since the last
meeting on the cost model. She complimented Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc.,
for their work on this particular task. The results so far appear to be
very accurate. The cost model will be beneficial not only for the
Transit Service Needs Assessment, but also for many other purposes.
Ferrol reviewed the handout which summarizes the major elements of the
model and some of the results. The first page includes the model
coefficients. 1984 data has been used for the model, as it has
throughout the study. Ferrol reviewed the differences in the cost of the
coefficients for the MTC's two factor model and the RTB's four factor
model. The peak to base ratio under the RTB's model is 1.52. This shows
how dramatic the peak impact is. Ferrol noted that the comparison of the
model results are very close. Aaron indicated that the largest switch
between the two models is the allocation of administrative overhead from
miles under the MTC model to peak hour buses in the RTB model.
-5 -
Ferrol next reviewed a series of graphs which showed the results charting
daily revenue miles and subsidy per passenger for local and express
routes. The first graph shows all routes within these two categories
while the second shows the results after the "outlying" routes have been
taken out.
Steve Grochala asked about the use and policy implications of the model
and the results. Katie responded that the model will be used in two
major ways. First, it will be used in the Transit Service Needs
Assessment to evaluate how new service concepts and routes compare with
existing services. Second, it will be used by the RTB to follow up on
the activities of the RTB-MTC Joint Committee in developing thresholds
and standards for all types of services. In response to a question from
Frank Boyles, Katie indicated that other models are being developed for
other types of services. Ferrol noted that the private operator regular
route model is almost complete using Medicine Lake Lines data.
Steve Grochala pointed out the equity issue of routes, such as 16, 21 and
5, which are performing very well. These often go through transit
dependent neighborhoods. Steve suggested that consideration should be
given to doing something for these good performance routes such as
reduced fares.
THE NEXT PMT MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR THURSDAY, JULY 17, 1986, AT 1:30 P.M.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
MEMO
DATE: June 25, 1986
TO: Fred G. Moore, Director of Public Works
FROM: Sherman L. Goldberg, City Engineer
SUBJECT: 40th Avenue Street Repair
I have talked with Greg Begin and he would like to pave that portion of 40th
Avenue, East of Fernbrook at the same time that he will be doing the cul-de-sac
at the East end of the street. He would like to hold off for a couple of
weeks, and I agree that the longer we can let the area that has been disturbed
dry out, the better off the final product will be. We have not had any calls
from the residents, but he assured me that if we did have some complaints, that
he would be able to get in there within one or two days after the complaints,
if need be. Once he does come in, we will have to check the East end of the
job adjacent to the new cul-de-sac and have any of the other damaged blacktop
taken out and repaired.
SLG:kh
cc: Ken Johnson
Dan Campbell
Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to
contact me or Jim Thomson.
Very truly yours,
LeFEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY,
O'BRIEN DRAWZ, P.A.
James M. Strommen
Enclosure
2/0066LT02.H37
LeFevere
Lef ler
Kennedy
O'Brien
Drawz 1
2000 First Bank Place West
June 26, 1986
Minneapolis
,\
Minnesota 55402
J
Telephone (612) 333-0543
Jim Willis, City Manager
Telecopier (6121 333-0540
City Of Plymouth
Clayton L. LeFevere
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Herbert P. Lefler
Plymouth, MN 55447
J. Dennis O'Brien
John E. Drawz
David J. Kennedy
Re: City of Plymouth V. Jeff Howard
John B. Dean
Glenn E. Purdue
Dear Mr. Willis:
Richard J. Schieffer
Charles L. LeFevere
Herbert P. Lefler III
Jim Thomson recommended that I enclose a copy of the
James J. Thomson, Jr.
Order and Memorandum issued by Judge Pam Alexander in the
Thomas R. Galt
Dayle Nolan
Howard trial which concluded last May. This Order denies
Brian F. Rice
a new trial or judgment of acquittal requested by
John G. Kressel
Howard's attorney, Doug Hall. While Howard has a right
Lorraine S. Clugg
James M. Strommen
to appeal this Order, it is doubtful that he will. He
Ronald H. Batty
would have only a slight chance of prevailing at the
William P. Jordan
Court of Appeals. If he does not appeal, this opens the
Susan Dickel Minsberg
Kurt J. Erickson
door for sentencing and probable settlement of the other
William R. Skallerud
remaining nuisance charges against him.
Rodney D. Anderson
Corrine A. Heine
John R. McDonald, Jr.
As you may know, I am working with Joe Ryan on a civil
David D. Beaudoin
action against Howard regarding the fence he has recently
built in his front yard. We intend to serve these
documents before the 4th of July weekend. If our motions
are granted, we may obtain a court order requiring Howard
to remove the fences within one month's time. This would
be substantially faster than any criminal proceeding we
would undertake.
Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to
contact me or Jim Thomson.
Very truly yours,
LeFEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY,
O'BRIEN DRAWZ, P.A.
James M. Strommen
Enclosure
2/0066LT02.H37
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
State of Minnesota,
Plaintiff,
vs
Jeffrey S. Howard,
Defendant.
MUNICIPAL COURT
DIVISION I -MINNEAPOLIS
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM
Case No. 3097298
The above entitled matter came on before the Honorable
Pamela G. Alexander, one of the Judges of the Municipal Court,
on June 10, 1986 on motion of the defendant for judgment of
acquittal, or in the alternative, new trial.
The defendant was represented by Douglas Hall, Esq. The
State was represented by James Strommen, Esq.
.After reviewing the record and hearing arguments of counsel,
this Court finds that the evidence presented at trial was
sufficient to sustain a conviction and that the jury's finding
of guilty to the charge was justified by the evidence and not
contrary to law. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that defendant's Motion for Judgment of
Acquittal and defendant's Motion for New Trial be, and is hereby,
DENIED.
BY THE COURT:
Pamela G. Alexander
Judge of the Municipal Court
Dated: June 24, 1986
p
MEMORANDUM
MOTION FOR JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL
Minn. R. Crim. P. Rule 26.03, subd. 17 authorizes the Court,
on motion by the defendant, to set aside a guilty verdict and
enter judgment of acquittal, if the evidence is insufficient to
sustain a conviction. Accordingly, the Court must review the
record and determine if there are facts and/or legitimate in-
ferences drawn from those facts sufficient to lead a jury to
reasonably conclude that the defendant was guilty of violating
the statute. See State v Merrill, 274 NW2d 99 (Minn. 1978).
Minn. Stat. 343.21, subd. 2 states simply that "no person
shall deprive any animal, over which he has charge or control,
of necessary food, water or shelter." The State contends that
on the day in question, the defendant did not provide the
necessary shelter for his animals as provided by the statute.
The State's main witness was Denise Gilbertson, a Field Cruelty
Officer for the Hennepin County Animal Humane Society. Ms.
Gilbertson testified that on the day in question, she inspected
a barn, a metal shed, a dog house and a chicken coop during an
inspection of the defendant's farm. According to her testimony,
the barn housed several animals and she observed no bedding.
1
Defendant disputes the sufficiency of this evidence in as much
as it was admitted by the State that Gilbertson did not go inside
the barn to inspect it, but rather observed some of the interior
of the barn from several feet outside the barn door. Ms. Gilbert-
son testified that she saw no need to inspect the barn further
since the defendant had informed her that there was no bedding
provided in that barn. Defendant denies having told Gilbertson
this. Ms. Gilbertson testifiec: to a much more thorough examination
of a metal shed structure on defendant's property. Again, her
testimony is that the shed (where she observed some 50 birds of
various types) contained no bedding and had a floor that con-
sisted of the bare ground and drifted snow. According to her
testimony the barn was open to the north and to the south due to
a lack of workable doors, and it was also uninsulated. Gilbertson
V
further testified that an argument developed between her and
the defendant as to whether bedding was even needed here.
Defendant testified that there was bedding in the metal shed
on that day and produced some photographs to support his
contention. However, the State disputes his claim that the
photographs were taken just shortly after Gilbertson left
on the afternoon of December 18th. The State produced
climatological evidence compiled by the U.S. Weather Service
tending to cast some doubt on defendant's claim as to when
he took the pictures. On cross-examination, defendant ad-
mitted that some of the pictures introduced during the trial
were not taken on the day in ouestion, but that the one's
showing the existence of bedding was taken the day of Ms.
Gilbertson's visit. Testimony regarding a purported dog
house was also heard. The State claims that a wooden structure
located on the property was indeed a dog house and that she per-
sonally observed a dog chained to it. The structure had no
bedding, according to Gilbertson, was too small for the german
shepard dog chained to it, no floor , and was otherwise in-
adequate as a shelter and violative of Minn. Stat. 343.40.
The defendant claims that it was not a dog house but a crate
used for the geese, and that there was bedding in it. The final
structure inspected was the chicken coop which the defendant
admits contained no bedding because it was a "roosting area"
The ultimate issue in this case therefore was whether or
not there was bedding provided in all the structures inspected
by Ms. Gilbertson on December 18, 1985. As urged by the State
in its opposition brief, if -one animal -•ras without bedding on
the day in question, there has been a violation of the statute.
Assuming, as we must, the jury believed Ms. Gilbertson's testi-
mony as to what she observed on that day, and disbelieved any
contrary evidence offered by the defendant, this Court concludes
that the jury could reasonably find that the defendant was guilty
of the offense charged. Accordingly, defendant's motion for
judgment of acquittal fails.
�g
MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL
Minn. R. Crim. P. Rule 26.04, subd. 1(1) authorizes the
Court to grant a new trial on written motion of the defendant
if the verdict or finding of guilty is not justified by the
evidence, or is contrary to law. As pointed out above, the
State's main witness testified that she observed no bedding
while defendant testified that he did have bedding on the day in
question. The jury could properly weigh the credibility of the
witnesses and this Court, viewing the evidence in the light most
favorable to the prosecution, finds no basis to hold as a
matter of law that the verdict was not justified by the evidence
presented.
1With respect to whether shelter necessarily includes "bedding",
testimony from all of the witnesses established that if bedding was
not provided, the necessary shelter for winter in Minnesota
was not provided,
SHERIFF
DON OMODT
OW,xe Of the
ogCrvrltt,
The Honorable Virgil Schneider
Mayor, City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Dear Mayor Schneider:
:Q
6COURTHOUSE
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55415
(612) 348-3744
June 23, 1986
In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, I am enclosing a copy of the Lockup
Inspection Report of your facility. This inspection was conducted by Lt. Jalma
of the Hennepin County Sheriff's Department. Copies of the report have also
been forwarded to the Commissioner of Corrections and to your Chief of Police.
The Fire Inspection Report lists the following three items to be taken
care of immediately:
Install a 10# ABC dry chemical fire extinguisher in the squad room.
The alarm system must be tested annually by an approved alarm company.
The smoke detectors and grill below the smoke detectors should be
cleaned on a monthly basis.
Upon correction of the deficiencies please notify Lt. Jalma at 348-8358,
and he will verify the correction and report same back to the Department of
Corrections.
If you have any questions regarding our findings and written comments,
please feel free to call me at 348-4946.
Sincerely,
DON OMODT, SHERIFF
By: David T. Hile
Inspector
DTH:cjt
Encl.
cc: Commissioner of Corrections
Chief Richard Carlquist
Minn. Stat. 387.03 "The sheriff shall keep and preserve the peace of his county..."
lete in
:TATE OF MINNESOTA
Good( X ) Fair ( )
T1�e
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTH>MiE
Are safety screens provided? Yes (
) No ( X) What are their
450 No. Syndicate St., St. Paul, MN 55104
3.
Does Jailer or Custodian have suitable space? Yes ( X) No (
SHERIFF LOCKUP INSPECTION REPORT
4.
city or village
Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Blvd. qty
Hennepin
Type of lockup: ® City rD Village o Used by Municipality mW County
COMMENTS:— Item 4: There are no windows
Main* of Officer is Charge Richard Carl qui st Title
Chief
Mayor_ Virgil Schneider Clerk 'TNuri I -Oar
A. Administration
Operation of cell doors? Good (X )
1.
How is prisoner register kept? Good ( X) Fair ( ) Poor ( )
2.
2.
How are firearms, tools, etc., safeguarded? Well ( X) Poor ( )
) Porn ( )
3.
How is fire protection? Good ( X ) Fair ( ) Poor ( )
Keyed, bolt ( X ) Padlock ( ) Remote control( )
4.
How often are prisoners checked? Every--Hrsr Mi nutes
S.
How long are prisoners held? Maximum Time _ 5-6 hniirc Average Timm
1 hour
6.
In a Jailer or Custodian always present when someone is being held? Yes Q( ) No(
)
If not, explain procedure used: _ Arresti no officer acts as jailer
7.
Does Jailer or Custodian sleep nights while on duty? Yes ( ) No (X )
B.
Do security procedures appear proper? Yes ( X) No( )
9.
What is general condition of cleanliness?
Excellent ( ) Good (X ) Fair ( ) Poor ( )
10.
Is lockup swept every day? Yes ( X ) No( )
11.
In lockup thoroughly cleaned at least once every two weeks or whenever needed? Yes (
X) No( )
COMMENTS:
D. 11vilding
1.
General condition? Excellent( )
Good( X ) Fair ( )
Poor ( )
2.
Are safety screens provided? Yes (
) No ( X) What are their
condition? Good ( ) Fair ( ) poor
3.
Does Jailer or Custodian have suitable space? Yes ( X) No (
)
4.
What is condition of windows? Good (
) Fair ( ) Poor (
)
COMMENTS:— Item 4: There are no windows
in the cell area.
C. cells
1.
Operation of cell doors? Good (X )
Fair ( ) Poor ( )
2.
Condition of cell locks? Excellent (
) Good (X ) Fair (
) Porn ( )
3.
Type of cell locks? Keyed, snap ( )
Keyed, bolt ( X ) Padlock ( ) Remote control( )
COMMENTS:
D. Seddino
1. What is supplied? None ( ) Mattress ( ) Mattress covers ( ) Sheets ( )
Pillows ( ) Pillow cases ( ) Blankets (X )
2. is clean bedding issued to each prisoner? Yes ( V No ( ) If not, explain procedure
3. Are blankets kept clean and fresh? Yes ( X ) No ( )
COMMENTS: Laundered as needed.
E. Plumbing
1. Does each cell have a toilet? Yes ( X) No( }
2. Does each cell have a washbasin? Yes ( X ) No( )
3. Is there a shower for prisoner use? Yes ( X) No( )
4. If answer is no to any above; Explain:
S. How is drinking watersupplied? Fountain (Y) Faucet( ) Paper cups ( ) Other ( );
Explain: Combination 'ai-r fixture
6. Cleanliness of fixtures? Excellent ( ) Good ( X) Fair Poor
7. Condition of plumbing? Excellent ( ) Good ( Xj Fair ( ) Poor ( )
COMMENTS:
P. Hooting and Ventilation
1. Heating system: Furnace ( ) Steam ( ) Hot Air ( X) Other ( );
Explain f Pntral haati na
2. Heat supply: Excellent ( ) Good (X) Fair ( ) Poor ( )
3. Ventilation: Winter: Good (X ) Fair ( ) Poor ( )
Summer: Good( X ) Fair ( ) Poor ( )
4. Condition of windows: Good ( ) Fair ( ) Poor ( )
S. Condition of screens: Good ( ) Fair ( ) Poor ( )
6. Is there danger of prisoner as by tiation? Yes( ) No( )
COMMENTS: Items and 5: There are windows or screens in the cell area.
G. Lighting
1. Amount of light: Days: Good (X) Fair ( ) Poor ( )
Nights: Good ( X) Fair ( ) Poor ( )
2. Wiring: Excellent ( ) Good (X ) Fair ( ) Poor ( )
3. Are switches and fixtures out of reach of prisoners? Yes( X) No ( )
4. Are cells well enough lighted for reading? Yes ( X) No ( ) How well? Good ( X) Fair ( ) Poor ( )
COMMENTS:
M. Medical and Health Services
1. Is illness given immediate attention? Yes ( X) No ( )
2. Is a doctor readily available? Yes ( X ) No ( )
3. Is a hospital available? Yes ( X ) No ( ) Distance from Lockup? --12 mi 1 ac - Nnrth Memorial Hospi
4. First aid supplies? Good( X) Far ( ) Poor ( ) None ( ),
COMMENTS:
1. Peed
I. Is food prepared at lockup? Yes ( ) No ( X)
2. Who supplies food? Perki ns
3. Preparation: Excellent ( ) Good ( X ) . Fair ( ) Poor ( )
4. Quantity: Good ( X ) Fair ( ) Poor ( )
S. Temperature when served? Hot ( X) Cool ( ) Cold ( )
6. Cleanliness in food serving? Good ( X) Fair ( ) Poor ( )
COMMENTS
J. Paint and General Appearance
1.
Outside appearance: Good ( X )
Fair (
) Poor (
)
2.
Interior appearance: Good ( X)
Fair (
) Poor (
)
3.
Paint condition: Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
- Ceilings ( )
- Walls ( )
- Floors ( )
( X)
( X)
( X)
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
- Cellwork ( )
( X)
( )
( )
4.
Painting needs: None
s.
General cleanup needed: Ceiling
vents in
cells need cleaning.
6. Improper use of detention apace? Yes ( ) No (X )
Explain: Intal .ins-rninhpr nf s- sr hnnkpci in •I
's ::
Juveniles: 29
K. Reeentmendetions: None
Attachment:
1986 Fire
Inspection Report
Dote of Ifspectlew
April
23
19 86
asysarnre of seeror Deputy
Lt. Michas Jalma
DISTRIBUTION BY SHERIFF Wannepi A COW"
Goverming Body o/ Municipality Mi nnaannl i c cnrnty Soot
coermissaoruerof corvvctions
Sie.ifrs File J rAJA 1, ,,j,* X; -e- 'iNceee dAi IvP0 )
r�
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
OFFICE OF FIRE MARSHAL
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
NAME PLYMOUTH POLICE DEPT. - Holding Cells
ADDRESS_
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
NAME OF OWNER Sgt. Dennis Paulson, Representative
HOW OCCUPIED
ORDER
"NOTICE N0.86042
TO THE OWNER, LESSEE, AGENT AND OCCUPANT OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PREMISES:
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the 1986 Code of Ordinances of the City
of Plymouth, as amended, you and each of you upon whom this order shall be served
are hereby ordered immediately, not to exceed the time frames listed.
IMMEDIATELY: Install a 10# ABC dry chemical fire extinguisher in the
squad room.
The alarm system must be tested annually by an approved
alarm company.
The smoke detectors and the grill below the smoke detectors
should be cleaned on a regular basis (monthly).
And you are advised to comply herewith under penalty of said ordinance.
DATED THIS 5th DAY OF May 19 86 •
When this ORDER is complied with, or if you have Stan S .e1
any questions regarding this ORDER, call the Fire Fire nspe o
Marshal at 559-2800, extension 365.
BY:-
PUMOUTR
June 27, 1986 -
Hennepin County Sheriff
Room 36, Courthouse
Minneapolis, NW 55415
Attn: Lt. Jalma
RE: FIRE INSPECTION OF CITY OF PLYMOUTH POLICE HOLDING CELL AREA
Dear Lt. Jalma,
The fire inspection orders that were written for the Plymouth Police
Department holding cells are in the process of being complied with.
Mr. Fred Moore, Director of Engineering for the City of Plymouth, has
contacted an alarm company to service the alarm system on an annual
basis.
A monthly maintenance schedule has been implemented to clean the
smoke detectors and the grill below the detectors.
The fire extinguisher mentioned in the orders will not have to be
installed. A 10 pound dry chemical fire extinguisher is located in
the Public Safety reception area which is within the travel distances
required for theholding cell area and the reception area.
Please call if you have any questions.
Sinr y
Stan Scofield
Fire Inspector
LSS:ly
cc: James G. Willis, City Manager
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
DUNE 25, 1986
The Regular Meeting of the Plymouth Planning Commission was
called to order at 7:30 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Steigerwald, Commissioners
Magnus, Stulberg, Plufka and Pauba
Commissioner Mellen arrived 7:34 P.M.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioner Wire
STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Coordinator
Sara McConn
City Engineer Sherm Goldberg
Planning Secretary Grace Wineman
*MINUTES
MOTION by Commissioner Pauba, seconded by Commissioner
Stulberg to approve the June 11, 1986 Minutes as submitted.
VOTE. 5 Ayes. MOTION carried.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Chairman Steigerwald introduced the application by C.O.M.B.
Company and requested an overview of the June 16, 1986 Staff
Report by Coordinator McConn.
Chairman Steigerwald inquired where the satellite dish would
be located. Coordinator McConn stated it would on the south
side of the building. Chairman Steigerwald introduced Mr.
Grant Oppegaard representing C.O.M.B. Company.
Mr. Oppegaard stated the staff report covers all the
details. He pointed out that the uplink truck placement is
for one year, it is a flat-bed truck with an antenna. They
have a six month permit from the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC), and can renew the permit for another six
months. They are considering a permanent installation on
the rooftop of their facility and the truck is only
temporary.
Chairman Steigerwald inquired about
of the dish. Mr. Oppegaard stated
but cannot answer on the wattage.
the equipment and will be checking
assure there are no problems.
-120-
the height and wattage
it will be 20 ft. high,
Technicians will install
it out with the FCC to
__X_ - \0C'__
NOTION TO APPROVE
VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
C.O.M.B. CO.
CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR OUT-
SIDE STORAGE (86060)
Page 121
Planning Commission Minutes
June 25, 1986
Chairman Steigerwald inquired what the preference is for
screening the area. Mr. Oppegaard stated they will put in
Evergreens to shield the vehicle, but want to be sure the
trees are spaced to provide room to remove the truck when
the permanent location is determined.
Chairman Steigerwald inquired about security. Mr. Oppegaard
stated they are hiring employees for 24-hour security.
Chairman Steigerwald opened the Public Hearing.
Mr. Bob Wernick, 13405 15th Avenue North, stated he has no
problem with the truck parking, but currently trucks are
parking outside the storage area in the southeast corner of
the site and the trucks are not used regularly. Mr.
Oppegaard explained they purchased the Litton building and
are moving in July 1, 1986. The trucks Mr. Wernick has seen
are Litton trucks. He stated C.O.M.B. has no intention of
parking their trucks there.
Mr. Wernick stated he has no problem if the trucks are
parked in the proper areas and not out front.
Chairman Steigerwald closed the Public Hearing.
MOTION by Commissioner Stulberg, seconded by Commission MOTION TO APPROVE
Magnus to recommend approval for the Conditional Use Permit
for Outside Vehicle Storage for C.O.M.B. Company, subject to
the conditions as listed in the June 16, 1986 Planning Staff
Report.
Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - NOTION CARRIED
Chairman Steigerwald suggested that the Engineering Depart-
ment get a description of the antenna power (wattage) to
establish if it is a microwave. Commissioner Mellen concur-
red, noting that there are Northwestern Bell and NSP towers
and equipment in the area. Coordinator McConn stated that
the TV Cable Company was also concerned about interference
from the NSP and Northwestern Bell installations which
determined their site selection.
Page 122
Planning Commission Minutes
June 25, 1986
Chairman Steigerwald introduced the application by Truck
Parts & Service, Inc. for a Conditional Use Permit for re-
tail sales in the Industrial District. Reading of the June
16, 1986 Staff Report was waived.
Chairman Steigerwald introduced Mr. Steve Kollins, the
petitioner. Mr. Kollins had no questions or comments.
Chairman Steigerwald opened the Public Hearing, as there was
no one present to speak on this item, the Public Hearing was
closed.
Commissioner Pauba noted the petitioner relates that there
will be 10 - 15% retail sales and inquired how this equates
in the number of people and vehicles. Mr. Kollins stated
that 10% is approximately $90,000 in sales monthly and
equates to 1.8 persons per day. He stated drop-in customers
would not be a common occurrence.
Commissioner Mellen inquired about the possibility of oil
spillage. Mr. Kollins stated the facility has a concrete
floor, and a service picks up oil containers once a week.
a i ,
STEVE KOLLINS
TRUCK PARTS do SERVICE
CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT (86062)
MOTION by Commissioner Pauba, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO APPROVE
Magnus to recommend approval for the Conditional Use Permit
for retail sales in the Industrial District for Truck Parts
& Service, Inc., subject to the conditions as listed in the
June 16, 1986 Planning Staff Report.
Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried.
Chairman Steigerwald introduced the application by Rudolph
Marti, J & R Pizza, for a Conditional Use Permit to operate
a Class II restaurant with delivery and pick-up service.
Reading of the June 10, 1986 Staff Report was waived.
Chairman Steigerwald introduced Mr. Marti who had no
questions or comments.
Mr. Marti identified the delivery area which is outlined in
his narrative.
Chairman Steigerwald opened the Public Hearing, as there was
no one present to speak on this item, the Public Hearing was
closed.
VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
RUDOLPH MARTI
0 do R PIZZA
CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT (86063)
MOTION by Commissioner Plufka, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO APPROVE
Stulberg to recommend approval for the Conditional Use Per-
mit for Domino's Pizza for Rudolph Marti, J & R Pizza, sub-
ject to the conditions as listed in the June 10, 1986 Plan-
ning Staff Report.
Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
Page 123
Planning Commission Minutes
June 25, 1986
Chairman Steigerwald introduced the application by Robert
A. Schmitt for a Conditional Use Permit to erect an amateur
radio antenna. An overview of the dune 10, 1986 Planning
Staff Report was provided by Coordinator McConn.
Chairman Steigerwald introduced Mr. Robert Schmitt, 11200
48th Avenue North. Mr. Schmitt had no questions or
comments.
Commissioner Pauba inquired if there would be problems with
the trees on and near his lot. Mr. Schmitt stated the
antenna will be near the same, or below the height of the
trees. Commissioner Mellen inquired about the type of
antenna. Mr. Schmitt explained it is a Mosley Antenna which
is a small antenna for amateur radio.
Commissioner Plufka inquired if Mr. Schmitt were aware of
the 35 ft. height allowance that requires no Conditional Use
Permit. Mr. Schmitt stated he was given conflicting inform-
ation regarding the height restrictions, and feels it may
have been because people he spoke with were confused between
the height of an antenna and the height of satellite
dishes. Commissioner Plufka inquired whether this differ-
ence in height, 35 ft. to 48 ft., increases the receiving
and transmission capabilities to a large degree? Mr.
Schmitt stated it depends on the conditions.
Chairman Steigerwald opened the Public Hearing.
Phillip Konopka, 11110 48th Avenue North, inquired if the
Commission received the copies of his letter. Chairman
Steigerwald confirmed the Commission had received the
correspondence.
Mr. Konopka stated he has problems with the installation of
the antenna and has been annoyed by interference from Mr.
Schmitt's current CB equipment. He stated the pictures he
took are of the CB antenna. He lives on the east side of
Mr. Schmitt and the erection of this tower will reduce his
property value. He has had to relocate because of his
employement and always looks for homes that will be good for
resale. There will be a problem with safety as it appears
only bolts connect the antenna and he thought there would be
guy wires. The antenna could be damaged by the wind and may
be a natural lightning rod, attracting lightning strikes.
Mr. Schmitt stated the tower will be grounded, there are
three bolts and rods, set in every 3 to 8 ft.
ROBERT A. SCHMITT
CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT (86066)
Page 124
Planning Commission Minutes
June 25, 1986
Chairman Steigerwald inquired if Mr. Schmitt had talked with
other neighbors and has he offered help when interference
was experienced. Mr. Schmitt stated he did talk with neigh-
bors and gave them his telephone number to call anytime they
experienced interference problems; he also told them he
would stop transmission during those times. He studied the
problems and recommended to Mr. Konopka that he may change
his speaker lead. When this didn't work, Mr. Konopka became
very upset. Mr. Schmitt stated he contacted the FCC and
tested the telephones and stereo systems. He believes with
the replacement of the speaker wires, Mr. Konopka's problems
will be alleviated. He provided a copy of the letter he
received from the FCC stating no complaints have been
reported to them.
In response to Chairman Steigerwald, Mr. Schmitt stated
there should be no problems with the ham radio antenna, but
a CB can be prone to interference.
Chairman Steigerwald inquired if Mr. Konopka had taken his
complaints to the FCC. Mr. Konopka stated he didn't want to
make this a big deal. Chairman Steigerwald inquired if the
materials submitted and the discussion had cleared things up
for him. Mr. Konopka stated he was not really satisfied,
but the information is adequate.
Commissioner Magnus inquired if Mr. Schmitt had received
complaints from other neighbors, Mr. Schmitt stated he had
received none. He gave the Commission a letter from his
neighbor to the west, Bradley Hagemo, who supports his
request.
Discussion ensued about the location and height of the
antenna tower. Chairman Steigerwald inquired who would in-
stall the tower. Mr. Schmitt stated another operator who
has the technical expertise will assist him in erecting the
tower.
Commissioner Pauba commented that if a residence should be
damaged by.the tower during a wind storm, the property owner
would be covered under his own homeowner's insurance.
Commissioner Plufka confirmed there is no CB band with this
antenna and it will cause less interference.
Ray Baird, 11105 48th Avenue North, stated that he Just
moved into Minnesota and wants to be assured that the
antenna will not decrease his property value. He feels the
antenna will be very visible and could dissuade a buyer from
looking at homes in the area. Chairman Steigerwald stated
the City cannot prevent an amateur radio operator from
erecting a tower within Ordinance provisions. Conditions
can be applied to those which require Conditional Use
Permits.
-� = koc.-
Page 125
Planning Commission Minutes
June 25, 1986
Ronald Dohman, 125 Magnolia Lane, stated he has a Condition-
al Use Permit from the City for his amateur radio tower, he
is an electrical engineer. He noted the height of his tower
at 70 ft. When he researched information for the Condition-
al Use Permit, he talked with real estate people who had not
seen either negative or positive effects on property
values. He noted there are no guy wires on his tower. He
explained the manufacturer's specifications. The higher the
tower the less interference to other appliances. He stated
that lightning is not a problem as shown with microwave
towers built on mountain tops.
Commissioner Plufka inquired how high the tower is when
cranked down. Mr. Dohman stated approximately 21 ft., but
it is not useable at that height. If a tv is connected to
cable it is a closed system and would receive no signals
from the antenna. Mr. Dohman explained the differences be-
tween CB and ham radio transmissions. He further explained
that if you look at the appliances you buy, they have a
disclaimer on the back because the manufacturer does not
install filters in their equipment.
Eric Foss, 4615 Oakview Lane, stated he also has a Conditio-
nal Use Permit from the City of Plymouth for his amateur
radio tower. He concurs with both Mr. Schmitt and Mr.
Dohman. The tower height is very important to the ham radio
operator, especially for receiving and transmitting over-
seas. CB and ham are very different, he gave up the CB be-
cause of interference and other problems. His tower does
not have guy wires and has been in place for three years.
He had a tower in place for four years at his previous
home. He has had no complaints and feels there is no prob-
lem with property values. He read a statement signed by his
neighbors when he applied for his permit.
Wayne Menge, 3190 Kimberly Lane, stated he recently received
a Conditional Use Permit for his antenna and he endorses all
that has been said by the other operators. He commented
that he recently sold his home on Dallas Lane and the buyers
wanted the tower with the home. He sees no problem with
property values.
Chairman Steigerwald closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Pauba stated he was opposed to the tower
erected by Mr. Menge and feels that this installation is
better as far as aesthetics and the safety features reduce
his concerns. He stated denial of the application would not
be appropriate because permits for towers of greater height
have been approved. However, it is important that none of
the neighbors be affected by interference from the tower
signals.
\Oc`
Page 126
Planning Commission Minutes
June 25, 1986
MOTION by Commissioner Pauba, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO APPROVE
Plufka to recommend approval for the Conditional Use Permit
for Robert A. Schmitt, subject to the conditions listed in
the dune 10, 1986 Planning Staff Report and approving the
maximum tower height for 48 ft.; maximum antenna height for
1.5 ft. for a total height of 49.5 ft.
Commissioner Mellen stated he is opposed to the installation
of the tower because of the density in the area; and, that
it will be detrimental to the neighborhood because of its
height.
Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes, Commissioner Mellen, Nay. MOTION VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
carried.
Chairman Steigerwald introduced the application by Craig CRAIG SCHERBER
Scherber for rezoning and preliminary plat for "King's KING'S NORTH CORP.
North". He requested an overview of the dune 10, 1986 staff REZONING AND
report by Coordinator McConn. PRELIMINARY PLAT
(86068)
Chairman Steigerwald introduced Mr. Tom Loucks, representing
the petitioner. Mr. Loucks had no questions but stated he
had read the staff report and agrees that the application
complies with the City's requirements and standards.
Chairman Steigerwald opened the Public Hearing.
Jerry Fischer, 4630 Fernbrook, stated he is concerned with
the improvements to Fernbrook Lane and potential assessed
cost. City Engineer Goldberg explained Fernbrook Lane will
stop at the south property line of this proposed develop-
ment as part of the Kingsview Heights development. Mr.
Fischer stated he plans to live on his property for many
years to come. He has a greenhouse and wants to remain in a
rural setting. He stated the roadway assessments would be
an unfair burden.
Chairman Steigerwald explained that the City Council is the
forum to discuss assessments and Mr. Fischer should make the
Council aware of his concerns.
City Engineer Goldberg explained the assessments are based
on the frontage and the land use guiding.
Chairman Steigerwald closed the Public Hearing.
s \O C4_
Page 127
Planning Commission Minutes
June 25, 1986
MOTION by Commissioner Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO APPROVE
Magnus to recommend approval for the Rezoning and Prelimin-
ary Plat for Craig Scherber for King's North, subject to the
conditions as listed in the dune 10, 1986 Planning Staff
Report.
Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried.
VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
Chairman Steigerwald called a 5 minute recess at 8:43 P.M. RECESS
Chairman Steigerwald called the meeting to order and intro- TERRY SCHMID
duced the application by Terry Schmid, Avon Lumber for a AVON LUMBER
Zoning Ordinance Amendment. An overview of the dune 16, ZONING ORDINANCE
1986 Planning Staff Report was provided by Coordinator AMENDMENT (86041)
McConn.
Chairman Steigerwald introduced Mr. Dale Hamilton, McCombs -
Knutson Associates, representing the petitioner.
Chairman Steigerwald pointed out that the only thing being
discussed by the Commission, is the ordinance amendment, not
a particular site.
Mr. Hamilton introduced the petitioner's daughter, the
landowners, and others involved with this project. He
stated he knows they are not discussing a specific site, but
will use the site as an example. He explained the
constraints in limiting the building unit number to 12, and
the costs involved which would make the project neither
practical nor profitable if they do not construct more units
per building. This is needed to get the maximum efficiency
and compactness from this site.
He discussed the 30 acre site and the topographic features,
explaining that the building concentration would allow open
areas, enhanced by the pond and trees for maximum livability
for the residents.
Mr. Hamilton showed the percentage of site used under
different proposals, stating the ordinance change will
provide more a livable site.
Commissioner Plufka wondered if this was not like comparing
apples and oranges, constraints versus no constraints. He
inquired about the maximum density for the R-3 Zoning
District. Coordinator McConn confirmed the density is 5 -
10 units per acre.
Mr. Hamilton stated their proposal gives a spatial effect
which enhances the ponding.
Page 128
Planninq Commission Minutes
June 25, 1986
Commissioner Plufka stated that grades of guiding and zoning
are not only for density, but provide possibilities for liv-
ing accommodations for different life styles. Offering more
units within larger buildings rather than smaller buildings
with less units may not suit all buyers.
Building height and proposed underground garages were
discussed.
Chairman Steigerwald stated that even though today's market
is not particularly good for a 12 -unit building, this type
of structure has been popular and could be popular again.
He inquired what benefit this amendment would have
community -wide? What would be the criteria for other
developments?
Mr. Hamilton stated the reduced need for public streets
would relieve the City of extra costs, and the buildings
will be well built and attractive.
Commissioner Plufka stated this change could be construed to
be arbitrary and capricious if circumstances are not set
forth that will work for everyone.
Mr. Hamilton stated the building design is such that the
payback would allow the installation of elevators, making
the buildings attractive to empty nesters, singles, and
older citizens. He feels this is opening up living accommo-
dations to a greater number of people.
Chairman Steigerwald inquired how he would write this into
an Ordinance. Mr. Hamilton feels this amendment would pro-
vide better regulation for the R-3 and R-4 Zoning Districts.
Chairman Steigerwald stated it is his understanding from the
discussion so far, that the construction of 12 unit build-
ings would be economically unfeasible, however, no firm
reasons for the zoning amendment have been given.
Mr. Hamilton stated the larger buildings would provide
amenities such as game rooms, party rooms, etc., that would
serve a greater number of people. The rent charged in this
type of building would be higher, attracting higher income
residents.
Commissioner Mellen stated that a cluster development could
also offer these types of amenities so this is not a valid
concept. Mr. Hamilton stated that having these amenities
under the same roof would be beneficial and more suitable
for the tenants. During Minnesota winters, people would not
want to walk from one building to the other. A large build-
ing is more secure which is important to prospective
tenants.
1 oc .
Page 129
Planning Commission Minutes
June 25, 1986
Commissioner Mellen stated that people have different
interests in unit types and building styles. Commissioner
Plufka stated the City 's responsibility is to provide hous-
ing for all life styles and all economic groups. Amending
this zoning district could evaporate unit types and pricing
for families and people with lower incomes.
Mr. Hamilton noted this proposal would be constructed with
private funds, whereas housing for families of lower incomes
are provided with government funds. Commissioner Plufka
noted there are a lot of folks, such as young people Just
starting out, who are looking for a nice place to live at a
moderate cost. Government programs are fast disappearing
and the community must watch and make sure housing costs are
within the reach of all citizens.
Commissioner Stulberg inquired how much R-4 land is avail-
able in Plymouth at this time. Coordinator McConn stated
she does not know the exact number of acres. She noted re-
garding this request, the petitioner had other options to
consider for development of the site. In response to a
question from Commissioner Mellen, she stated a variance
would not be appropriate, because the unit type proposed is
not allowed in the R-3 Zoning District. She explained the
unit types for each zoning district and the required square
footage in each district. Alternatives open to this
petitioner would be to propose to amend the Land Use Guide
Plan from LA -3 to LA -4 and rezone the property or, develop
the property as a Planned Unit Development (PUD). She noted
the comments given by the petitioner are design oriented
which could be addressed as a PUD, such as topographic
characteristics and open space amenities. However, the
property in question is less than the required acreage for a
PUD.
Commissioner Magnus stated that approving this amendment
which would apply across the City is a big concern because
of the loss of transition to the R-4 Zoning District. If
only large scale buildings are constructed, this eliminates
housing styles such as townhomes, four, six and twelve-
plexes that appeal to potential home buyers.
Chairman Steigerwald stated a PUD Plan would be preferable
to changing the Zoning Ordinance; one could be considered
because of the wetlands and other constraints. He stated he
likes the idea of keeping the buildings at 2 -stories and
could work with this type of development if it followed the
ordinance provisions and standards.
Page 130
Planning Commission Minutes
June 25, 1986
Commissioner Plufka concurred that this is a unique parcel,
and the proposed development would be an appropriate
transition to the industrial land that abuts this property.
However, to accomplish this by an ordinance amendment would
eliminate unit styles that may be desired by potential home
buyers and future residents. Chairman Steigerwald reiter-
ated that the PUD Plan would be a better presentation for
this land, rather than the Zoning Ordinance Amendment. Com-
missioners Plufka and Pauba concurred.
Greg Frank, McCombs -Knutson Associates, stated their concern
is they would be forced into a "cookie -cutter" design under
the R-3 Zoning District provisions. Amending the Zoning
Ordinance could give the developer a better choice and the
City would have more to work with as well.
Chairman Steigerwald opened the Public Hearing, as there was
no one present to speak on this item, the Public Hearing was
closed.
MOTION by Commissioner Magnus, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO DENY
Pauba to recommend denial of the Zoning Ordinance Amendment
for the reasons cited in the June 16, 1986 staff report.
Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
NEW BUSINESS:
Chairman Steigerwald introduced the application by R.J. Ryan R.J. RYAN CONST. CO.
Construction for Nathan Lane Associates. Reading of the VARIANCE FOR
June 10, 1986 Planning Staff Report was waived. NATHAN LANE ESTATES
(86074)
Mr. Tom Ryan, representing the petitioner, explained the
variance request that came from an error discovered when
working with the survey of the property.
MOTION by Commissioner Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO APPROVE
Plufka to recommend approval for the Variance for R.J. Ryan
Construction for Nathan Lane Associates, subject to the
conditions as stated in the June 10, 1986 staff report.
The Commission concurred there would be no other way other
than granting the variance request.
VOTE. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - NOTION CARRIED
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting adjourned at 9:43 P.M.
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission
June 12, 1986
Page 16
Present: Chair Edwards, Commissioners Anderson, Reed, LaTour, Beach and Rosen;
staff Blank and Pederson; Councilmembers Vasiliou and Zitur; residents
of Green Oaks
Absent: Commissioner Mullan
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Edwards called the meeting to order at 7:43 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion was made by Donald Anderson and seconded by Carol Beach to approve
the minutes of the May meeting as presented. The motion carried with all
ayes.
3. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
a. Athletic Associations. None were present at this meeting.
b. Staff. Recreation staff members were not present at this meeting.
c. Others. There were no guest speakers present at this meeting.
4. REPORT ON PAST COUNCIL ACTION
a. Award of Bid for Parkers Lake City Park. Council awarded a bid to Matt
Bullock Contracting Co. in the amount of $459,000 for Phase I construction
of Parkers Lake City Park. Work should begin there by the end of the week.
b. Queensland and Imperial Hills Neighborhood Park Improvements. Budgets
and concept plans for these two neighborhood parks were approved with
the exception of the pond dredging for Queensland park.
c. Council approved the guidelines for requesting City contributions to
school playgrounds.
5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. Play Equipment at Green Oaks Park. Director Blank briefly reviewed the
history of the problems at Green Oaks park which resulted in the Council
directing PRAC to hold a public meeting to hear the concerns of the
residents. Director Blank reviewed his staff report for PRAC which
listed four options for dealing with problems at Green Oaks along with
his recommendation to partially re -locate some of the equipment. Chair
Edwards read aloud letters received from Faye Lang, 18205 30th Place,
who supported leaving the equipment as is; Janice Rakos, 18725 27th
Avenue, who supported moving the equipment; and Audrey Johnson, 18835
30th Place, who supported moving the equipment. Following the reading
of the letters, Chair Edwards called people from the audience to
speak.
1. Rick Vanderford, 2615 Zircon Lane, favored moving the equipment, but not
to the west side of the hill. He suggested the southeast side.
2. Dave Volker, 2830 Brockton Lane, spoke on behalf of the Greentree West
Homeowner's Association. The Association met recently and passed a
resolution supporting the total relocation of all playground equipment
to an area approximately 30-35 yards north of the undeveloped farm land,
on the south end of the park, mid -way between the two housing develop-
ments. When questioned by the Commission that this location might
interfere with the softball diamond, he stated that it did not. He
further stated the diamond is very rarely used.
Minutes of the June 12, 1986 PRAC Meeting
Page 17
3. Jeff Grates, 18630 26th Avenue, stated his home borders the park on
the northeast corner. He is home during the day and also stated that
the ball diamond is rarely used. He favors the total relocation of the
equipment.
4. Jim Richter, 2625 Zircon Lane, stated that he enjoys the park very much,
but suggests moving the equipment to an area near the first base foul
line of the ball field.
5. Kent Carlson, 18705 27th Avenue, stated he borders the park and his
property is 15-20 feet from the slide. He complimented the Commission
on the fine play equipment, but he feels it attracts older kids. He
favors total relocation to a more central point in the park.
6. Carolyn Sternad, 18415 30th Place, has lived in the Green Oaks area
for 21 years and has enjoyed the park with her children and grandchildren.
She does not think that moving the equipment will solve the noise
problem. She feels it would be better to wait at least a year to see
if use tapers off. She suggested implementing the curfew if teenagers
are a problem after 10:00 p.m.
7. Chuck Johnson, 2710 Xanthus Lane, lives around the corner from the park.
He stated that a noise problem existed long before the new equipment was
installed, and he favors leaving the equipment as is.
8. Fred Ratzloff, 2700 Xanthus Lane, stated that he and his family enjoy
using the park and think that the equipment should be left where it is.
He agrees it's noisy, but feels regardless of where equipment is located,
there is going to be noise. He indicated his concern with the high
tension wires being above the equipment if it is moved to the south
end of the park. He favors leaving equipment alone for at least a
year to see if situation improves.
9. Peter Busch, 18905 30th Avenue, feels equipment should be left where it
is. He also stated his concern with Rick Rosen being on the Commission
and discussing this issue, which he felt was a conflict of interest.
He suggested that Commissioner Rosen remove himself from the voting
process.
10. Carl Nelson, 18625 26th Avenue, stated that the only solution to the
problem is to move the equipment to a central location in the park.
11. Elliot Kjos, 2720 Zircon Lane, lives on the northwest end of the park,
and he recommends moving equipment to an area which would be an equal
distance from all homes. He also suggested the removal of the shelter
building, as it attracts teenagers who throw rocks on the tin roof,
which creates a lot of night disturbances and noise. He also questioned
the planter at the entrance to the park and wondered who was to maintain
it. He indicated that it is full of weeds and looks very unsightly.
12. Dan Barnard, 2210 Xanthus Lane, bikes to the park frequently and
enjoys it very much. He feels equipment should be left where it is
for now to see if situation changes with time. He also indicated his
concern with Commissioner Rosen being involved in any decision-making
process regarding this issue.
Minutes of the June 12, 1986 PRAC Meeting
Page 18
Z.'- lob
13. Jim Jestus, 18805 27th Avenue, stated that his backyard is on the park,
but he has not heard any noise at night from teenagers. He worries
that if equipment is moved to an area near the hill, it might not be
visible by the parents.
14. Karen Peters, 19020 26th Avenue, lives one block west of the park.
She favors moving the equipment down closer to the farm land. She
indicated that she has visited in the Rosen and Carlson homes on
numerous occasions and that the noise coming into these homes is
unbearable. She also stated she is aware that teens throw rocks on
the top of the shelter building which is very noisy, since it has
a tin roof. She favors replacing the pea gravel with sand and
suggests better patrol of the park at night.
15. Linda Rosen, 18715 27th Avenue, indicated that she met with a rep-
resentative of the pollution control agency in April. The PCA
stated that the ideal situation would be to have the equipment
lower than the homes, but in this case, the equipment is higher.
The PCA also felt that the equipment is too close to the three
homes in the corner, and that these three homes are providing
a buffer for the rest of the neighborhood. Mrs. Rosen favors
moving all of the equipment to an area southwest of the ballfield.
16. Jean Carlson, 18705 27th Avenue, stated that she did not think the
Park and Recreation Advisory Commission listened to the residents
during the earlier planning stages of this play equipment. She
recommends its total relocation to the south central portion of
the park. She also suggests removing the picnic shelter and
replacing all rocks with sand.
17. Fred Retzloff spoke a second time and said that after hearing all
the comments made, he understood the problems to be noise, increased
traffic, and insufficient patrolling of the park at night. He
recommends that before any decisions be made, the opinion of the
noise pollution control agency should be sought.
18. Carolyn Sternad spoke again, and her final recommendation was to
plant trees in the corner where the play equipment is located to act
as a screen for the residents living closest to the playground.
19. Jeff Grates stated again that the noise problem must be dealt with,
and the equipment should be moved.
20. Dan Barnard spoke a second time and supported leaving the equipment
alone, replacing the rock with sand to cut down on some of the noise,
and that any study done by the pollution control agency should be
monitored for some time before any decision is made.
=- \ 0!0
Minutes of the June 12, 1986 PRAC Meeting
Page 19
Following all the comments from the residents, Chair Edwards asked the
commissioners for their input and ideas on solutions to the problems
at Green Oaks.
Carol Beach stated that once the Queensland and Imperial Hills parks
are improved, some of thLy pressure will be taken off Green Oaks.
Children who are now using Green Oaks will more than likely switch back
to Imperial Hills or Queensland.
Donald Anderson thinks that dissipation of noise should be PRAC's goal.
Judy LaTour suggested the total removal of some of the equipment with
relocation to an entirely different park. She feels that there is
too much equipment for this size park. She also recommends planting
trees in the corner where the toddler equipment is located to cut
down on the noise.
Donald Anderson feels that PRAC is not quite sure what to do to solve
the problems at Green Oaks, how much equipment to move, or where to
put the equipment.
Judy LaTour stated that she supports removing the roof from the shelter
building, and moving the larger play equipment.
A motion was made by Carol Beach to table any action on Green Oaks until
July in order to do further research on proposed locations. The motion
died for lack of a second.
Commissioner Reed recommended re -hiring Brauer and Associates for their
opinion on relocation. He agrees that more information is necessary
before any site is chosen.
Rick Rosen reminded PRAC of Council's directive to make a recommendation
that evening.
A motion was made by Carol Beach and seconded by Donald Anderson
recommending that staff research proposed locations for moving the
play equipment and make a decision no later than August 15. The
motion failed on a 1-4 vote, with Carol Beach voting aye, and Donald
Anderson, John Reed, Barbara Edwards and Judy LaTour voting nay.
Rick Rosen abstained.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY JOHN REED AND SECONDED BY DONALD ANDERSON
RECOMMENDING PARTIAL RELOCATION OF THE PLAY EQUIPMENT AS SOON AS
POSSIBLE TO A LOCATION TO BE DETERMINED BY A PROFESSIONAL. HE
FURTHER RECOMMENDED SEEKING THE OPINION OF BRAUER AND ASSOCIATES
TO HELP DETERMINE THE BEST LOCATION. The motion carried with
four ayes. Carol Beach voted nay and Rick Rosen abstained.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DONALD ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY JUDY LATOUR TO
TOTALLY REMOVE THE PICNIC SHELTER FROM GREEN OAKS PARK. The motion
carried with a 3-2 vote. Barbara Edwards and John Reed voted nay.
Rick Rosen abstained. Carol Beach asked staff to get a cost estimate
on removing the shelter and suggested that replacing the roof with
something other than tin may solve the noise problem.
Minutes of the June 12, 1986 PRAC Meeting
Page 20
M.- yob
b. Parkers Lake Park Update. Construction should begin within the next two
weeks. The bid was awarded to Matt Bullock Constracting Co. in the
amount of $459,000.
c. Zachary Playfield Update. Because the bid for Parkers Lake was higher
than anticipated, Director Blank decided to eliminate the picnic shelter
from Phase I construction in order to reduce the cost. He also decided
to use funds proposed for the Zachary Playfield landscaping for Parkers
Lake instead. The Zachary landscaping will be moved to the 1987 CIP.
d. 1987 LAWCON Grant. Our 1987 LAWCON grant has been submitted for Phase II
of Parkers Lake City Park.
e. 1987-91 CIP. Director Blank indicated that he had received a letter from
residents regarding improvements for Lions Park. John Reed stated that
he was a member of the Lions Club and that they have $500 to donate
toward the purchase of some equipment such as a climbing structure and
sand diggers. He also stated they were willing to provide some labor.
Director Blank indicated that no allowances have been made for funding
improvements at Lions Park. Barbara Edwards asked if funds set aside
for Rolling Hills or County Road 61 parks would be used for Lions
if it's decided to go ahead with improvements there? Director Blank
responded that $100,000 has been set aside for Rolling Hills, Amhurst
and County Road 61 parks and that it would probably be okay to spend
an additional $12,000 on Lions. Director Blank also stated that the
City has received a lot of pressure to install a trail along County
Road 15, which will cost approximately $138,000. If the Council
chooses to proceed with this construction this year, it will affect
the 1987 CIP.
Rick Rosen asked if there was an inventory of what's in each of our
parks, which ones need updating and when they were last improved.
Director Blank said that he would prepare such a list and provide
copies for all commissioners.
6. NEW BUSINESS
a. New Plats. None.
b. Bass Lake Dock. This DNR approved dock has been ordered, and once it
is installed, it will remain in the lake year round.
c. Plymouth Creek Park Planning. Pond dredging within Plymouth Creek Park
is in the 1986 CIP. A concept plan was prepared for this park a few
years ago, but has never been formally approved. Copies of the plan
will be made available to each commissioner for review.
7. COMMISSION PRESENTATION
Carol Beach informed the commissioners that she had purchased a quilt for
Ruth Brown's baby, and she let each know how much they owed her for that
gift.
8. STAFF COMMUNICATION
Director Blank announced that Ruth gave birth to a son (11 lbs. 8 oz.) on
May 14.
9. Adjourn
The meeting adjourned at 11:00 p.m.
association of
metropolitan
murncipalities
June, 1986 183 University Ave. East, St. Paul, Minn. 55101 NO. 26
AMM Annual Meeting - 1986
This, the twelfth Annual Member-
ship meeting of the Association of
Metropolitan Municipalities was by
any standard, a very unique and
exciting event. Held on the Jonathan
Padelford, while cruising the Missis-
sippi River, the business portion of
the annual meeting attended by some
140 officials and guests representing
40 member cities was brief and to the
point. Retiring boardmembers were
honored and presented with Certifi-
cates of Appreciation. They were
Ron Backes, St. Louis Park Council -
member and AMM Past President;
Sharon Sayles Belton, Minneapolis
Councilmember; Jim Miller, Minne-
tonka City Manager and current LMC
President; Pat Hoyt Neils, former
Plymouth Councilmember; and Bob
Sundland, St. Anthony Mayor. The
nominating committee report was
presented by Inver Grove Heights
Mayor Bill Saed and the new officers
unanimously elected (story on page
2).
President Scheibel, whose creative
idea it was in selecting the meeting
location, addressed the delegates
about the happenings and highlights
of the past year for the AMM. He
stated, "We have had some legislative
successes, most notably with regard
to local government aid and the
metropolitan agencies reform bill."
"During the course of the year, I
have observed the potency that is
generated when a spectrum of people
sharing common interests—if not
always common opinions—work to-
gether. We have confronted issues
ranging from airport noise to econ-
omic development to housing to local
authority, and what has emerged
has been, I think, visions grounded
in practicality."
He continued by adding, "The As-
sociation of Metropolitan Municipa-
President Jim Scheibe[—Addressing Delegates
lities has an important role to play.
Being part of local government is
particularly exhiliarating because it
is government to which people have
direct access. We see and feel the
problems of people every day. We
are in the position to be most chal-
lenged and most rewarded by seeing
direct results. The consortium of
perspectives and the shared thinking
that is facilitated through the Associ-
ation of Metropolitan Municipalities
is critical to our growth as govern-
mental professionals."
President Scheibel concluded with,
"My experience affirms the convic-
tion I have long held, that the Twin
Cities metropolitan area has an un-
usual resource in the quality of
people who chose to involve them-
selves in government, whether in
elective or staff capacity. To those
with whom I have worked this year,
thank you for your competent, crea-
tive and innovative approaches to
our metropolitan agenda. Thank you,
too, for the care with which you have
worked to shape the future of our
metro area."
As his last official presidential act,
Jim Scheibel congratulated incoming
President Bob Thistle and relin-
quished the gavel as well as the
meeting. In his first act as AMM
President, Mr. Thistle presented Jim
Scheibel with a plaque containing
the Athenian Oath and warmly con-
gratulated him for his excellent and
creative service to the AMM.
After a few brief remarks by Presi-
dent Thistle, the essence of which is
found in the President's Corner else-
where in this newsletter, the meeting
was officially ended. The delegates
then enjoyed the remainder of the
cruise topside under the stars, enjoy-
ing refreshments and the music of
the Misssissippi Minstrels Dixieland
Band.
AMM Officers Elected for 1986-87
Bob Thistle
Neil Peterson
President
Robert Thistle, Coon Rapids City
Manager, was elected President of
the Association of Metropolitan Muni-
cipalities for the 1986-87 year at the
Annual Meeting held May 21, 1986.
Chosen for Vice -President was Bloom-
ington Councilmember Neil Peter-
son. Also elected were nine Board
Directors.
Bob Thistle, elected to the AMM
Board of Directors in May of 1980,
has been actively working with the
League of Minnesota Cities, City
Managers Association, LOGIS, and
the AMM Board and committees
since his arrival in Minnesota in July
of 1979 as the City Manager for
Coon Rapids. Bob was born and
raised in Detroit, Michigan and
earned his undergraduate degree
from Wayne State University. He
began his career in public service in
the City of Fenton, Michigan, where
he was Administrative Assistant to
the City Manager. Later he became
Deputy Director of Genesee County
Model Cities Program and later
Director of that program. Bob joined
the City Manager staff in Flint, Michi-
gan, as Budget Director in 1972. In
1974, he became Deputy City Manag-
er for budget administration for the
City of Flint. In 1976, he moved to
Sioux City as Deputy City Manager
for Community Development and in
late 1978 became Acting City Manag-
er of that community for six months.
Wherever Mr. Thistle has lived and
worked he has taken a very active
role in his community. In Flint, he
served on the United Way Executive
Board and was on Boards of Directors
for Volunteer Centers and Poverty
Agencies in both Michigan and Iowa.
Vice -President
He represented Flint in the Metro-
politan Alliance of Municipalities and
served on a Governor's Task Force
in Iowa to review state efforts to
assist municipalities. Bob has served
on the AMM and LMC Revenue Com-
mittees for many years. He is Chair-
man of the LMC Local Government
Aid Technical Committee and past
Chairman oftheAMM RevenueCom-
mittee. He serves on the LOG IS Exec-
utive Committee and through his
Board tenure has represented the
AMM on various ad hoc committees
and Task Forces dealing with Metro-
politan Issues. As AMM President
for the next year, Bob will also serve
on the Executive Committee and
continue his active role on the
Revenue Committee.
Neil W. Peterson began serving as
a Bloomington City Councilman in
1978, having been re-elected three
terms. He also serves as Commis-
sioner on the Bloomington Housing
and Redevelopment Authority, the
Bloomington Convention Bureau, Bloom-
ington Fine Arts Board, and liaison
to the Bloomington Human Rights
Commission and various other com-
missions and task force groups. He
was elected to the AMM Board in
May of 1983 and serves on the Re-
venue Committee, Metropolitan Sig-
nificance Task Force, and By -Laws
Committee.
Neil has spent the majority of his
professional career in the financial
community, primarily in commercial
banking. Born in Broken Bow, Ne-
braska, Neil graduated from Hastings
College, Nebraska with a B.A. in
Economics and attended the Stonier
Graduate School of Banking at Rut-
gers University, as well as many
banking and professional seminars,
which included the Senior Bank Man-
agement Seminar at Harvard Univer-
sity. Neil served the Norwest Banks
in various capacities in Iowa and
Minnesota with primary emphasis in
the area of commercial lending and
loan administration. Hespenttime in
equipment leasing and his last assign-
ment was as a Senior Lending Officer
in one of their major metropolitan
affiliates. In 1980, Peterson resigned
his position at Norwest Bank and
started anew export trading company
that specialized in agriculture pro-
ducts, primarily registered Holstein
dairy cattle, to markets in Asia and
the Middle East. As an entrepreneur
and originator of this unique agricul-
ture export specialty, the Minnea-
polis/St. Paul International Airport
continues to be recognized as one of
the most active airports for the ex-
portation of cattle and Neil continues
to function in a limited administrative
capacity in those activities. His cattle
exportation business, however, was
not exempt from the depression that
has plagued all agriculture and agri-
culture exporting industries. Hethere-
fore rejoined the financial community
in 1985 as a Vice President with the
consulting firm of Evensen Dodge,
Inc., an independent financial consul-
tantto municipalities, state, and local
governments.
Nine officials were elected to serve
on the Board of Directors, eight for
two-year terms and one for a one-
year term. They are.
TWO-YEAR TERM
Mark Bernhardson, Orono Administrator
Nancy Enright, Lakeville Councilmember
Walt Fehst, Robbinsdaie City Manager
Ed Fitzpatrick, Fridley Councilmember
Kevin Frazell, Mendota Heights
Administrator
Carol Johnson, Minneapolis
Councilmember
Jim Lacina, Woodbury Administrator
Gerald Marshall, Brooklyn Park
Councilmember
ONE-YEAR TERM
Larry Bakken, Golden Valley
Councilmember
CURRENT BOARD MEMBERS
Mentor'Duke' Addicks, Minneapolis
Legislative Liaison
Gary Bastian, Maplewood Councilmember
Robert Benke, New Brighton Mayor
Eldon Reinke, Shakopee Mayor
William Saed, Inver Grove Heights Mayor
Leslie Turner, Edina Councilmember
Maureen Warren, St. Paul Legislative
Liaison
Jim Scheibel, St. Paul Councilmember and
AMM Past President
President's Corner
by Bob Thistle
It is with pleasure that I assume
the role as President of the AMM for
1986. 1 thank each of you for the trust
and honor you have given to me by
electing me your President. With
your help and support, the Board,
staff and I can make the challenge of
the next year an opportunity for
success.
The AMM is a unique organization
for a major metropolitan area. It
provides a forum for communities of
great diversity and special separation
to meet, discuss and come to consen-
sus on issues that affect them mutu-
ally.
The AMM is also well respected by
the bodies it seeks to influence. The
State Legislature, the Metropolitan
Council and other metropolitan agen-
cies are often seeking our counsel
and views regarding proposals, ideas,
and legislation. These are relation-
ships which we must foster and en-
hance.
1986-1987 will not be a year for the
meek of heart. It would appear that
the next legislative session could
well be a watershed year for the
funding relationships of local govern-
ment and State of Minnesota. The
issue was succinctly stated in the
summary of the 1986 Economic Re-
port to the Governor of the State of
Minnesota. The summary stated:
From 1967 to 1979 Minnesota has
pursued a policy of local tax
displacement which will be all but
impossible to continue throughout
the balance of the 1980's and into
the 1990's. Permanent structural
changes to the state income tax will
force a re-evaluation of the proper
mix of all tax revenue sources and
the proper role of intergovernmental
transfer statements. Nothing short of
a comprehensive review of all tax
sources and their relationships to
spending needs at both state and
local levels will put the state on a
long-term path of tax equity,
interstate competitiveness and
stability. Such a comprehensive
review must recognize the changed
economic environment and be
based on a set of specific and long
term goals.
Our task will be to see that the
municipalities that we represent are
treated fairly and equitably through
this transition.
The major AMM focus for 1986-87
includes:
• Being prepared to address pro-
posed changes in the state tax
distribution programs by 1) Clear-
ly identifying our goals and objec-
tives, 2) Maximizing the use of our
resources, both political and ad-
ministrative to achieve the goals
and obJectives established by the
AMM membership, and 3) Develop-
ing strategies for achieving these
goals and objectives.
• Be prepared to pursue other goals
and objectives the organization
has established by its membership
related to state legaislation and/or
metropolitan agency policies.
• Continuing our efforts to expand
our municipal membership.
• Establish working relationships
with other groups representing
communities such as the outstate
coalition, unions, special metro
interest groups, etc.
It is perhaps basic, but if we are
clear in our objectives, we have the
resources within our organization to
achieve those objectives. The oppor-
tunities for 1986-87 are abundant.
Our task is to identify them and to
make them ours.
The AMM would like to thank Miller -
Schroeder Financial, Inc. and North-
western Bell Telephone Company
for defraying a portion of the costs
for the Annual Meeting on the Jona-
than Padelford.
Policy Committees
to Resume for 1987
The AMM Policy Committees will
resume meeting late this summer to
begin development of new policy or
changes to current policy for the
1987 legislative session.
Any member from any city may
and is encouraged to volunteer to
serve on a committee. If you are not
now part of a committee but would
like to become a member of any
committee, contact Carol, Vern, or
Roger at the AMM office at 227-5600.
Fiscal Disparities
The AMM Revenue Committee has
and is continuing to meet regularly
throughout the summer attempting
to hammer out Policy standards on
the more controversial issues. The
committee has already heard from
Rep. Bill Schreiber and Charles
Weaver, original author of Fiscal Dis-
parities. There are 40 officials on the
Revenue committee representing
most of the significant contributor
and gainer cities as well as many in-
betweens. They, as well as the Board
of Directors, are committed to the
AMM airing the issues thoroughly
and doing everything possible to
arrive at some major policy decisions
that are supportable by a large major-
ity of cities for the 1987 legislative
session.
.Lob-�....,
1
AMM Board of Directors
Ed Fitzpatrick
Ed Fitzpatrick is serving his fourth
three-year term on the Fridley City
Council. From the beginning he has
served as Fridley's representative to
the Association of Metropolitan Muni-
cipalities and the League of Minne-
sota Cities. In May 1985 Ed was
elected to the Board of Directors of
the AMM.
Before his service on the City Coun-
cil, Mr. Fitzpatrick served five years
as chairman of Fridley's Parks and
Recreation Commission followed by
two years as chairman of the Planning
Commission. All together, Ed has
served almost twenty years in signi-
ficant positions in Fridley city govern-
ment.
Ed has bachelor's and master's
degrees from the University of Min-
nesota and was a Minneapolis Public
Schools English teacher for thirty
years, serving schools in Northeast
Minneapolis. At the time of his recent
retirement he was teaching at Edison
High School.
In June of 1985 Mr. Fitzpatrick was
presented a plaque in recognition of
ten years' service on the District 13
(Fridley and Columbia Heights) Com-
munity Education Advisory Council.
During Councilman Fitzpatrick's
tenure on the Fridley City Council
the park and recreation programs
have expanded with the addition of
Springbrook Nature Center and Frid-
ley Community Park, an outdoor
recreation facility with six lighted
ball fields. Mr. Fitzpatrick has been a
constant advocate of City participa-
tion in Community Education, fund-
ing for human services organizations,
and programs for senior citizens. He
has supported redevelopment efforts
in the City ranging from low income
housing to office buildings and indus-
trial parks.
Ed and his wife Charlotte have
four sons, the youngest of whom is
attending the University of Minne-
sota.
Gerald Marshall
Wn
Jerry Marshall, an eleven year veter-
an of the Brooklyn Park City Council,
is in his sixth two-year term. He
currently serves as Mayor Pro -tem
and council liaison to the Housing
and Redevelopment Authority Board.
Over the past years he has acted as
Council Representative to the Plann-
ing, Park and Recreation, and Econ-
omic Development Commissions as
well as the Northwest Human Servic-
es Council, H.R.A. Housing Grant
Board, Police Civil Service Com-
mission, Charter Commission, and
numerous special committees. Jerry
recently worked to establish the City
Community Center, relocate the Arm-
ory, and establish executive housing
along with a championship golf
course for Brooklyn Park. He is Past
President and a charter member of
the Brooklyn Park Jaycees and has
been active in coaching and umpiring
youth sports throughout the past 24
years.
Jerry has B.S. and B.A. degrees
from the University of North Dakota
and is employed by First Brokerage
Company food brokers in Minne-
tonka where he has been Vice Presi-
dent and Sales Manager for 14 years.
He and wife Audrey have two teenage
children—one girl and one boy. Be-
sides his interest in and enjoyment
of sporting events, he is an active
softball player, hockey enthusiast,
and accomplished accordian player,
often entertaining at neighborhood
and family events.
For the past several years, Jerry
has been his city's official represen-
tative to the League of Minnesota
Cities and the AMM. He has been an
active participant, most recently serv-
ing on the AMM Housing policy
committee. Jerry was appointed to
=—k
the AMM Board of Directors in Febru-
ary 1986 by the Board and elected to
a full two-year term by the member-
ship at this year's Annual Meeting.
Duke Addicks
Mentor C. "Duke" Addicks, Jr.
joined the City of Minneapolis as its
legislative liaison in September of
1984. Prior to that he was in private
law practice in Minneapolis where
he represented several associations
and cities before the legislature and
served as attorney for some smaller
cities, charter commissions and joint
powers organizations. From October
of 1973 to August of 1984 he was the
legislative counsel for the League of
Minnesota Cities where he authored
the Handbook for Minnesota Cities.
Before that, beginning in April of
1970, he was the staff attorney for
the Association of Minnesota Coun-
ties. He has represented local govern-
ments before the legislature for the
past sixteen years.
Duke was elected to the AMM
Board of Directors in May 1985 and
serves on the AMM Revenue Com-
mittee. He also currently serves as a
member of the panel of commercial
arbitrators of the American Arbitra-
tion Association.
Born in Minneapolis, and a lifelong
Twin Citian, Duke received his under-
graduate and law degrees from the
University of Minnesota and also
earned a M.A. degree in the cross-
cultural study of myth and religion
from the United Theological Semi-
nary of the Twin Cities.
A professional storyteller, Addicks
gives his popular Stories in the Stars
programs frequently at the Science
Museum of Minnesota, throughout
the Minnesota State Parks and at
planetariums, colleges, schools, li-
braries, campfires and banquets.
He is married to former LMC legis-
lative counsel, Peggy Flicker. They
live in St. Paul with their four children,
including an infant son.
CDBG: A shining past — a clouded
by Bill McCarthy
From Eastport, Maine to Long Beach,
California, from Duluth, Minnesota to
Brownsville, Texas, and in thousands of
communities in between, one program of
federal government assistance has made
a world of difference in how downtowns,
residential neighborhoods and local
economies look today.
The program? The Community Devel-
opment Block Grant program, known far
and wide in cities as "CDBG".
A BRIEF HISTORY
Authorized in 1974, during the admin-
istration of President Gerald R. Ford, the
CDBG program replaced a number of
Individual or "categorical" federal assis-
tance programs to cities, the Model Cities
Program and Urban Renewal among the
major ones. In consolidating these pro-
grams into a single block grant program,
the U.S. Department of Housing and Ur-
ban Development (HUD) sought to focus
federal aid to cities more coherently.
Perhaps the single biggest change to
result from the creation of the block grant
program was that cities themselves were
given the role of determining, within
guidelines, what local priorities would be
and, thus, how federal funds would ulti-
mately be spent.
Pursuant to an application process de-
veloped by HUD—one which mandated
public hearings to elicit neighborhood
input—local communities generate pro-
posals for spending CDBG money on a
variety of eligible projects.
HUD funding is provided to metropol-
itan areas and urban counties (pop.
50,000 and above) on an entitlement ba-
sis, with individual allocations deter-
mined by a formula of poverty, popula-
tion, overcrowded housing, growth lag
and age of housing stock factors. Seventy
percent of CDBG funds are currently dis-
tributed among entitlement areas.
For small cities, CDBG was distributed,
until 1983, on a competitive basis, utiliz-
ing the remaining thirty percent of the
total block grant. Prior to that year, the
"Small Cities" Program was adminis-
tered directly by HUD.
With the adoption of enabling legisla-
tion, 47 states elected to administer their
own Small Cities program, employing
state -adopted selection systems and pri-
orities (HUD continues to administer the
Small Cities CD programs in Hawaii,
Maryland and New York).
ELIGIBLE ACITVITMS
VIVDER CDBG
A major reason for the widespread
success of the Community Development
Block Grant is the range and diversity of
activities which cities can undertake. Eli-
gible activities include:
5 Construction of public facilities
S Various types of housing rehabilita-
tion
b Land acquisition
! Site clearance
B Provision of public services
5 Completion of categorical grant pro=
grams
I Economic development activities
In planning for and utilizing CDBG
funds, grant recipients must ensure that
"no less than 51 percent of the funds
must be used for activities which benefit
low -and moderate -income persons, over
a period specified by the grantee, but not
to exceed three years."
While disputes have Surfaced in some
communities over this "principal bene-
fit" rule, particularly with respect to cer-
tain public facilities and economic devel-
opment projects, overall the CDBG
program claims that 87 percent of funds
benefit low -and moderate -income per-
sons (according to grantees reports).
Mtmttoring of the' ways in-ohit'R
CDBG entitlement communities have al-
located funds has shown increasingly
larger spending in two activity catego-
ries: housing rehabilitation, totalling 36
percent of funds, and economic develop-
ment, totalling 13 percent. Economic
development projects have increased sig-
nificantly in recent program year;, in part
due to cutbacks and terminations of other
sources of government assistance. Public
facilities construction and site clearance
activities, on the other hand, are declin-
ing as local activity priorities.
A LEGACY OF LOCAL SUCCESS
Since its beginnings In 1974, the Com-
munity Development Block Grants Pro-
gram has achieved widespread success
throughout the nation. Cities of all sizes,
in all regions of the country, and with
different types of needs and problems,
have utilized CDBG funds to improve
neighborhoods, downtowns and the
overall quality of community life.
WhaTfollows are capsulized summar-
ies of some local accomplishments in-
volving CDBG funds:
Long Beach, California
With trends in suburbanization caus-
ing deterioration of its downtown econ-
omy, the City of Long Beach sought -to
counter the trends by constructing a
large, suburban -type shopping mall in
the heart of its central business district.
Using $5.1 million in CDBG funds for
land acquisition and payment of reloca-
tion costs, in conjunction with a public
bond issue and private development fi-
nancing, the Long Beach Plaza became a
$145.7 million project. Opened in 1982,
the Plaza itself provides 1,200 jobs and
has saved another 600, while generating
$600,000 a year in tax revenues.
The spinoff effects of this venture have
been dramatic. In less than five years,
private investment equaling $1.2 billion
and generating 6,000 new jobs has taken
place. And the Long Beach CD Depart-
ment is currently at work on related
downtown development projects total-
ling nearly $2 billion, including more
than 1,500 residential units for moderate -
income households.
It is interesting to note that the eco-
non,dc revitalization of Long Beach was
cited by President Reagan himself, in a
-11speiW before the National League of
Cities membership at the 1984 Congres-
sional -City Conference, as an example of
public and private resources working to-
gether successfully.
it White Plains, New York
Improvement of this city's housing
stock has been a major priority of its local
officials since the late 1970'x. By 1984,
1,378 units of housing had been rehabili-
tated and another 102 traits newly con-
structed through the efforts of the White
Plains Neighborhood Rehabilitation
Project.
The key to White Plains' success has
been its ability to generate financing from
a local lending institution. This was ac-
complished with the deposit of $1.3 mil -
ban in CDBG funds under regulations for
a Lump Sum Drawdown, with about
$90,000 a year accruing in interest. With
the city responsible for pre-screening and
preparation of loan applications, the
bank agreed to financing arrangements
for both single-family and multiple -fam-
ily loans.
The result of the program, which also
involved rehab assistance by the city and
no tax reassessments after completion of
work, has been a 5 to I ratio of private
dollars ($10.5 million) to public invest-
ment ($2 million) with participation lev-
els in some of targeted neighborhoods
reaching 40 percent.
li Birmingham, Alabama
Commercial revitalization, as a core
element of , overall neighborhood im-
provement, has been a priority in North
Birmingham since the mid -70's. Dilapi-
dated and vacant storefronts, in a com-
mercial area too large for the changing
needs of the neighborhood economy, be-
came the target of Birmingham's plan-
ners. Concentrating on a six -block area,
future
MOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
(BUDGET AUTHORITY, M M MI)ONS)
29,191
eDA w
—UDAD 400
2s,txw
20.000
1,129
-aoA 266
ASSISTED UDAO aro
10.000
HOUSING
23,762
AsslsrEo
a,9�DD
MOUSING 3297 RDA 0
S."s UDAD 0
9
17 HOUSING
K79 1964 /647
►ropowd
"no less than 51 percent of the funds
must be used for activities which benefit
low -and moderate -income persons, over
a period specified by the grantee, but not
to exceed three years."
While disputes have Surfaced in some
communities over this "principal bene-
fit" rule, particularly with respect to cer-
tain public facilities and economic devel-
opment projects, overall the CDBG
program claims that 87 percent of funds
benefit low -and moderate -income per-
sons (according to grantees reports).
Mtmttoring of the' ways in-ohit'R
CDBG entitlement communities have al-
located funds has shown increasingly
larger spending in two activity catego-
ries: housing rehabilitation, totalling 36
percent of funds, and economic develop-
ment, totalling 13 percent. Economic
development projects have increased sig-
nificantly in recent program year;, in part
due to cutbacks and terminations of other
sources of government assistance. Public
facilities construction and site clearance
activities, on the other hand, are declin-
ing as local activity priorities.
A LEGACY OF LOCAL SUCCESS
Since its beginnings In 1974, the Com-
munity Development Block Grants Pro-
gram has achieved widespread success
throughout the nation. Cities of all sizes,
in all regions of the country, and with
different types of needs and problems,
have utilized CDBG funds to improve
neighborhoods, downtowns and the
overall quality of community life.
WhaTfollows are capsulized summar-
ies of some local accomplishments in-
volving CDBG funds:
Long Beach, California
With trends in suburbanization caus-
ing deterioration of its downtown econ-
omy, the City of Long Beach sought -to
counter the trends by constructing a
large, suburban -type shopping mall in
the heart of its central business district.
Using $5.1 million in CDBG funds for
land acquisition and payment of reloca-
tion costs, in conjunction with a public
bond issue and private development fi-
nancing, the Long Beach Plaza became a
$145.7 million project. Opened in 1982,
the Plaza itself provides 1,200 jobs and
has saved another 600, while generating
$600,000 a year in tax revenues.
The spinoff effects of this venture have
been dramatic. In less than five years,
private investment equaling $1.2 billion
and generating 6,000 new jobs has taken
place. And the Long Beach CD Depart-
ment is currently at work on related
downtown development projects total-
ling nearly $2 billion, including more
than 1,500 residential units for moderate -
income households.
It is interesting to note that the eco-
non,dc revitalization of Long Beach was
cited by President Reagan himself, in a
-11speiW before the National League of
Cities membership at the 1984 Congres-
sional -City Conference, as an example of
public and private resources working to-
gether successfully.
it White Plains, New York
Improvement of this city's housing
stock has been a major priority of its local
officials since the late 1970'x. By 1984,
1,378 units of housing had been rehabili-
tated and another 102 traits newly con-
structed through the efforts of the White
Plains Neighborhood Rehabilitation
Project.
The key to White Plains' success has
been its ability to generate financing from
a local lending institution. This was ac-
complished with the deposit of $1.3 mil -
ban in CDBG funds under regulations for
a Lump Sum Drawdown, with about
$90,000 a year accruing in interest. With
the city responsible for pre-screening and
preparation of loan applications, the
bank agreed to financing arrangements
for both single-family and multiple -fam-
ily loans.
The result of the program, which also
involved rehab assistance by the city and
no tax reassessments after completion of
work, has been a 5 to I ratio of private
dollars ($10.5 million) to public invest-
ment ($2 million) with participation lev-
els in some of targeted neighborhoods
reaching 40 percent.
li Birmingham, Alabama
Commercial revitalization, as a core
element of , overall neighborhood im-
provement, has been a priority in North
Birmingham since the mid -70's. Dilapi-
dated and vacant storefronts, in a com-
mercial area too large for the changing
needs of the neighborhood economy, be-
came the target of Birmingham's plan-
ners. Concentrating on a six -block area,
Nation's Cities Vkek)y February 24, 1986
the city utilized $2.5 million in CDBG
funds and another $2.5 million in other
public funds to acquire properties, dear
land sites, develop a new supermarket, a
new police precinct in a rehabbed build-
ing, a medical clinic, a 125 -unit Section 8
apartment complex and new and rehabil-
itated stonefronts.
Along with improvements in public
amenities, this commercial area develop-
ment has generated the new construction
of six other buildings and improvements
in 40 others. In all, the $5 million in
public funds have generated $9 million
in private investment, with increased
employment and local tax revenues and
reduced crime the ultimate payoffs
The Neighborhood Commercial Re-
vitalization program is now being ex-
panded into five other neighborhoods.
5 Omaha, Nebraska
Assisting 28 low -and moderate -in-
come families to become homeowners in
Omaha, Nebraska has been the achieve-
ment, thus far, of the city's Urban Home-
stead Program. CDBG funds have been
the primary ingredient in the success of
the Program, with $432,000 invested in
acquisition and rehabilitation of previ-
ously vacant properties. CD funds have
provided low-interest loans for necessary
move -in repairs, while the homesteaders
provide other sources of funds to com-
plete additional repairs over a three-year
period.
In additon to conserving some of Oma-
ha's private housing stock and providing
homeownership opportunities for low -
and moderate -income families, the Ur-
ban Homestead Program has also placed
28 parcels of real estate back on the city's
tax rolls.
$ Priest River, Idaho
The infusion of CDBG funds into small
communities can often mean the differ-
ence between economic life and death.
Amidst the decline of the timber industry
in Idaho, the community of Priest River
undertook to attract a high-tech em-
ployer back in 1979. Having acquired a
site and having located a prospective
computer component manufacturer, the
problem confronting the local develop-
ment corporation was how to finance
improvements in the local water supply
and a waste treatment plant to
accomodate the companies needs.
The solution to priest River's needs
was a $342,000 CDBG grant from the
state of Idaho for infrastructure develop-
ment. The CD funds secured the deal
with the company, which, in tum, in-
vested $1.4 million to launch its facility.
As a result of community initiative and
a critical infusion of CDBG funds, Priest
River's new employer will eventually
supply 20 percent of the community's
employment and much needed dollars in
the form of local tax revenues.
The list of local success stories involv-
ing CDBG funds goes on and on. The five
stories recounted here depict communi-
ties of all types who have used the block
grants for innovative and much-needed
purposes. They also point to the critical
role that CDBG money has played in
leveraging and generating much larger
amounts of funding from other sources,
particularly private sources.
The many payoffs, including employ -
See p.7, co1.3
Chronology
HOUSING
1918—Approval of federal government's fust housing program.
1937—Public housing originated.
1936 --Farmers Home Administration Act authorized to establish a program of
grants and loans for the construction or reconstruction of farm dwellings.
1949—Housing Act proclaimed goal of providing decent housing for all
citizens and to remove slum conditions. The Act created the Urban Redevelop-
ment Program, which later changed into the urban renewal program; increased
the funds available for public housing; and established new programs for rural
housing.
1954—Act broadened the scope of urban redevelopment structures (Section
221(D)(2)) and required a "workable program" for solving overall development
problems as a condition for receiving urban renewal and related federal
assistance
1%1—Subsidized below market interest rate mortage insurance programs to
assist rental housing for low to moderate income families (Section 234).
1964—Extended the subsidy treatment given for housing the elderly to fam-
ilies displaced by urban renewal projects and authorized a new program of 20 -
year, 3 percent loans to property owners or tenants in urban renewal areas
(Section 312).
1%5—Provided utilization of privately -owned housing for families at the
income level of those eligible for regular public housing. This Act included
the rent supplement program, the privately -owned leasing of existing struc-
tures and urban renewal capital grant funds to low-income owners (Section 702
and 703).
1966 Housing and Urban Development Act organized HUD; Demonstration
Cities and Metropolitan Development Act authorized the program known as
"Model Clues".
1%8—Housing and Urban Ad enlarged the authorization of the rent supple-
ment and the model cities programs, a housing program for low-income
families and a major new program to help the poor buy their own homes and
rent apartments (Section 235).
1972—Rural Development Act authorized to assist In the alleviation of hous-
ing problems of low-income famllies in rural areas.
1974—Housing and Community Development Act included a new "Section 8"
housing assistance program replacing the former "Section 23 leasing program"
and consolidated several programs Into the Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG).
CDBG from p.4
went opportunities, quality housing, lo-
cal tax revenues and, perhaps most im-
portant, enhanced quality of community
life, would seem to augur well for
CDBG's continuation and expansion.
Such, however, is not the case.
CDBG STATUS AND PROSPECTS
Despite its many successes, the Com-
munity Development Block Grants Pro-
gram has been targeted for cuts and
eventual termination since the Reagan
Administration took office in 1981. For
example, the CDBG appropriation for
FY86 is $3.12 billion, a cut of 10 percent
from the FY85 level of $3.472 billion.
In his budget proposal for FY87, the
President has proposed deferring an ad-
ditional $500 million from the FY86
appropriation, redudng the total to $2.6
billion. This same amount (52.6 billion) is
proposed for FY87.
Interestingly, the appropriations levels
suggested by the Reagan Administration
for FY86 and FY87 are only slightly
higher than the $2.4 billion level at
which CDBG was funded in 1975. Yet, in
1986, there are 201 more entitlement
grantees than there were in 1975.
And despite this increase in entitle-
ment grantees, the President proposes to
reduce the entitlement portion of CDBG
funds from 70 percent to 65 percent, and
increasing the small cities share from 30
percent to 35 percent—although it also
forces small cities into competition with
each other as wekk as with larger cities.
(This proposal results from the Adminis-
tration's plan to eliminate the Farmers
Home Administration, which has pro-
vided aid to small communities and Waal
areas in the past).
Thus, despite its record of successes
and contributions to communities across
the country, the outlook for the Commu-
nity Development Block Grants Program
is one of reduced and more dispensed
resources in the future. In addition, the
program faces potential termination if it
is not reauthorized beyond Sept. 30,
1986.0
'he federal housing policy is in disarray
by Reggie Todd
The administration's budget proposals
for housing and community develop-
ment programs in fiscal year 1987 should
come as no surprise for those who have
followed its proposals in this area since
1981.
. Federal policy for housing and com-
munity development is in disarray, the
victim of repeated budgetary cuts since
the Reagan administration came into of-
fice. Although the trend of decline pre-
dates the current administration, addi-
tional units of assisted housing which
totaled 600,000 in 1975 had been cut in
half by 1980 and fell to less than 100,000
in fiscal year 1986.
I If the administration's FY 1987 budget
Proposals for assisted housing are
adopted, only about one-third of 34,000
of the estimated 98,000 units appropri-
ated by Congress for FY 1986 will be
available to aid lower income house -
�olds.
Under the "administration's proposal,
i4.4 billion of the $10.7 billion available
st FY 1986 would be rescinded and $2.3
3rillion would be deferred until FY 1987.
in addition, $428 million in FY 1986
-kousing funds will be cut on March 1,
1986 to comply with the 4.3 percent
across-the-board cuts required under the
iramm-Rudman-Hollings deficit reduc-
ion law.
r As a result, only $3.7 billion of the
110.7 billion appropriated for FY 1986
-would be available for housing assis-
ance—a 66 percent cut.
The major direct federal housing pro -
for lower income households are
dei meither through the Department
Housing and Urban Development
or, in small cities and rural areas,
the Farmers Home Administra-
(FmHA) of the U.S. Department of
culture. However, the administra-
's budget proposals also call for
ting FniHA rural housing pro -
addition, almost three quarters of a
m households in small towns and
areas live in subsidized housing,
arils with interest credits of the
y far the largest federal housing sub -
es, however, both in cost to the Trea-
and in number of recipients, are
provided to middle and upper in -
e households through the tax code.
1981, budget authority for low in -
e housing was $30 billion and the
ted costs - of housing related tax
ditures (through deductions or tax
in the tax code) was $33.3 billion.
administration's FY 1987 proposals
uce that budget authority to zero, and
"d would rely on $2.3 billion in
eferred FY 1986 spending to fund
50,000 housing vouchers.
Housing related tax expenditures are
estimated at $45.6 billion for 1986 and in
excess of that figure for 1987.
Roughly 90 percent of the cost of the
housing provisions of the tax code are
accounted for by homeowner deduction
of mortgage interest and property taxes
and deferral or exclusion of capital gains
on home sales.
A sound housing policy -would treat
adequate, affordable housing as a basic
human need. HUD by one measure
found that in 1981 there was 3.0 million
seriously inadequate housing units and
another 4.7 million units with significant
deficiencies. By these measures, 9.3 per-
cent of the housing stock is inadequate.
However, the number -of substandard
units is dwarfed by the number of house-
holds paying more than they can afford
for shelter. A total of 7.2 million owners
and renters, 11.4 percent of all house-
holds were paying more than half of their
incomes for shelter (1980 Annual Hous-
ing Survey conducted by HUD).
In addition, fewer than one quarter of
all renter households with income below
$10,000 paid less than 25 percent of their
income for rent, about half with incomes
between $10,000 and $15,000 paid less
than 25 percent and three quarters with
incomes between $15,000 and $20,000
paid less than 25 percent.
While the need for low income hous-
ing is dear, the administration and Con-
gressional response to this need has not
been very focused.
Congress has been unable to reach an
agreement on an omnibus housing and
community development authorization
bill since 1980. An authorization was
pushed through as part of the 1981 bud-
get reconciliation legislation, but it was
neither comprehensive nor well thought
out.
'In 1983, 'the rZongress passed the
Housing and Urban Rural Recovery Act,
not because there was consensus on
what our national housing policy should
be, but because the House Banking Com-
mittee Chairman held hostage an au-
thorization bill for the International
Monetary Fund (IMF) which the admin-
istration badly wanted. In return for the
IMF legislation, the president reluctantly
signed the two-year housing authoriza-
tion and 3 -year community development
legislation.
Unable again this year to reach agree-
ment on a coherent federal housing pol-
icy, Congress failed to reauthorize expir-
ing assisted -housing programs. Although
the House had included a scaled-down
housing bill in the House passed budget
reconciliation bill' (a backdoor_ effort to
get action on the housing bill), tate Senate
Banking Committee was unable to reach
consensus to even report out a housing
authorization bill.
With the total breakdown of the FY
1986 reconciliation process, the only leg-
islation to continue housing programs
which expired on Sept 30, 1985; was
through the HUD -Independent Agencies
appropriation measure which was signed
by the president on Nov. 25, 1985.
The administration now is seeking to
back out of that agreement through its
proposals to defer and rescind virtually
all of those already appropriated funds,
which brings us to FY 1987 and the
administration's singular answer to the .
low income housing crisis—the use "of
50,000 housing vouchers.
In FY 1987, the administration uwould
end all production of subsidized homing .
for low income families and make vouch-
ers the nation's only housing program:
See p.6 coLl
Housing from p.3
The voucher program is similar to the
Section 8 existing certificate program
which has been in existence since 1975
and provides a rent subsidy for lower
income families to help them afford de-
cent housing in the private market. HUD
makes up the difference between what a
lower-income household can afford and
the fair market rent for an adequate hous-
ing unit. No eligible tenant need pay
more than 30 percent of adjusted income
toward rent.
The administration has been attempt-
ing to replace the Section 8 program with
housing vouchers for three years, but has
only been able to get the Congress to
agree to a limited demonstration pro-
gram in 1983. Congress appropriated
funds for 36,000 vouchers in FY 1986.
While the subsidy under the voucher
program remains the difference between
30 percent of adjusted income and the
payment standard (FMR), the rent actu-
ally paid can be higher or lower than the
FMR depending on what the tenant was
able to negotiate. Rather than annual
adjustments to the subsidy to compen-
sate for normal rent increases, the
youcher program only permits adjust-
ments twice during a five year period.
"Tenants and landlords under the
voucher program are only assured of five
years of funding for the voucher instead
of 15 years under the Section 8 existing
program—making the cost to the gov-
ernment substantially less.
While the administration, in arguing
for vouchers, continues to assert that
there is not a lack of available housing
but a lack of affordable housing for lower
income households, the voucher pro-
gram clearly will not address many prob-
lems affecting lower income renters.
Vouchers will not work for very large
families because insufficient multi -bed-
room units exist; many single parents
and minority households are discrimi-
nated against by private landlords, and
vouchers won't address the special needs
of the physically and developmentally
handicapped.
In addition, a survey, "the Nation's
Housing Needs" published by the U.S.
Conference of Mayors in June, 1984, re-
ported that the supply of housing avail-
able to low and mderate income house-
holds had decreased or remained the
same over the last five years.
The most frequently cited reason for a
decreasing supply of housing was de-
creased construction. The second reason
most often cited was increased demand
for higher income renters. These findings
suggest that the combination of less
rental housing construction, particularly
the severe cutbacks in federally assisted
new construction coupled with increased
competition from higher income renters
is squeezing the lower income renter out
of the housing market.
It seems likely that the malaise affect-
ing the housing and community develop-
ment programs will continue in the near
future—until such time as the adminis-
tration and Congress stop enacting ad
hoc, back door approaches to addressing
the nation's housing and community
development and reassert a coherent and
comprehensive federal policy in provid-
ing housing assistance to those who are
most in need and cannot obtain or retain
safe, sanitary and affordable housing
without such assistance.O
7 T -- \3
EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
FINANCIAL SPECIALISTS
FIRST NATIONAL-SOO LINE CONCOURSE 507 MARQUETTE AVE. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 339-8291 (AREA CODE 612)
VOLUME 32, NUMBER 3
FILE: Financial Specialists: Ehlers and Associates, Inc.
Please distribute to governing body membgrs
June, 1986 is ,
TAX REFORM
On May 7 the Senate Finance Committee unanimously approved a sweeping tax refori bill which will likely
be altered on the Senate floor before it will go to the Conference Committee. The bill's defeat is unlikely,
due to the President's strong support, and will likely emerge in late summer or early fall.
The bill excludes municipal bond interest earnings from income in calculating individual taxpayers'
minimum tax. In fact, governmental purpose bonds by state and local governments have not been
drastically affected which is substantially different from House Resolution 3838. H.R. 3838 provides a
maximum tax rate of 38%, while the maximum rate is 27% in the Senate version. Currently the maximum
rate is 50%.
IMPLICATIONS FOR TAX-EXEMPT MARKET
Investors are having difficulty pricing the impact of tax reform since both measures are so different. This
confusion has slowed the demand for tax-exempt securities. However, the supply of tax -exempts coming
to market has increased. Together these two factors have increased tax-exempt interest rates in recent
weeks and made tax-exempt bonds especially attractive for individual investors when compared to U.S.
Treasury Bond yields.
In the 1970's the average 20 -year tax-exempt bond yields were 70% of the 20 -year U.S. Treasury Bond
coupon rate. In the late 1970's the difference rose to around 85%, and by 1982 and 1983 it was 90 to 95%.
During 1985 the difference dropped 80 to 85%. Currently municipal bonds trade very close to U.S.
Treasury Bonds and recently have been 110% of Treasury yields. Overall, however, in absolute Lerms
tax-exempt interest rates are lower than 1985 rates.
QUALIFIED TAX-EXEMPT OBLIGATIONS
To give your tax-exempt obligations an edge in marketing we recommend that you properly structure your
bond issues so you can designate the bond issue as a "qualified tax exempt obligation." In order to qualify
the bonds must be:
1) Issued in 1986, 1987 or 1988.
2) An "essential purpose bond".
3) Acquired by a bank located in the same state as the bond issuer.
4) Not exceeding a total of $10,000,000 in one year or issued to finance a project
where the principal amount of bonds being issued for the same purpose does not exceed
$ 3,000,000.
H.R. 3838 provides that banks may deduct 100% of the interest earnings for federal income tax purposes on
"qualified tax-exempt obligations." Currently banks can only deduct 80% of the interest earnings for
federal income tax purposes.
MUNICIPAL REBATE PROVISIONS INCLUDED IN TAX REFORM
'The Senate proposal includes arbitrage rebate provisions for similar municipal bond issues by a community
if they exceed $5,000,000 within one year. This rebate provision applies to the construction account,
sinking fund and debt reserve fund and is also included in the House version. Large issuers will be severely
affected and should contact their Congressmen for support in modifying this proposal.;
ROBERT EHLERS' REPORT ON COMPETITIVE BIDDING FOR THE
LEASE PURCHASE OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS
Recently Robert Ehlers, Founder & President Emeritus of Ehlers and Associates, completed a report
detailing the advantages of a competitive sale for the lease/purchase financing of the Cass County
Courthouse Annex in Fargo, North Dakota and a law enforcement center for Clay County in Moorhead,
Minnesota. Many underwriters have said that lease/purchase agreements are too complicated to be bid
competitively. Competitive bidding allowed both counties to free themselves from the constrictions and
extra costs associated with privately negotiated bond sales. This report, by Robert Ehlers, provides helpful
insights into the lease/purchase of many municipal facilities. A free copy is available upon request.
Very truly yours,
EHL S AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
even F. AViPresident
Director-S
SUMMARY OF AREA BOND SALES
Rinnesota
I.S.D. 0161 (Brainard) 03/03/86 G.O. Tu Antic. Certs. of IMMt. 3,110
1987
5.89%
6.987
W
feast take
Bond
G.O. Ieprwanent goods
565"
1988-/9%
6.45%
6.985
Baa -1
Ret
Wye,
G.O. Tu Antic. Carts. of IndMt.
L -ideality
Gate
Type of Bonds
Mount
Raturitt
Rate
Inter
Rat)m
I-
1989-2002
6.515
6.981
A
01is"o County
03/06196
G.O. grant Anticipation Bonds
Danterton
03/03/86
G.O. Street Ilproverent Bads
2N
1986-19%
9.105
6.985
W
ORkerton
03/03/86
c.0. Wap --went Bonds
15011
1%7-19%
7.13%
6. g8%
W
Ron"la
03/03/86
G.O. Santer Ieprpvement Bonds
36511
1981-1996
6.%%
6.90%
W
0 -ie
03/05/86
G.O. Bonds
525M
1987-1998
7.02%
6.98%
W
State board of Regents 03/13/86
law lborial Union Its- Bonds 9,000
1987-2009
6.16%
6.885
UM
State of I -
A
Breckenridge
04/15/86
G.O. Refundinq Improvenent Bonds
420,
1987-2007
I.S.D. 13 (LIr)
Dallas Center
03/16/86
G.O. Essential Corp, Pure, Bonds
9158
198 2004
7.79%
6.89%
W
Ramon
03/25/86
G.O. Bonds
4,250"
1%7-200i
6 W
7.34%
A-1
Malt -Udell C.S.D
03/26/86
G.O. School Building Bonds
790M
1994-2W3
7.55%
7.34%
W
Color Rapids
04/01/86
G.O. Bonds
2,800
1987-1994
5.58%
7.21%
Aaa
Giadortok
04/02"6
G.O. Street I1lprovelent Bonds
33M
1988-1997
6.77%
7.21%
W
Eagle Grove
04/07/86
G.O. Bonds
300"
1%7-19%
6.49%
7.15%
W
El"rt
04/07/86
G.O. Corporate Purpose Bonds
11511
1908-2001
7.315
1.151
W
lake "ills
04/08/86
Electric RevanlM Bads
550
19"8-20(10
1.325
1.15%
A
Ion city
04/15/96
Parting Syttea Rrvenue Nis
1.575"
1981_zW1
7.841
7.25%
Baa -I
WrthMwd
04/15/86
G.O. Cwporate Purpose Bads
25M
1%7-1999
6.89%
7.25%
W
Des Roines
04/21/86
G.O, laprove t Bads
11,265"
1988-2005
6.68%
7.16%
Ata
Webster city
04/21/86
S.D. Corporate Purpose Bads
575"
1%1-19%
6.22%
7.16%
A
Port Dodge
29
04//96
G.O. W'W:t Purpose Bads
950"
1%1_19%
5.19%
7.22%
Aa
Radford
04/29/86
G.O. laproveaent lu Bads
325"1%7-2001
School District Wltd. la, Bonds
7.20%
7.22%
W
Buffalo Center
04/30/96
G.O. Bonds
265"
1%7-19%
6.27%
7.22%
W
Rinnesota
I.S.D. 0161 (Brainard) 03/03/86 G.O. Tu Antic. Certs. of IMMt. 3,110
1987
5.89%
6.987
W
feast take
03/03/86
G.O. Ieprwanent goods
565"
1988-/9%
6.45%
6.985
Baa -1
I.S.D. 193 (Carlton)
03/04/86
G.O. Tu Antic. Carts. of IndMt.
325M
1987
5.%1
6.987
W
Rosnount
03/04/86
G.O. 14nicilsaI Building Bads
1,300,
1989-2002
6.515
6.981
A
01is"o County
03/06196
G.O. grant Anticipation Bonds
30011
1988
5.551
6.gn
A
Richfield
03/10/66
G.G. Stone Seer Reveam Bonds
2,52511
1988-2007
6.505
6.891
Aa
1.5.0. 1601 (fosston)
03/11/86
G.O. Tu Antic. Carts. of LkMt.
39011
1%1
5.58%
6. on
W
I.S.D. /112 (Chaska)
.03/13/16
g.0. Tu Antic. Certs. of IMMt.
1,25011
1987
5.52%
6.88%
W
I.S.D. /118
03/13/06
6.0. iu Antic. Carts. of IMMI.
3650
1987
5.31
6.981
W
(P-tongvI Nle)
7.25%
A
Breckenridge
04/15/86
G.O. Refundinq Improvenent Bonds
420,
1987-2007
I.S.D. 13 (LIr)
03/17/86
C.O. Tu Antic. Carts. of Indebl.
38011
1987
5.47%
6.896
W
I.S.D. 1861 ORnae)
03/11/86
C.O. iu Antic. Certs. of Ingo0t.
2,0901
1981
5.425
6.895
W
Aawdale
03/)7/66
C.O. /apnwvaent Badx
6958
1991-19%
6.25%
6.845
W
special Intereatliata
03/19/86
G.O. Tu Antic. Certs. of IngoDt.
1,6001
1907
5.91
6.895
0
SIDMite Bear Lee)
7.16%
Baa -1
Metropolitan Transit
04/22/86
Is, Anticipation Certificates
17,600
1987
Ilona
03/25/86
G.O. Tea Increment gads
8101
198/-19%
6.64%
7.34%
W
I.S.D. 1162 (Bagley)
03/31/86
6.0. Tu Antic. Carts. of Webs.
45011
198/
5.34%
7.21%
W
I.S.0. /126
04M /86
6.0. Tu Antic. Wt. of IngoDt.
3601
1987
5.23%
7.21%
W
(Clara city)
7.22%
W
(East Chain)
I.S.O. K% (faritault)
04/07/86
C.O. Tea Antic. Cert. of IMMt.
1,99011
1981
5.21
7. in
W
I.S.O. 6831
04/07/86
G.O. Tu Antic. Cert. of Ingots.
2,095"
1987
5.32%
7.195
W
("pest Lake)
7.22%
A
.is -in
Richland Center
03/06/96
G.O. Corporate Puryose Bonds
950,
1987-2000
1.5.0. /262
04/07/96
G.G. Tu Antic. Cert. of Indobt.
1,300
1987
5.10%
7.15%
W
(St. Anthony)
6.g91
A-1
Rndford School District
03/18/96
School District Wltd. la, Bonds
3,500,
19884006
eagle take
04/07/66
C.O. Iproreeant Bads
350
1988-1997
6.60L
7.15%
W
Wasted
04047/86
C.O. Dispoul Systell Bads
5258
1989-19%
6.40%
7.151
Baa
Wasted
04/01/%
G.O. G Anticipation Bonds
0
1,20988
1ant
5.53%
7.15%
Baa
gadiphl C-ty
04/08/86
C.O. Gant Antic. Refund. Bongo
650
1981
5.39%
7.1%
A-1
Wrth Dakota
Morthood Relic School 03/04/86 G.O. Refunding Bads
620
1987-1997
6.51
6.91% W
District fb. 129
Bad
Bi-P1701ic
06/16/86 G.O. School Wilding Bonds
Rel
Buyer
7.12%
11unicipalit
Data
type of Bonds
Mann!
KaWity
Rate
Inter
Us—
Grant Rarais
04/09/86
Gross Revenue Recrentiunal
31511
1967-1991
1.40%
7.15%
W
1981
4.66%
facility Bonds
tight 6 Poor
Revenue Notes
I.S.D. 4347 (willm )
04/00/86
G.0. la, Mlic. Cert. of IrdMt.
2,510
1901
5.151
1. IS1
W
I.5.0. /255
U/10/96
G.O. lar Mt- Cert. of Indetl.
485,
1%1
5.111
1.151
MP.
(vine Island)
lbnticeno
04/14/86
Seam, Interceptor Is, Bonds
I,050
1989-2002
6.725
7.25%
A
Breckenridge
04/15/86
G.O. Refundinq Improvenent Bonds
420,
1987-2007
6.115
1.25%
Baa -1
Cold Spring
04/15/86
G.O. Ilryrovaent Bonds
6WA
1988-1%7
6.52%
7.25%
Baa
I.S.D a99 (Esko)
04/15/86
G.O. lar antic. Cert. of Indebt.
295.
I967
5.221
7.25%
W
Borth St. NO
04/21/86
G.O. inprovelrent Bonds
825"
1987-2003
6.41%
7.16%
A
L- City
04/12/86
G.O. lw,o mot Bonds
495'.
1981-1996
6.201
7.16%
Baa -1
Metropolitan Transit
04/22/86
Is, Anticipation Certificates
17,600
1987
4.35%
1.16%
"I1;-1
Caaission
W- County
04/22/86
G.O. Drainage Ditch -d,
310"
1986-1%7
6.19%
1.16%
A
I.S.O.1453
04/28/86
G.O. lar Antic. Carts. of IMM ,.
330"
17
%
5.191
7.22%
W
(East Chain)
.demi ngo
04/28/86
G.O. Santer Bonds
285"
1988-2004
7.09%
7.22%
W
Wtchinson
04/29/86
G.O. lmprovement Bonds
1,015"
1988-1991
b.11%
7.22%
A
.is -in
Richland Center
03/06/96
G.O. Corporate Puryose Bonds
950,
1987-2000
6. SBf
6.981
A
"anitowc County
W/18/%
G.O. Corporate Purpose Bonds
3,115,
1988-2000
6.791
6.g91
A-1
Rndford School District
03/18/96
School District Wltd. la, Bonds
3,500,
19884006
7.26%
6.091
A
Sheboygan County
03/18/96
G.O. Promissory Motes
5,!0011
19%-1%5
6.18%
6.891
Aa
Dresser
03/21/86
G.O. S-1 Refunding Rev. Bonds
23M
1961-2001
1.88%
6.9%
W
Ment Berlin
03/25/%
G.O. Promissory Wl-
1,325,
1981-1995
6.95%
7.34%
A
Green Bay
04/02/86
G.O. Promissory Moles
1,90011
1988-19%
6.68%
7.21%
Aa/M
Green Bay
04/02/96
G.O. Corporate Purpose Bads
3,R0
1991-2005
6.68%
7.21%
Aa/AA
"ilwukee County
04/08/86
G.O. Corporate Purpose Bonds
11,45011
7967-2001
6.63%
7.15%
Aa/AA-
South Rilwukee
04/10/86
G.O. Corp. Puryose Pro♦. Motes
1,/304
1991-19%
5.07%
7.15%
A
B7ackha. Y. Tech.
04,14/86
G.O. Pralissory Motes
4201
1987-1994
6.%%
1.M
W
6 Adult Ed. Dist.
Glendale
04/14/86
G.O. Praeiswr, Rotes
810,
1988-1995
S.6 IS
1.2R
M
Portage County
04/15/86
G.O. Premiss -y Wtes
2.055"
1987-1996
5.621
7.25%
As
W,1 Allis
04/15/86
G.O. Pr isso y Motes
1,500,
1987-1996
5.75%
7.251
A-1
Oshkosh
04/1//86
G.O. Corporate purpose Bonds
1,05011
1981-2000
5.995
7.251
A-1
Oshkosh
04/17/86
G.O. Promissory Rotes
1,3601
1987-19%
5.72%
1.25%
A -I
Allaxes
04/24/86
G.O. Promissory Motes
1,335,
1987-1996
6.11
1.16%
W
Janesville
04 /28/06
G.O. Corporate Purpose 6
2,985,
1987-19%
5.121
1.22%
A
promissory Rotes
Wrth Dakota
Morthood Relic School 03/04/86 G.O. Refunding Bads
620
1987-1997
6.51
6.91% W
District fb. 129
Bi-P1701ic
06/16/86 G.O. School Wilding Bonds
9,800
19M M%
7.12%
1.25% A-1
School Dist. /1
RICH
Ma attte Board of
OU29/86 Electric Wilily System
4,10011
1981
4.66%
7.22% ARM
tight 6 Poor
Revenue Notes
Community Improvement
I have noticed a problem with: ./
or 31
Resident has noticed a problemwrit
Street/Potholes Wa /?dg
Brush/Weeds/Trees Fi ng (. cavh�ing j
Drainage Duke- Cac'.,
Traffic/P=aring Violation Garage/ r s
Traffic/Street Sign/SignaTErosl /pirt�C,e s
Dead Animals in street BrokenUai�g�ipment_�
Sign _ Streetlight
ther
O
DescriptionLocation�
• ! `_ 1
Your name \`,1�j Z t-}y,�_ Date l•P jd (o g(,
Resident's Name
Address Phone
141
a
Community Improvement Reminder
I have noticed a problem with: iii• �l
Resident has noticed a problem with:
Street/Potholes Watermain/Hydrant
Brush/Weeds/Trees Filling/Excavating
Drainage dunk Cars
Traffic arking Violation Garbage/Demos
Traffic/Street Sign/Signal- Erosion/Dirty greets
Dead Animals in street Broken/Damaged Equipment
Sign �; Streetlight
Other
Des a
ip, i
Location
Your nam e
Resident's Name
Address
C I',,,
4�1 Ir -1, ,, - _ _ _
Y
Xeric I
VXX�x
Phon e
n � �
2, "
)
4�1 Ir -1, ,, - _ _ _
Y
Xeric I
VXX�x
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
MEMO
DATE: June 26, 1986
TO: Sherm Goldberg, City Engineer \
FROM: Frank Boyles, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT REMINDER CARD
Attached is a copy of a Community Improvement Reminder Card submitted by
Dave Crain on behalf of Ms. Lee Bean, 4675 Balsam Lane regarding
extensive damage to curbs in the Deerwood Estates development. Would
you please investigate this matter and provide me with a report of your
findings. I would appreciate a response by Friday, June 27 so it may be
included in the Council Information Memorandum.
Thank you.
FB : dma
attach.
cc: James G. Willis, City Manager
S/F - 6/27/86
June 27,86
Frank:
I inspected the area on Balsam Lane & 47th ave and could not see
any curbing that was so bad that it would "stand out like a sore thumb" !
There are a few cracked curb sections but nothing that would
require being removed and replaced, The curbing in that area does take a
beating from the construction equipment but that is the "nature of the
beast".
There is one piece of curbing that needs to be replaced in front of
the hydrant on Balsam Lane @ 47th due to a watermain break, This is scheuled
to be replaced.
Sherk1dberg
June 26, 1986
Mr. Kirk Klopfleisch
15841 -27th Avenue No.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Mr. Klopfleisch:
S
f�
CITY Or
PLYMOUTR
4" .-\Sc�4..
Yesterday afternoon, City Councilmember Jerry Sisk stopped by my office and
informed me that he had observed you picking up litter along Vicksburg Lane
south of Highway 55. He frankly was at a loss for words to express his
amazement that an individual would voluntarily, in this day and age, pick up
litter along a public walkway.
I, too, must confess that it is a rare sight today when a citizen
voluntarily takes it upon himself to walk up and down a street and pick up
litter left by other thoughtless individuals. That it does occur, is but a
continuing testimonial to the sense of pride that people, such as yourself,
have in their community. I wish hundreds more in our community would follow
your own personal example!
I want to thank you, not only for myself, but on behalf of the Mayor and
Council for your selflessness in seeking to make Plymouth a more beautiful
community. While I fully recognize that you're not motivated by the
expectation of public thanks or acclaim, the fact is that such examples of
citizenship need to be appropriately recognized.
Thank you again for your care and commitment.
Yours truly,
ACi
s G. Willis
Manager
JGW:Jm
cc: Mayor & City Council
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
June 23, 1986
I N 26 ry4&
Plymouth City Council
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Dear Council Members:
This letter is to bring to your attention the concerns of the
Plymouth residents who will be affected by your decision to
move the Green Oaks Park equipment to a central location in
the park.
Unfortunately, your
decision will
be moving the problem and not
solving the problem.
Moving the
park equipment will bring new
complaints
and harassment of different residents. The
equipment
located in
Green Oaks
park is "too much" for the
land mass.
This is
a small park,
not Zachary Playfield, the
equipment
which existed before improvements was the "right"
equipment
for Green
Oaks park.
The following are my comments to the City Council:
A. With the early spring and the new equipment in April and
May I could hear the noise and see 50+ people in the park
at various times of the day from early morning until late at
night, but after the first few weeks of use, I feel there are
very few people using the equipment and that usage
lessens further as the summer gets hotter and people look
for swimming facilities as well as playground equipment.
B. If you still feel the equipment must be moved, then move the softball
field and place the playground equipment in the softball field location,
noise will be buffered by the hill without disrupting the use of the hill
for sledding, kite flying, soceer and other field sports.
C. The residents who live closest to the park knew of the
existence of the playground equipment when they purchased
their homes. My home faces the park, directly in front of
the hill where the equipment is proposed to be moved and I
strongly object to that site as only moving the problem.
D. I do not agree with spending $15,500 to move the park
equipment to another unsuitable location. Will the
equipment then be moved again next year when other
residents bring their complaints before you?
I support the Mayor's comments to put the equipment in storage and remove it
completely from the park.
Thank you for your work on this matter.
Sincerely,
/ y
a
X
�sb
CZ 7::T::H:AV�E:N
UNACCEPTABLE
i These locations are the only choices to subject all
residents to the noise equally.
1
I
•
Ia
I I
UNACCEPTABLE
i These locations are the only choices to subject all
residents to the noise equally.
1
I
•
February 21, 1986
Senator Tad Jude --
235 State Capitol
St. Paul, MN 55155
&A
CITY OF
PLYMOUTFF
SUBJECT: Transit Funding Legislation
Dear Tad:
During this session of the Legislature, I know that you will be dealing with
transit funding issues. Since Plymouth has taken the initiative to develop
Its own transit program, I want to share our perspective on the transit
funding issue.
Plymouth Metrolink is funded exclusively through property tax dollars paid
by residents and businesses in the community. From our perspective, the
legislature should resist any attempts to limit the ability of a munici-
pality to directly utilize all or a portion of its property tax contribution
to the Metropolitan Transit Taxing District for its own transit program
purposes.
Plymouth is also served by Medicine Lake Lines. Medicine Lake Lines, as the
MTC, is supported both through property tax dollars and state income tax
dollars. Obviously any cut in state or federal funding will impact greatly
upon Medicine Lake Lines' ability to adequately serve Plymouth. I recognize
that both the state and federal government have pressing reasons for limit-
ing their funding. I would hope, however, that the state legislature will
use this opportunity to develop a funding program for transit operators
which encourages experimental non-traditional transit demonstrations over
traditional transit programs which have proven incapable of supporting them-
selves except in the central business district. You have an unique oppor-
tunity before you to develop a transit funding system which promotes innova-
tion and cost effectiveness in transit delivery in place of the existing
"cash give-away program" which does little, if anything, to promote effec-
tiveness and innovation in transit affairs. I hope that the legislature
will work -with the appropriate agencies to this end.
Yours ver tr ,
Frank Boyles
Assistant City Manager
FB:jm
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559-2800
SENATOR TAD JLDE
❑State Capitol. Room 235
Saint Paul. Minnesota 55155
Phone: (612) 296-4248 (Office)
06907 Ives Lane
Maple Grove. Minnesota 55369
Phone: (612) 4244127 ( Home)
District 48:
Brooklyn Park • Corcoran
Hanover • Hassan • Loretto
Maple Grove • Medina
Osseo • Plymouth
Mr. Frank Boyles
Assistant City Manager
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Frank:
June 18, 1986
Senate
State of Minnesota
Thank you for your letter on filling me in on Plymouth's
perspective relating to the transit funding issue. As
we have discussed extensively before, legislation in
1981 established that a municipality may utilize up
to 90 percent of its property tax obligation to develop
its own transit program and that 10 percent is to go
to support regional transit. My understanding is that
this formula has not been changed ... but at times has
been misinterpreted.
In your letter you recognized that both the state and
federal government have pressing reasons for limiting
their funding for transit. While the regional transit
board has had a $4.5 million reduction in the amount
of transit assistance, my understanding is that Plymouth
should not be significantly affected by this. I am
told that because Plymouth's funding is based on property
tax revenues, it should not be affected by reduction
of RTB's other funding mechanisms. Similarly, cuts
on the federal level in the dollars available to local
transit should also have a minimal effect on Plymouth
because their program is tied to property tax revenues
rather than transit funding.
I share your belief and hope that a funding program
will be developed which will encourage experimental
nontraditional transit demonstrations over they current
"cash give-away program" which does not appear to be
as effective. I am told that the planning staff at
the RTB has completed Phase I of its transit service
needs assessment study and anticipates completing Phase
II by late this summer. It is likely that some innovative
approaches will come out of this study and Judy Hollander,
director of programs and planning (292-8789) would be
the person to contact for more information.
J(/
COMMITTEES • Governmental Operations • Judiciary • Public Utilities and State Regulated
Industries • Taxes and Tax Laws • Former Chairman, Judiciary Committee, House of Representatives
S I's C...,
Page 2
Mr. F. Boyles
June 18, 1986
Z was glad to hear from you and hope you will keep me
informed on any legislative matters of importance in
Plymouth. Thanks for keeping me on the list for PACT
minutes. You have my support and admiration for the
work you have done in helping to develop Plymouth's
transit program.
Sincerely,
TJ: DP
y� -r2t
fib° +
June 23, 1986
Plymouth City Offices
Plymouth Police Department
ATTN: Chief of Police
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55441
To the Chief of Police:
I am writing to you in regards to the Intervention Program that is set up in
the City of Plymouth. I just wanted to let you know that I think it's the
greatest idea for helping women when they are in a violent, or somewhat
similar, situation with a spouse, or whoever it may be. As you can assume, I
was in a bad situation and when the police were called they also called the
Intervention Program. W. the way, I just got my whole situation settled with
the courts and I was beat up way back in January. It probably wouldn't have
gone as good as it did if it weren't for the Intervention Program.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I never would have made it through my
ordeal without the help of Sue Beaty, from the Program that is set up through
Plymouth.
Sue helped me to cope with problems/questions I had, she was always there and
she went to the courts, more or less to fill in for me so she could let me know
what went on without my having to be there. She did a lot of corresponding back
and forth to get questions answered and to help me out in whatever way she
could. She was very eager to help.
The only problem is that there aren't enough of these programs around. If
there were more set up, and more well known, I think women would feel more
comfortable calling them. I didn't even know about this one until the police
officer called them.
I would also like to give credit to your crew there at your office. They
helped me out very politely and I didn't even worry or feel intimidated or
uncomfortable in the least. If you keep up this kind of action I think more
men will be put where they should be (behind bars) instead of running around
harming innocent women, who just aren't able to defend themselves.
Again, thank you. Also, would you please send the duplicate copy to the
Plymouth City Council office so they can see how helpful the Intervention
Program can be, and how appreciated it really is.
Sincerely,
bat a tee
JME:jme
Enclosure
MEMBERS
BLOOMINGTON
BROOKLYN CENTER
BROOKLYN PARK
BURNSVILLE
CHAMPLIN
CIRCLE PINES
COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
DEEPHAVEN
EDEN PRAIRIE
EDINA
EXCELSIOR
FRIDLEY
GREENWOOD
HASTINGS
HOPKINS
LAKE ST. CROIX BEACH
LAUDERDALE
LORETTO
MAPLE PLAIN
MAPLE W OOD
MINNETONKA
MINNETRISTA
NEW BRIGHTON
NORTH ST. PAUL
ORONO
OSSEO
PLYMOUTH
RICHFIELD
ROBBINSDALE
ROSEVILLE
ST. ANTHONY
ST. LOUIS PARK
SHAKOPEE
SHOREVIEW
SHOREWOOD
SPRING PARK
VADNAIS HEIGHTS
VICTORIA
WAYZATA
WOODLAND
SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORI
TO:
FROM:
SUBJ:
DATE:
MEMORANDUM
Directors and Member Managers
Members
tse.
H
and Associate l
Counsel
Results of Intervention in 1985
NSP Electric Rate Case
June 25, 1986
The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission issued its
Order in the 1985 NSP Electric Rate Case on June 2, 1986.
I have not enclosed the Order as it is 90 pages in
length. The Order is not final in the sense that the
company and several of the other parties who were not
successful on various issues have filed petitions for
rehearing and reconsideration. I expect that the peti-
tions will be denied. We will briefly respond to the
company's petition as it asks that one of our victories
be overturned. I do expect, however, an appeal by the
company to the Minnesota Court of Appeals. Certainly the
appeal will not be taken on all of the issues which the
company lost, but it may involve one or more of our
issues.
Our consultant has calculated an average savings per
residential customer resulting from the SRA's
intervention. The following is a list of savings by
issue per average residential bill ($417.25 as calculated
by NSP) for one year:
Delay in Payments Issues $ .71
Fuel Inventory .53
Return on Equity 6.92
Total $8.16
Two comments regarding this list are appropriate. First,
the numbers are the savings for one year, but it is very
likely the rates will be in effect at least two years,
which is the anticipated period before NSP files another
request. Secondly, on delay -in -payments and on the
savings from the return -on -equity issues, SRA was one of
several parties seeking the adjustment. We have assumed
that SRA should be given credit for 1/3 of the adjust-
ment. This is, of course, subjective. SRA was the only
party pressing for the adjustment on fuel inventory.
2000 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST • MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 • (612) 333-0543
S- kS�
An example of the meaning to individual cities is as
follows. Assuming a city with 5,000 households, the
savings to residential customers from the fuel inventory
issue alone would amount to approximately $5,300 over the
two years the order is expected to be in effect. Using
the total savings shown in the table above, a two-year
savings would be $81,600. Since business rates and usage
are much greater, the savings to them is very
substantial. Based on a $3,000 annual electric bill, a
commercial customer will save about $120 over the two
years because of the SRA intervention. Assuming that
there are 15,000 residents in the same city, SRA dues for
the period will be approximately $2,000. I think you
will agree with me this is a rather handsome return on
the dues.
In addition to the dollar savings in the Commission
Order, the SRA obtained an Order from the Commission that
NSP must study its losses on power delivered to its
subsidiary in Wisconsin and file that study in the next
rate case. We believe this will result in a savings of
several million dollars per year to Minnesota customers.
SRA was the only party asking for this Order.
The SRA also contributed to the intervention by the Board
of Water Commissioners of the City of St. Paul, and SRA
counsel handled the case. We were successful in
preserving the two municipal pumping rates. Because of
our efforts, the small municipal pumping rate received a
4% increase rather than a 25% increase requested by the
company or a 20% increase requested by the Department of
Public Service. The savings to an individual city can be
calculated by multiplying an annual billing on the small
pumping rate by 16%. Again, this can be expected to
remain in place for at least two years, so the saving is
doubled.
On the large pumping rate (called the demand -metered
rate), the class identity was saved and because we were
able to fight off a proposed demand ratchet, approximate-
ly 2% of billings was saved on the average.
Thank you for your continuing support of the Suburban
Rate Authority. If you have any questions, please feel
free to call me at (612) 333-0543.
Glenn Purdue
LeFEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY,
O'BRIEN & DRAWZ
2000 First Bank Place West
Minneapolis, MN 55402