Loading...
1992-01-21� CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA AGENDA January 21, 1992 - 7:30 P.M. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Agenda Adoption 4. Approval of January 7, 1992 Minutes. 5. Consent Calendar a. Acknowledgment of the December Fire Department Report. b. Acknowledgment of the Draft January Parks and Recreation Minutes. c. Acknowledgment of the December Treasurer's Report. ** d. Acknowledgment of the Trunk Highway 110/149 Workshop with MnDot - more information available on Tuesday. e. Adoption of Subdivision Ordinance Amendment - ORDINANCE N0. 282 , ._ f. Approval of the Proposed'Dakota County Legislative Policies for 1992 - RESOLIITION NO. 92-06 g. Approval of Funding Request for 1992 Deer Survey ** h. Approval to Purchase Snowbucket for 1991 Backhoe. i. Approval to Purchase 3/4 Ton Chevrolet Truck. j. Adoption of RESOLIITION N0. 92-07, Resolution Authorizing Advertisement for Bids for Improvements for Mendota Heights Road. • �� k. Approval of Transfer of Old Fire Hall. 1. Approval of the List of Contractors. *** m. Approval of the List of Claims (available Tuesday). * n. Approval to Replace Unmarked Squad Car. Ead of Conseat Calendar � 6. Public Co�ents 7. IInfinished and New Business a. Discussion on Kensington Park - Centex and NSP Alternatives -. .� b. Discussion on Air Noise Mitigation Part 150 Program. � � c. Discussion on Pay Equity Report 8. Council Commeats 9 . P,d j ourn CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO January 21, 1992 \ T0: Mayor and City Council FROM: Tom Lawell, City Adminis a SUBJECT: Add On Agenda for January 21st Council Meeting e One item has been added to the consent calendar (5n)*. Additional information is submitted for items 5d and 5h (**) . Item 5m, -The List of Claims - is attached for your review (***). 3. Actenda Adoption It is recommended that Council adopt the revised agenda printed on green paper. 5d. Acknowledgment of the Trunk Highway 110/149 Workshop Please attached memo. 5h. Ant�roval to Purchase Snowbucket for 1991 Backhoe. Please see attached memo and recommendation. 5m. List of Claims See attached List of Claims 5n. Approval to Replace Unmarked Squad Car._ See attached memo. �i��;i:�:7 , � CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA AGENDA January 21, 1992 - 7:30 P.M. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Agenda Adoption 4. Approval of January 7, 1992 Minutes. 5. Consent Calendar a. Acknowledgment of the December Fire Department Report. b. Acknowledgment of the Draft January Parks and Recreation Minutes. c. Acknowledgment of the December Treasurer�s Report. d. Acknowledgment of the Trunk Highway 110/149 Workshop with MnDot - more information available on Tuesday. e. Adoption of Subdivision Ordinance Amendment - ORDINANCE NO. 282 �' f. Approval of the Proposed Dakota County Legislative Policies for 1992 - RESOLIITION NO. 92-06 g. Approval of Funding Request for 1992 Deer Survey h. Approval to Purchase Snowbucket for 1991 Backhoe. i. Approval to Purchase 3/4 Ton Chevrolet Truck. j. Adoption of RESOLIITION NO. 92-07, Resolution Authorizing Advertisement for Bids for Improvements for Mendota Heights Road. k. Approval of Transfer of Old Fire Hall. l. Approval of the List of Contractors. m. Approval of the List of Claims (available Tuesday). End of Conseat Calendar 6. Public Comments . 7. IInfinished and New Busiaess a. Discussion on Kensington Park - Centex and NSP Alternatives b. Discussion on Air Noise Mitigation Part 150 Program. c. Discussion on Pay Equity Report � 8. Council Comments 9 . Ad j ourn Page No. 3195 January 7, 1992 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY � STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, January 7, 1992 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, was held at 7:30 o'clock P.M. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. Mayor Mertensotto called the meeting to order at 7:30 o'clock P.M. The following members were present: Mayor Mertensotto, Councilmembers Blesener, Cummins, Koch and Smith. AGENDA ADOPTION Councilmember Cummins moved adoption of the revised agenda for the meeting, revised to move item 5E, Birch Addition easement release, and 5F, subdivision of Kensington PUD outlot B, to the regular agenda. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion.�� Ayes : 5 �� Nays: 0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Councilmember Blesener moved approval of the minutes of the December 3, 1991 regular meeting. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Abstain: 1 Koch Councilmember Cummins moved approval of the minutes of the December 17, 1991 regular meeting. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Blesener moved approval of the consent calendar for the meeting along with authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein. a. Acknowledgment of the Code Enforcement . monthly report for Dec2mber: . • b. Acknowledgment of�the draft minutes of the November 26, 1991 Planning Commission. c. Adoption of Resolution No. 92-01, "RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING 1992 CITY DEPOSITORIES OF FUNDS." f � Page No. 3196 January 7, 1992 d. Adoption of Resolution No. 92-02, "RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PLEDGED SECURITIES FOR 1992." e. Approval of a contract with Station 19 Architects to provide architectural services for designing the buildings for Kensington Park, along with authorization for its execution by the Mayor. f. Authorization for the issuance of a purchase order for $14,254.00 to Minnesota Toro, Inc., for a snow blower and cab attachment for the large Toro mower. g. Authorization for issuance of a purchase order to Cedar Computer, Inc., for a Hewlett Packard Laserjet IIISi printer and options for a cost not to exceed $4,850. h. Approval of the list of contractor licenses dated January 7, 1992 and �' attached hereto. i. Approval of the list of claims dated January 7, 1992 and totalling $331,674.06. �Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 EASEMENT RELEASE Council acknowledged a memo from Public Works Director Danielson regarding the release of a slope easement over the Koepke property on •Freeway Road. � � jMayor Mertensotto pointed out several � `references in the stipulation for easement Frelease which would release easement area tacross the Koepke property and other property. }He felt that the stipulation should be revised ;so that the release relates only to the }applicant's (Koepke) property. `Councilmember Cummins moved to approve the 'Stipula�ion for Release of Easement , 'conditioned upon revisions to remove reference to other property, so that the release relates only to the Koepke property, and to authorize e� Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 KENSINGTON POND DIVISION Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Page No. 3197 January 7, 1992 execution of a revised Stipulation by the Mayor. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Council acknowledged a report from Public Works Director Danielson regarding a request from Centex Homes for approval of the division of outlot B of the Kensington PUD. Responding to a question from Mayor Mertensotto, Administrator Lawell explained that when the initial manor home plan was discussed it included manor homes on both sides of the pond located on Outlot B. Phase II approval replaced the manor homes on the east side of the pond with townhomes, and there will be separate homeowners associations for the townhomes and manor homes. As currently platted, the pond would belong to only the manor home associations, which would mean that people living on the townhome•side of the pond would Mot have access to it. He stated that Centex wishes to divide the outlot to provide half of the pond to each of the associations for maintenance purposes. Mayor Mertensotto asked whether Centex is � amenable to the city's request for additional land for the Kensington park. Administrator Lawell responded that Centex is not willing to donate the land but would work out an arrangement for the sale of the land to the city at fair market value ($20,000 to $25,000) plus their costs of about $13,000. Accommodating the request would require moving two carriage homes and a cul-de-sac. He stated that at the next Council meeting, staff will present some options on the matter as well as information on the utility pole/power line issue. Councilme r Blesener m ved adoption of Resolution No. �63-; �RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUBDIVISION OF OUTLOT B', •KENSIIJG'FON PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 28 NORTH, RANG � DAKOTA•COUNTY, MINNESOTA." Councilme er Blesener seconded the motion. BID AWARD, BACKHOE Ayes: .5 Nays: 0 Page No. 3198 January 7, 1992 fCouncil acknowledged a tabulation of bids �received for the purchase of a �tractor/loader/backhoe for the Street ?Department. Public Works Director Danielson reviewed the bids for Council and the audience. Councilmember Blesener moved to authorize the purchase o.� a tractor/loader/backhoe from J.I. �Case, Inc. for a 1991 Case for their low bid �of $29, 730. ,Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion. ACTING MAYOR Councilmember Blesener moved that Councilmember Cummins be appointed to serve as � Acting Mayor during any absences of Mayor Mertensotto in 1992. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 HEALTH OFFICER Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 i �- Councilmember Cummins moved that Dr. Thaddeus Chao be reappointed to serve as the City's Health Officer for 1992. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER Councilmember Blesener moved to designate the Sun-Current as the City's official newspaper for 1992. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 BOARD OF REVIEW Council acknowledged a memo from the City Clerk regarding the scheduling of the annual Board of Review/Equalization. Councilmember Blesener moved to schedule the Board of Review/Equalization as part of the regularly scheduled April 21, 1992 Council meeting, at 7:30 P.M. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 MN/DOT LAND PURCHASE Council acknowledged a memo from Public Works Director Danielson regarding the sale of right-of-way to Mn/DOT for construction of a T.H: 55 frontage road (Parcel 207). It was noted in the memo that at its December 3, 1991 f� V Page No. 3199 January 7, 1992 discussion on the matter, Council accepted the Mn/DOT offer for the right-of-way contingent upon installation of curb and gutter. Council was informed that because the cost of the road would be greatly increased, Mn/DOT will only install curb and gutter and storm sewer along the 800 foot long frontage road if the City is willing to pay for those improvements. Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that Council has approved the sale with the curb and gutter condition, and suggested that the matter be pulled off of the agenda subject to further review in the future. He stated that in the event the City should eventually decide to connect the frontage road�to the west, curb and gutter would have to be installed and Mn/DOT would not be required to participate. He also pointed out that the City is currently negotiating with Mn/DOT over storm sewer matters in connection with the Mendota Interchange Project. � ` PART 150 PROGRAM Council acknowledged a report from Administrative Assistant Batchelder regarding alternatives for use of the Part 150 air noise � mitigation program funds. Mayor Mertensotto stated that the LDN 65 contour for determining air noise impact is not acceptable. He pointed out that the contour does not address very high sound exposure levels in the Mendota Heights/Eagan corridor, and that the repeated overflights far exceed LDN 65, yet with the exception of the Furlong area and a small number of homes outside of that neighborhood, none of the homes in the corridor would be eligible for Part 150 funding. Administrator Lawell responded that the appropriateness of LDN 65 was discussed at the last meeting of MAC and representatives of the cities surrounding MSP. He did not believe MSP would have much chance of changing the LDN 65 standard established by the FAA. He .,. further stated that the city has questioned -the preliminary 1996 LDN 65 contour assumptions and has asked for written information from the MAC, so that a consultant chosen by the City could re-run the contour. He felt that it was strange that the Rogers Lake and Curley neighborhoods just miss being in the contour and that the city should have r C) Page No. 3200 January 7, 1992 the information to determine whether the projection is correct. Mayor Mertensotto stated that it is easy to talk about a LDN 65 contour standard, but pointed out that MAC revenue from a ticket tax and $2 million from Northwest Airlines could generate as much as $12 million, all of which will be applied on the federal standard. Those funds will be locally generated, and should not be subject to the FAA standard. Administrator Lawell stated that the question has been put to the cities has only been about allocation of the federal funding. He further stated that all of the cities agree that the standard applies only to the federally mandated and restricted Part 150 program and does not apply to local money. He informed Council that many residents in the Furlong area have indicated that they would be interested in sound insulation and are not interested in being bought out in the future. On the other hand,''some of the Furlong residents do wish to be bought out. He suggested that Council may want to consider questionnaires to get input from the Furlong residents on how to use the Part 150 allocation. The City must respond to MAC by January 31st on how the funds will be spent. Councilmember Cummins asked if the city is able to bank its 1992 allocation for future use. Administrator Lawell responded that the FAA would like the cities to be as specific as possible as to how much they will spend and how it will be spent. It also requires that all of the 1992 Part 150 allocation to MAC be spent in 1992. If the city elects to bankroll its 1992 amount, the money will be used by some other community, and Mendota Heights would have to get a commitment that the money would be available for its use in the future. Responding to questions from Council, Administrator Lawell stated that while it may be possible to use Part 150 funds to buy out isolated houses, the use of the funds cannot be mixed within a neighborhood. It would not be possible to use the funding for purchase of some of the homes in the Furlong area and insulation of others. r- ti Page No. 3201 January 7, 1992 After discussion, Council directed that representatives of the MAC be requested to attend the January 21st meeting. Council further directed that notice of the meeting be sent to all residents who are impacted by the program. PUBLIC HEARING: Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the EASEMENT VACATIONS purpose of..a public hearing on the vacation of a utility easement over Lot l, Block 4 of the Furlong Addition (Schwartz property), located at the end of Kendon Lane, and the vacation of right-of-way for a cul-de-sac at the end of Furlong Avenue, lying in part on Lot 1, Block 3, and Lot 11, Block 2 of the Furlong Addition (Tousignant and Berskow properties.). Engineer Klayton Eckles was present and informed Council that the City does not need the utility easement over the Schwartz property and that the property owner has given the City a utility easement which was needed for the Furlong project. With respect t� the Tousignant propert�, he explained that the survey done for the property owner was in error by about 40 feet, and as a result part of his home is on the right-of-way. He informed Council that the right-of-way is not needed and that the owner has agreed to trade an easement for the Furlong project for part of the right-of-way. Mayor Mertensotto asked for questions and comments from the audience. There being no questions or comments, Councilmember Blesener moved that the hearing be closed. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Cummins moved adoption of Resolution No. 92-04, "RESOLUTION APPROVING VACATION OF A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT." Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Blesener moved adoption of Resolution No. 92-05, "RESOLUTION APPROVING VACATION OF A STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY." Councilmember Koch seconded the motion Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 �- �a Page No. 3202 %' January 7, 1992 COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Cummins asked whether any major issues will come before Council in 1992. Administrator Lawell briefly reviewed a number of pending issues. Councilmember Blesener asked about the status of Royal Redeemer Church's acquisition of the tax forfeit land adj acer�t to the church property. .She suggested that the City should inform the Council of its support of the church's acquisition of the land. Councilmember Blesener noted reference in the Administrative Assistant's planning synopsis tht the church would like to put a storage building on the tax forfeit land. She did not feel that an accessory structure would be appropriately placed on the forfeited land but rather that it should be placed further back on the church property. ADJOURN There being no further business to come before the Council, Councilmember Koch moved that the meeting be adjourned. �' CounciTmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 8:36 o�clock P.M. Kathleen M. Swanson City Clerk ATTEST: Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor MENDOTA HEIGHTS FIRE DEPARTMENT DECEMBER 1991 MONTHLY REPORT FIRE CALLS NO. 91220 - 91231 FlRE ALARMS DISPATCHED: NUMBER ACTUAL FIRES Structure - MH Commercial Structure - MH Residentiai Structure - Contract Areas Vehicie - MH 1 Vehlcle - Contract Areas Grass/Brush/No Value MH Grass/Brush/No Value Contract MEDICAL Assist 1 Extrication HAZARDOUS SITUATION Spilis/Leaks Arcing/Shorting Chemical Power Llne Down FALSE ALARM Residential Malfunction Commercial Malfunction 5 Unintentional - Commercial 1 Unintentional - Residential 2 Criminal ;OOD INTENT Smoke Scare Steam Mistaken for Smoke Other 2 MUTUAL AID TOTAL CALLS 12 LOCATION OF FIRE ALARMS: � TO DATE MENDOTAHEIGHTS 11 185 MENDOTA 0 5 SUNFISH LAKE 0 13 LILYDALE 1 2 5 OTHER 3 TOTAL 12 231 WORK PERFORMED HOURS TO DATE FIRE CALLS 208 4189 MEETINGS 7 5 751.5 DRILLS 1 11 1467 WEEKLY CLEAN-UP 2 5 355.5 SPECIAL ACTIVITY 129 1607 ADMINISTATIVE 0 954 'IRE MARSHAL 93.5 1049.5 " TOTALS 641.5 10374 NUMBER OF CALLS: 1 2 STRUCTURE CONTENTS MISC. TOTALS TO DATE $0 $226,250 $5,600 $19,000 $47,000 TOTAL MONTHLY FlRE LOSSES $0 $0 $0 FlRE LOSS TOTALS MENDOTA HEIGHTS ALL FIRES, ALL AREAS (MONTH) $0 $297,850 MEND. HTS.ONLY STRUCT/CONTENTS $225,750 MEND. HTS.ONLY MISCELLANEOUS $19,500 MEND. HTS. TOTAL LOSS TO DATE �$245,250 BILLING FOR SERVICES LAST YEAR 187 15 15 25 5 247 LAST YEAR 4589 760 884.5 1073 605 1474 830.5 10216 AGENCY THIS MONTH TO DATE M WDOT $0 MILW. RR $0 CNR RR $0 OTFfRS: $0 TOTALS: $0 $0 FlRE MARSHAL'S TIME FOR MONTH INSPECTIONS INVESTIGATIONS RE-INSPECTION MEETINGS ADMINISTRATION SPECIAL PROJECTS TOTAL 31.5 5.5 6.5 14.5 33.5 2 93.5 REMARKS: SEE OTHER SIDE FOR SYNOPSIS �.� L..0 1 SYNOPSIS The department responded to 12 fire calls during the month of December. This month was a relatively quiet month. The only major incident was a vehicle fire on December 13 on Highway 149 and I-494. Damage was estimated at approximately $1,000. We ended the year with a total of 231 calls. This is 16 calls less than 1990. TRAINING The monthly squad drills dealt with the inspection, cleaning, and use of ladders on the fire ground. The monthly department drill was spent on the operation of automatic sprinklers. The class was taught by one of our firefighters, Roy Kingsley, who maintains, inspects and installs automatic sprinkler systems for General Sprinkler. - OTHER TRAINING Some of our firefighters participated Refresher Course (16 hours). This course recertified with the State of Minnesota as m in the First Responder is required to be a First Responder. :� DRAF1' CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES JANLTARY 14 , 19 9 2 The regular meeting of the Menc�ota Heights Parks and Recreation Commission was held on Tuesday, January 14, 1992, in the City Hall Large conference Room, 1101 Victoria Curve. The meeting was called to order at 7:10 o'clock P.M. The following Commission members were present: Huber, Spicer, Damberg, Lundeen. Commissioner Hunter arrived late. Commissioners Katz and Kleinglass were excused. Also present were Parks Project Manager Guy Kullander and Administrative Assistant Kevin Batchelder. Guests at the meeting included Dave Libra, Mend-Eagan Soccer; Keith Campbell, Sting Soccer and John Steffi of the Mendota Heights Jaycees. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Damberg moved approval of the December 10, 1991 Parks and Recreation Minutes. �- Commissioner Spicer seconded �he motion. AYES: 4 NAYS: 0 KENSINGTON BUILDINGS Chair Huber introduced Keith Sjoquist, of Station 19 Architects, who was present to discuss the preliminary designs of the Kensington buildings. Parks Project Manager Kullander explained that the City Council had contracted Station 19 for the design of the Kensington buildings and that Station 19 Architects had met with staff and Councilmember Blesener last week to discuss preliminary designs. Chair Huber stated the plans that Mr. Sjoquist is presenting are based on input from that meeting and from the City Council meeting in December. Mr. Sjoquist presented drawings showing a site plan and the building elevations. Mr. Sjoquist explained how the parking lot and soccer field locations affected the design and location of the comfort station area. Mr. Sjoquist described the location of the comfort station as being in the southwest area of the triangular shaped , parcel north of the soccer field. Mr. Sjoquist explained that most users of the comfort station will• be present for soccer games. He stated that not as many people using the trails would be users of the comfort station. Mr. Sjoquist stated the location of the comfort station is based on an attempt to reduce any activity in the goal areas behind the soccer fields. The location of the � January 14, 1992 Page 2 comfort station is midway between the two soccer fields. Mr. Sjoquist explained two picnic shelters will be flanking the comfort station. He stated this will allow activities to be watched from either side of the comfort station. There will be a shelter available for parents to watch children playing at the play equipment or to watch children playing on the soccer fields. Mr. Sjoquist explained that the play area would be near the parking lot and away from the goal areas behind the soccer fields to prevent stray balls from entering the play equipment area. Mr. Sjoquist explained the bike path layout and its design to avoid conflict with the station users. Mr. Sjoquist explained the drop off area in the parking lot design. Mr. Sjoquist stated one of the directions he had been given at the staff ineeting was to reduce the bathrooms to a singly occupancy level of use for both the men's and women's bathroom to allow more room for concession`and storage facilities. Mr. Sjoquist explained the net storage area and the concession/storage area that would be facing the fields. He explained that the comfort station faces the fields at a 45 degree angle and that the two walls of the comfort station that are closet to the fields are the concessions and the storage areas. Mr. Sjoquist showed a vending machine area on the design that could accommodate a bench should vending machines not be placed in this area. Mr. Sjoquist stated a dutch door had been designed to service as a concession window. Mr. Sjoquist explained the proposed picnic shelter plan stating there is room for two picnic tables under each of the two picnic shelters. Mr. Sjoquist explained that the exterior materials for all of these buildings is proposed to be similar to Mendakota Park. He stated they are proposing ma.sonry structures with wood shingles and concrete floors. The exterior materials are proposed to consist of rock faced concrete block, metal door frames, a smooth concrete band and wooden beams for the roof structure. Chair Huber inquired about the dimensions of the building. Mr. Sjoquist stated the building is 20 feet by 22 feet and that the concession area is 11 feet _ -by 15 feet. Mr. Keith Campbell inquired about the possibility of a window with a roll down door for the concessions area. Mr. Sjoquist stated that his understanding was this concession area does not anticipate a high level of use and the dutch door design should be adequate to handle anticipated use for concessions. :. January 14, 1992 Page 3 Chair Huber inquired about plumbing for the concession area. Mr. Sjoquist stated this could be easily stubbed in from the maintenance area. Mr. Sjoquist stated that Health Department regulations would require significantly increased costs, were a three tub sink and plumbing required for food dispensing. Chair Huber inquired about the difference in having a dutch door verses a roll down window for concession service. Parks Project Ma.nager Kullander estimated it would cost an extra $1,200 to $1,600 to install a roll down window. He stated the building has to be structurally built now to have the window and this would be expensive if done at a later date. The Commission discussed concessions windows verses dutch door. Parks Project Manger Kullander estimated it would cost approximately $800 to $1,000 additionally for a half window opening. Chair Huber inquired about the total estimate for the building. Mr. Sjoquist stated he does not have final figures at this point but would estimate approximately $60,000 for the� three buildings. Chair Huber inquired how this compared to the original estimate for the first plan shown for buildings. Parks Project Manager Kullander stated that the fixed pl.umbing cost had significantly increased the costs of the building. He stated his original design had shown a$30,000 building and now it is a$60,000 building. He stated we could stub in for a sink in the concessions area and, at a later date, it would cost approximately $1,000 to purchase a single compartment sink plus labor costs for installation. Mr. Campbell stated the soccer groups will be using the concession areas for tournaments and scheduled games and it is highly likely there would be two people serving or selling concessions at one time. He stated he felt a three foot wide dutch door was not adequate. Parks Project Manager Kullander stated either the dutch door or the half window option provides a three foot opening. Mr. Sjoquist suggested a wider four foot dutch door could be used and this would provide adequate room for two people to serve concessions. Mr. Sjoquist stated electric outlets would be available in the concession area to accommodate portable refrigerating uni.�s. The Parks Commission came to a consensus that the con�ession area should be the wider four foot dutch doo�. The vending area was discussed and it was determined that if no vending machines were placed.in the vending area this would make an appropriate area to install a bench for use as a sheltered sitting space. January 14, 1992 Page 4 KENSINGTON PAR.K UPDATE Administrative Assistant Batchelder explained that the Parks Commission recommendation in December on the final concept design for Kensington Park had gone to the City Council at their Dece�nber 17th meeting. He stated at that meeting the City Council had delayed determination of the final concept design and directed staff to begin negotiations with Centex and NSP about either providing more room for soccer fields or to address the power lines over the eastern fields. Administrative Assistant Batchelder stated that Council had directed staff to inquire if NSP was going to be placing new poles at that power line in the near future as part of NSP's capital improvement plans. Parks Project Manager Kullander stated NSP had indicated they do not have any capital improvement plans to put new poles in this location. He stated at Council's direction, staff had contacted both Centex and NSP�and that the memorandum prepared for this evening's meeting included the options that are an outcome of those discussions. He stated Option 1 was to bury the power lines underground as they enter through the park. Parks Project Manager Kullander stated Centex had offered to pay half the costs to bury the power lines, as this would increase the value of their properties adjacent to the park. He stated NSP had indicated burying the power lines would cost approximately $500,000. He stated the high costs are due to the mechanical equipment necessary to keep underground power lines cool. Parks Project Manager�Kullander stated that the only incidence where NSP had buried power lines were similar with voltage levels at the MSP Airport and in downtown Minneapolis. Parks Project Manager Kullander stated Option 2 was to add a mid point pole that would raise the power lines to a higher elevation and that this Option would cost approxima.tely $25,000. He explained that a mid point pole stresses the other existing poles and so part of the cost is to remove the existing poles and replace them with one taller pole. He explained this would raise the lines at the sag point being over the fields. Parks Project Manager Kullander stated Option 3 was to shift the poles 70 feet to the east and stated this design is shown on the sketch in the memo handed out this evening. He stated the shifting of power lines would impact two or three Centex lots which would require easement purchases and the costs to move the poles. He estimated this cost at $100,000. A January 14, 1992 Page 5 Parks Project Manager Kullander stated the City had also met with Centex representatives about possibly extending the park boundaries further to the west. He stated Option 4 had a design based on the City purchasing a 23 foot wide strip from Centex. He explained the site plan shows Bedford Court moving to the west and the buildings moving to the west and would require setback variances from the City Council. He stated Centex estimated $13,000 in planning and replatting costs and would be willing to sell the 23 foot strip of land for about $2.00 per square foot. Parks Project Manager Kullander estimated the cost for the 23 foot wide strip at $35, 000. He mentioned Centex had indicated they be willing to discuss the acquisition of this 23 foot wide strip at a reduced or zero cost if the City would consider surmountable curbs throughout the project. Parks Project Manager Kullander stated Option 5 would have the City purchase Lots 1 and 2 which is approximately 2.6 acres of land iiicluding 22 units. He stated Centex would want to be reimbursed for lost profit and land costs. Centex estimated this Option at $400,•000. Chair Huber stated it appears Options 1, 3 and 5 are out of the question and are too expensive to consider. Parks Project Manager Kullander stated the power lines are cutting across 50 feet of the eastern field and if the City were able to move the soccer site plan over 23 feet under Option 4 it would still be underneath the high wires. Parks Project Manager Kullander stated the existing H structure for the power lines are 65 foot structures with 25 feet of the structure being buried and the structure being 40 feet above ground. He stated the new H structure that NSP would use to replace the old structure was 85 feet in height of which about approximately 30 feet would be buried depending on soils. He stated this would provide an extra 15 or 25 feet in height of the powerlines and would eliminate the sag point being over the fields. Chair Huber inquired amongst the Parks Commissioners about support for various options. Commissioner Spicer stated the option to raise the powerlines for $25, 000 was his preferred option. Chair Huber stated that the space in setbacks between the fields had been a Council consideration�as a safety issue. Mr. Keith Campbell stated it would be necessary to have 50 feet between the fields, that it would be nice to have an additional 10 feet from the 40 feet shown on the current plans. Mr. Campbell stated the west side of the west field could hold bleachers instead of placing them between the two fields. Parks Project Manager Rullander stated retaining January 14, 1992 Page 6 walls built on the south end of the west field would allow bleachers to be on that side. He also stated it was appropriate to have the bleachers as close to the center of the field as possible. Commissioner Spicer stated it made the most sense to him to put 50 feet between the fields and raise the powerlines. Mr. Campbell reiterated his concern that there should not be soccer fields underneath the power line as it affects the play too much. Commissioner Lundeen stated the constraints of the site have left the Parks Commission with a field that has powerlines over it. He stated this is what the Commission has to deal with and his concern is that these fields are becoming more expensive. Commissioner Lundeen stated that there were other items in the referendum he would rather spend $35,000 on and this field could be made slightly smaller to be brought out from underneath the powerlines. Commissioner Lundeen stated that since the Commission received the original priorities of the soccer interests they have added considerable expense to the �cost of Kensington Park attempting to meet the wishes of the soccer group. He stated that the Commission has to decide if the money is well spent. Chair Huber asked for the feeling of the Parks Commission about the options available for powerlines or land purchase. The Commission stated they preferred the raising of the power line and did not prefer a land purchase from Centex Homes. Mr. Campbell stated it would be nice if staff could approach Centex and see if a 10 foot strip of land could be obtained in order to allow 10 feet of room for bleachers between the fields. Parks Project Ma.nager Kullander estimated that a 10 foot strip of land would still cost $13,500 which Centex anticipates for replatting and planning costs and the $2.00 per square foot for the land purchase. Chair Huber stated the Parks Commission should recommend that $25,000 be budgeted for raising of the powerlines but kept in reserve until after the fields are constructed to see how the fields fit and the extent of the problem. The Parks Commission was of the consensus that this is the proper approach for the soccer area. RECREATION PROGRAMMING AND STAFFING Administrative Assistant Batchelder explained that staff January 14, 1992 Page 7 is currently working on an inventory of what neighboring communities are providing for park services in order to compare this inventory with what organizations are providing currently in Mendota Heights. He stated this comparison should enable the City to look at where gaps in service for recreation programming exist�and determine what gaps in service the City might wish to fill. He stated at this point the City could then begin to look at recreation staffing after determining what gaps in recreation service we decide to fill. Commissioner Damberg stated she had requested this item be placed on the agenda because she feels the City needs to be prepared for an increase in recreation demands with the new fields and facilities we have recently built. She stated that upon reviewing brochures of other cities that she was aware that they provide a full range of recreation services including programs of a non athletic nature such as enrichment and arts and crafts. Commissioner Damberg also stated that in the winter time she does not see much use of �he park system outside of skating and hockey. She stated she feels the City should consider winter time enhancements for parks including skiing and other activities. Chair Huber stated softball programming will be the first area of need the City will have to address. He stated the City should maybe put its "toe" in the water by offering a late summer softball league or fall league to promote.our new fields and to allow the City to get an idea of what type of softball demand exists in our community. Commissioner Lundeen stated he would not like to force use on our new fields at Mendakota too early if the grass is not ready. He stated however a fall softball league would draw attention to our programs and help the City determine demand. Commissioner Damberg stated she would also like to see the City look at nature opportunities for recreation programming and suggested that this could be done in conjunction with Dodge Nature Center. She stated that Valley Park is a significant natural amenity and there are many people in the community that would interested in nature programs. Administrative Assistant Batchelder stated he would be prepared to have a softball field reservation policy, a concessions use policy and the recreation inventory prepared for the February meeting. January 14, 1992 Page 8 WILD FLOWERS ALONG TRAILWAYS Commissioner Damberg stated she is very interested in seeing the City look at the placement of wild flowers along our bike trails. She stated she feels it is appropriate to start �ooking at what areas of the bike system might be appropriate for this improvement. Commissioner Damberg passed around a book on wild flowers showing colored pictures of some hearty flower species that would be quiet attractive for Mendota Heights. She stated the Butterfly�Weed, the Columnbine, the Prairie Corn Flower and the Goldenrod are all hearty, established plants in our vicinity that would do quite well and be quite beautiful. Commissioner Damberg stated it would take some effort and cost on the City's part to establish wild flowers and to seed these areas. She stated there are a lot of volunteer resources in the community to draw upon to do this, however, she feels the effort is worthwhile as this would really beautify our community and could become a show place for our City. �- Parks Project Manager Kullander stated current park maintenance staffing is not conducive to this type of work and that mostly part time workers are used for summer maintenance. He stated a possible approach to wild flowers along the trails could be to allocate some money for the first year in order to turn the land, rake it out, kill the weeds, rake it out again and seed., He stated the maintenance would include mowing this to six inch level in the fall and over-seeding it for the second year. He further stated it would be the third year before it could be determined if the seed has taken and would begin to survive on its own without much City maintenance. Parks Project Manager Kullander stated the appropriate approach might be a pilot program where the City would contract with professional landscapers to provide a few pilot locations. He stated a possible way would be to allocate money each year to pay for the maintenance by part time workers once the areas have been established. Parks Project Manager Kullander stated the City currently budgets $10, 000 a year for the botxlevard tree program out of the General Fund. He stated it would be possible to request money out of the Special Park Fund for the first year and the City could consider budgeting out of the General Fund in following years for a wild flower program. Commissioner Damberg stated her intent was to have the City take stock of the interest of having wild flowers January 14, 1992 Page 9 and to identify a few areas where it could possibly be done. She stated it would take some evaluation to determine the appropriate flowers and native grasses. Parks Project Manager Kullander stated the soil preparation was the most difficult aspect of establishing wild flowers. Chair Huber stated the City's Operating Budget would be the preferred.funding method for a pilot project. A figure of $2,000 annually was discussed. Commissioner Spicer and Commissioner Lundeen stated they are in favor of a pilot proj ect . Commissioner Lundeen stated he would like to see something like this work, however, he feels that this type of project would need a lot of nurturing. Commissioner Hunter stated he was not a big fan of wild flowers along the trails, however, if there was interest he would not get into the Commission's way. Chair Huber directed staff to investigate how the budget for parks finished in 1991 and had there been enough money left over in the 1991 Budget to have done a project of this nature. Commissioner Dambe�rg stated there was a possibility of volunteers from the community helping the City implement this project. The Commission directed staff to provide more information at the next meeting. SIBLEY PLAY EQUIPMENT Commissioner Spicer inquired if the City could realize savings by doing two park equipment contracts at one time? Parks Project Manager Kullander stated there would not likely be significant savings as Sibley will be built on an industrial strength basis with mostly metal verses the plastic equipment that has been placed at other parks. The consensus of the Parks Commission was to defer the Sibley play equipment for discusaion at the July 1992 meeting. VERBAL UPDATES Administrative Assistant Batchelder stated he had a request to reserve tennis courts by an instructor working for Mend-Eagan. He stated the instructor desired to reserve Valley Park on Tuesday and Thursday evenings from 4:00 P.M. to 7:15 P.M. and on Saturday and Sunday's from �'�10:00 A.M.until 1:00 P.M. for boys and girls ages 4 to 15. Administrative Assistant Batchelder stated Valley Park was the most popular court in town and that in the past, Mend-Eagan had used Sibley Courts. He stated the City's policy was first come, first serve except for institutional or civic groups such as Mend-Eagan, St. Thomas Academy and Visitation. Commissioner Spicer January 14, 1992 Page 10 stated he would discuss this at the next Mend-Eagan meeting and report back at the February Parks meeting. Mr. John Steffi introduced himself as a new member of Mendota Heights Jaycees. He stated his group was interested in a commur�ity project such as a garden, and in possibly providing events in the parks, such as an ensemble concert. Commissioner Damberg and Mr. Steffi discussed possible ventures, and it was pointed out that we have a new shelter/bandstand at Mendakota Park. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the Parks and Recreation Commission adjourned the meeting at 8:50 o'clock P.M. Respectfully submitted, Kevin Batchelder � Administrative Assistant CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS TREASIIRER' S REPORT, DECIIi+iBER, 19 91 DAROTA COIINTY STATE BANR Checking Account 3.85� Savings Account 3.75°s C.D. Rep. Collateral - Bonds Gov't. Guar. CHEROREE STATE BANR BALANCE $ <19,652.17> .$ 540.19 0 $ <19,111.98> $ 500,000.00 $ 100,000.00 C.D. due 1/31/92 � 5.0� $ 350,000.00 Saving Cert. 2/28/92 @ 5 1/4� S 13,952.59 $ 363,952.59 Collateral - Bonds $ 500,000.00 Gov't. Guar. $ 100,0,00.00 FNMA 7.30% 12/2/98 FBS Fed. Farm. Cr. 6.7� Notes Due 12-5-96 (FBS) U.S. Treasury S 5/8s 5-15-93 Notes (FBS) GNNlA Mtg . Pool 9 °s U.S. Treasury Money Mkt Gov�t. Securities Fund Speco Funding Bk Accept 1/17/92 5.1% TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE: Funds Available 12/31/90 COLLATERAL $600,000.00 $ 600,000.00 Value 11-30-91 (est.) $ 499,695.50 $ 500,750.00 $ 500,008.00 $ 500,625.00 $ 498,671.88 $ 527,000.00 $ 259,258.03 $ 274,226.16 $2,714,113.55 $3,318,000.00 $1,200,000.00 $1,999,764.00 $ 997,033.00 $1,000,000.00 $7,013,620.57 $6,192,720.44 Rates Dec. 31 Monev Market Bank 3.850 Fid 4.68% Escrow Funds (American National Bank) 12-30-91 City Hall Buildings Railroad Crossing TOTAL LES:kkb $ 15,451.70 5169,932.54 $185,384.24 T0: FROM: CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO January 16, 1992 Ma.yor, City Council and City Adminis James E. Daniels n , Public Works Direct SUBJECT: Trunk Highway 110/149 Workshop with Mn/DOT DISCUSSION• Over the past year Mn/DOT and City staff have been working to prepare a plan to upgrade Dodd Road (T.H. 149) at its intersection with Trunk Highway 110. During preparation of this plan, Mn/DOT granted the City a request to establish a new MSA route. This new route provides a ring road with a bridge over Trunk Highway 110 around the shopping center. The Mn/DOT planners working on the Dodd Road upgrade plan feel that this new MSA route creates some unique opportu- nities for them and the City to work together for an improved solution to the traffic patterns through the area. They would like to discuss these ideas with the City Council. We feel that these discussions could best be presented in a workshop format rather than at a'regular City Council meeting. Tom Lawell and I are meeting with the Mn/DOT staff inembers in- volved in this proposal the morning of the Council meeting, January 21. At this meeting with Mn/DOT we will establish some dates and times that would be convenient with them for a meeting. We will be shooting for a time somewhere late in February, please bring your calendars to the Council meeting so that we can establish a date and time for the Council workshop. ACTION REOUIRED: For information only. JED : dfw CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO January� 21, 1992 T0: Mayor and City Council FROM: Tom Lawell, City Administ SUBJECT: Trunk Highway 110/149 Workshop DISCIISSION This morning Jim Danielson and I met with representatives from MnDOT to discuss traffic issues related to the Trunk 110/149 intersection. As described in the memo included with your packet, a number of roadway improvements have been discussed for this area, and MnDOT would like an opportunity to present these ideas to the Council. It has been suggested that Council devote a workshop session to this issue due to its long range implications for the community. A meeting sometime in the month of February has been envisioned. Two possible workshop��dates which appear promising are Thursday, February 13th or Thursday, February 20th. MnDOT officials have confirmed they are available on either of these dates. Specific dates which are unworkable for MnDOT include February 3, 10 , 11 and 12 . ACTION REQIIIRED Council should discuss establishing an actual date and time for the workshop. Council should also consider if anyone should be specifically invited to attend the workshop (Commission members, affected business and landowners, etc.). MTL:kkb CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO January 16, 1992 To: Mayor, City Council and City Administ From: Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assi�ti,��t� Subject: Subdivision Ordinance Amendment BACRGROUND At the December 3, 1991 City Council meeting, the Council accepted the Planning Commission recommendation to amend the Subdivision Ordinance to reflect current procedures regarding final platting. For the past twelve years final plat review has been performed by City Council after review for compliance with the approved preliminary plat by the Engineering Department. After accepting the Planning Commission recommendation, Council directed staff to provide the appropriate ordinance amendment showing final plat approval by the City Council, except in cases of ma.terial changes subsequent to Preliminary Plat approval. DISCIISSION The intent of the proposed Subdivision Ordinance amendment is to match ordinance language with current practice and procedural policy. Final Plat policy was considered by Council during the discussion of the "Procedural Requirements for Planning Applications" which was adopted in December to be consistent with the new Zoning Ordinance. The attached proposed ordinance � amendment will make subdivision provisions consistent with policy. There are two copies of the proposed ordinance amendment attached. One copy highlights the changes by the use of underlining to highlight new or additional language and the use of strikethrough to highlight eliminated language. The other copy shows the proposed ordinance language in final form as it will appear in the Subdivision Ordinance and as it will appear in published form when summary publication occurs, should Council decide to adopt the proposed changes. In addition to the highlighted changes, Council should note that Section 3.2(1) and Section 3.2(2) have been flip-flopped. Where the Planning Commission approval appeared above the City , Council approval in the Subdivision Ordinance, in the proposed �7iY version the City Council approval language will be first in order. , ACTION REQUIRED If the Council so desires, they should pass a motion adopting Ordinance No. 282, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE N0. 301. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 282 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 301 Section 1. Ordinance No. 301, known and referred to as "AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS FOR THE SUBDIVISION AND PLATTING OF LAND WITHIN THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, DEFINING CERTAIN TERMS USED THEREIN; PROVIDING FOR THE PREPARATION OF PLATS; PROVIDING FOR THE INSTALLATION OF STREETS AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE DEDICATION OF CERTAIN LAND FOR PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS; ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR APPROVAL AND THE RECORDING OF PLATS; PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE; AND REPEALING ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES INCONSISTENT HEREWITH," is hereby amended in the following respects: A. Section 3.2(1) is hereby amended in its entirety so that as amended it shall read as follows: 3.2(1) Apuroval by the City Council �€�e�-�e�r�e�a-e€-�l�e-���a�-��a�-bp-�ke-��ann�ng 2enux�9s�en; -st�ek The Final Plat �ege�he�-w��l�-�he �eeeMmende��ens-e€-�l�e-��enn�ag-2e���s�en shall be submitted to the City Council for approval. If accepted, the Final Plat shall be approved by resolution, which resolution shall provide for the acceptance of all agreements for basic improvements, public dedication and other requirements as indicated by the City Council. If disapproved, the grounds for any refusal to approve a plat shall be set forth in the proceedings of the Council and reported to the person or persons applying for such approval. B. Section 3.2(2) is hereby amended in its entirety so that as amended it shall read as follows: � � va' � �' J \ ��u���' a 3.2(2) Approval by the Planning Commission. Upon the request of the property owner, or where material chanqes have been made in the final plat subsequent to Preliminary Plat approval, the Planninct Commission mav review the Final Plat. The Final Plat shall be filed with the City Clerk and submitted to the Planning Commission at least twenty (20) days prior to a Commission meeting at which consideration is requested. During the said twenty (20) days, the City staff shall examine the final plat and•prepare a ••recommendat�oh to the PYanning Commission. �Approval, disapproyal, or any delay in decision of the Final Plat will be conveyed to the subdivider within ten (10) days after the meeting of the City Planning Commission at which such Plat was considered. In case the Plat is disapproved, the subdivider shall be notified in writing of the reason for such action and what requirements shall be necessary to meet the approval of the Commission. After review by the Planning Commission, such Final Plat, toqether with the recommendations of the Planning Commission, shall be_submitted to the City Council for approval. C. Section 4.2(3)d is hereby amended in its entirety so that as amended it shall read as follows: (d) Space for certificates of approval and review to be filled in by the signatures of �ke-eka��man-e�-�he e���-��enn�n�-ee��ss�e�-ane� the Mayor and City Clerk. �Phe-€e�m-e€-ee���€�ea�e-b�-�he-P�ar�n�ng ee�n�ss�er�-�9-a9-€e��e6ass Re��e�ved-b�-�l�e-i��a���ng-eemm�ss�en-e€-�1�e-2���*-e€ Me�ele�a-He�gl��g-�h�s-------ela�-e�---------,--�9_.- S�gnee�r---------------------------------------- -------------21�e��nta� ���e9��----------------------------------- -------------See�e�a�� The form of approval of the City Council is as ' follows: Approved by the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota this day of , 19_ Signed: Mayor Attest: City Clerk Section 2. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its publication according to law. Enacted and ordained into an ordinance this Twenty-first day of January, 1991. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS m Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor ATTEST: .. Kathleen M. Swanson , City Clerk K� � CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 282 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 301 Section 1. Ordinance No. 301, known and referred to as "AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS FOR THE SUBDIVISION AND PLATTING OF LAND WITHIN THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, DEFINING . CERTATN TERMS USED THEREIN; PROVIDING FOR THE PREPARATION OF PLATS; PROVIDING FOR THE INSTALLATION OF STREETS AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE DEDICATION OF CERTAIN LAND FOR PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS; ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR APPROVAL AND THE RECORDING OF PLATS; PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE; AND REPEALING ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES INCONSISTENT HEREWITH," is hereby amended in the following respects: A. Section 3.2(1) is hereby amended in its entirety so that as amended it shall read as follows: 3.2(1) Anproval by the City Council The Final P shall be submitted to the City Council for approva��1, If accepted, the Final Plat shall be approved by r solution, which resolution shall provide for the acceptance of all agreements for basic improvements, public dedication and other requirements as indicated by the City Council. If disapproved, the grounds for any refusal to approve a plat shall be set forth in the proceedings of the ; Council and reported to the person or persons applying for such approval. B. Section 3.2(2) is hereby amended in its entirety so that as amended it shall read as follows: 3.2(2) Approval bv the Planning Commission����`� 7`�\ Upon the request of the property owner, or where material changes have been made in the final plat subsequent to Preliminary Plat approval, the Planning omm' sion m� review the Final Plat. The Final Plat shall f'led with the City Clerk and submitted to the Plan ' g Commission at least twenty (20) days prior to a Commission meeting at which consideration is requested. During the said twenty (20) days, the City staff shall examine the final plat and prepare a recommendation to the Planning Commission. Approval, disapproval, or any delay in decision of the Final Plat will be conveyed to the subdivider within ten (10) days after the meeting of the City Planning Commission at which such Plat was considered. In case the Plat is disapproved, the subdivider shall be notified in writing of the reason for such action and what requirements shall be necessary to meet the approval of the Commission. After review by the Planning Commission, such Final Plat, together with the recommendations of the Planning Commission, shall be submitted to the City Council for approval. C. Section 4.2(3)d is hereby amended in its entirety so that as amended it shall read as follows: (d) Space for certificates of approval and review to be filled in by the signatures of the Mayor and City Clerk. The form of approval of the City Council is as follows: Approved by the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota this day of , 19_ Signed: Attest: Mayor City Clerk � Section 2. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its publication according to law. Enacted and ordained into an ordinance this Twenty-first day of January, 1991. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson City Clerk •� ' � l � CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO January 17, 1992 T0: Mayor and City Council FROM: Tom Lawell, City Administ� SUBJECT: Proposed Dakota County Legislative Policies for 1992 Similar to prior years, City and County representatives within Dakota County have once again developed a packet of legislative policy positions for advocacy during the 1992 Legislative Session. It is the intent of this memo to present the draft policies for formal Council adoption. � BACRGROIIND Several years ago it became evident to a number of Dakota County Cities that there did not exist a unified voice advocating for, or arguing against, State Legislation which profoundly impacts our residents. In response, the "Dakota County Administrator�s Group", which is comprised of City Administrators as well as Senior County staff, was formed. In addition to the obvious benefit of increased communication between these different organizations, this group has also annually developed a packet of position statements on issues which affect two or more communities within the County. This packet of position statements has typically been compiled in a draft format for presentation to the elected officials representing each body. Once the positions are adopted, a breakfast meeting is typically held at which time Dakota County Legislators are invited to meet with Dakota County local officials to hear our legislative agenda for the upcoming session. The legislative breakfast for this year has been tentatively set for Friday, February 14, 1992, beginning at 7:30 A.M. J� � 's'� . DI5CU55ION Attached for your information please find copies of all eleven position statements being proposed for 1992. To summarize, each issue is identified below along with a brief two or three sentence synopsis of the proposed policy position. 1. St�ecial Service District Legislation The establishment of Special Service Taxing Districts has long been an effective method of providing a specific City service to a particular, defined group of properties. Mendota Heights used this procedure with great success when it established a Street Lighting Taxing District in the Mendota Heights Business Park. As you ma.y recall, it is currently necessary to secure from the State Legislature specific enabling legislation for each Special Service District established. This policy position advocates for a more streamlined approval process which would no longer require specific enabling legislation in each case. 2. Transportation Finance Alternatives The State Highway Users Fund was established by Constitutional Amendment in 1958 as a means of providing funds for adequate highway construction and ma.intenance. The distribution formula for County State Aid Highway Funds presently is inadequate in that it fails to appropriate adequate funding to address needs within the Metropolitan area. It is the intent of this position statement to redefine the distribution formula and amend the appropriation process to better insure metropolitan highway adequacy. 3. Comprehensive Solid Waste Legislation Despite Dakota County's great success in establishing curb side recycling, Statewide recycling goals continue to increase and the prospects of ma.ndatory recycling and "organized collection" loom on the horizon. This position statement advocates for an opportunity to fully develop community programs without fear of additional State legislative amendments. The policy continues to support a system of operational flexibility in designing and implementing landfill abatement activities. Through this approach, involved parties can maximize local innovation and encourage active participation with the private sector. Lastly, the position statement advocates for continued or increased funding to implement landfill abatement programs. 4. Drug Education and Enforcement Given the importance of drug education, last year Dakota County Cities asked the Legislature to �ppr.ove a$2.00 per capita' ongoing special Yevy for this purpose. Instead, the Legislature approved a$1.00 per capita one time only levy, payable not to Cities but rather to school districts. This policy describes some of the difficulties encountered with this arrangement, and again requests a specific $2.00 per capita ongoing City Levy. Also, Dakota County proposes a separate $3.00 per capita levy for County investigation, prosecution and court processing of drug related expenses. 5. Local Government Finance As always, legislation regarding local government finance is of prime concern to Dakota County Cities. Further State budget deficits do not bode well for local governments as evidenced during last year's legislative session. This policy sets forth a number of basic finance principles important to Cities, requests that the Legislature honor its commitment to repeal levy limits for 1992, supports the continued payment of LGA/HACA Aid to Cities, and advocates for the strengthening of the Local Government Trust Fund established last session. 6. Hazardous Materials Response This position statement addresses the issue of hazardous material response capabilities as required by Federal Legislation known as SARA Title III. This statement basically advocates for a regional approach to this issue, including the request for State funding and coordination of such regional response. 7. Light Rail Transit Discussions related to Light Rail Transit have been ongoing for decades,� and little has been accomplished beyond the planning stage. The Dakota County Railroad Authority has acted as the County's voice on this topic, and has identified two corridors for possible future LRT construction (neither traverses Mendota Heights). Previously Mendota Heights has spoken out against Light Rail Transit as an effective transportation mode, and you will note that this policy is neutral on the LRT support issue. Instead, the policy merely indicates that if LRT is built, funding should be equitably distributed across the metropolitan area, coordination should be provided by the various existing County railroad authorities, and Cities should have approval authority over preliminary and final LRT design. 8. Regional Airport Policy I suspect there is not much need for additional background information on this issue. Because Dakota County is adversely impacted by either path of the "dual track process", a strong County wide statement favoring one track over the other is not �ossible. Instead, the policy encourages adequa.te,study of �both options and stresses the importance of ai'rcraft noise affects. The policy also advocates that an distribution of aircraft noise reflect and be existing community comprehensive plans patterns. 9. Land Use Planning Legislation y new or changed f irmly guided by and settlement This position statement advocates for the passage of legislation to codify and unify State planning/zoning law which preserves the municipalities control over local planning• issues. Prior versions of this legislation were drafted in such a way that many onerous requirements would have been placed on municipalities. This legislation has since been revised to better account for the need to keep local decisions at the local level. Therefore this position statement supports the passage of this newly revised legislation. 10. Road Access Charges and Road Utility Fees Any development of real estate will more than likely affect the surrounding transportation network. Nearly all Cities impose certain development fees in consideration of developing such property (i.e., water availability charge, sewer availability charge, etc). The application of additional "impact fees" and utility fees associated with roadway improvements is questionable under present Minnesota Law. It is the intent of this position statement to gain specific authorization� to impose such fees at the discretion of the City. li. Telephone Franchises Minnesota Statute currently provides that a franchise fee (up to five percent of gross revenues) ma.y be imposed by Cities when granting a franchise to any utility company utilizing City owned rights of way. Elsewhere in Minnesota Statute, an exemption from such franchise fees is provided to telephone and telegraph companies. Given the lack of practical distinction between utilities utilizing rights of way, this exemption makes little sense, and the policy advocates for the ability to impose such franchise fees on all utility companies, including telephone and telegraph. , , RECONIlKENDATION The above described positions represent a consensus among units of local government within Dakota County, and it is important our area Legislators be made aware of our legislative intents and desires. While some of the described positions are more important to Mendota Heights than others, I believe the entire Legislative Package is important as it seeks to maximize City autonomy, control and flexibility to deal with today's pressing municipal concerns. For these reasons, I recommend the Legislative Package be adopted for advocacy during the 1992 Legislative Session. ACTION REQIIIRED Should Council wish to endorse the attached position statements, it should pass a motion adopting Resolutibn No. 92- which sets forth that intent. MTL:kkb CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COIINTY, MINNESOTA RESOLIITION NO. 92 - A RESOLIITION SIIPPORTING 1992 LEGISLATIVE POLICIES ON ISSIIES WHICH MAY AFFECT DAROTA COIINTY ' WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights actively monitors decisions ma.de by other units of government which directly or indirectly affect the operations of the City; and ; WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights is an active participant in an informal organization of other Dakota County units of local government which routinely monitors State Legislation which may impact their collective well being; and i i WSEREAS, it is the desire of the City of Mendota Heights to cooperate with other Dakota County units of local government �in developing a series of position statemeiits relative to Legisla•tion which may be considered during the 1992 Minnesota Legislative Session; and WHEREAS, the attached position statements entitled Exhibit A represent the common issues of concern for which a unified opinion has been developed. ', NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the Cilty of Mendota Heights that the position statements attached are approved as policies for Legislative advocacy during the 1992 Minnesota Legislative Session. ' � i ; BE IT FIIRTHER RESOLVED that these position statements be forwarded to the Dakota County Legislative Delegation at a meeting scheduled for February 14, 1992. ' Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 21st day of January, 1992. ; CITY COUNCIL � CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ' By ; Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor ' ATTEST: Kathleen M. �wan�on City Clerk r DATE: c�ty of BURNSVILLE 100 Civic Center Parkway • Burnsville, Minnesota 55337-3817 (612) 895-4400 January 6, '1992 T0: Dakota County Staff Dakota County Administrators/Managers Dakota County Township Clerks 1ll�i Y F SUBJECT: Jill Shorba, Administrative Assistant Dakota County Managers Meeting Thursday, January 30, 1992 - 10:00 p.o. Apple Valley City Hall On Thursday, January 30, from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m., there will be a meeting of the Dakota County Managers/Administrators Group. The meeting will be held at Apple Valley City Hall (14200 Cedar Avenue). AGENDA 1. Finalize 1992 Legislative Positions Enclosed are the final drafts of the 1992 legislatiVe positions. Following the last Administrators meeting, changes were made in the following policies: ' Drug Education and Enforcement The policy was changed to include a request for a�3.00 per capita levy for County investigation, prosecution, court processing and community corrections services (similar to last year's policy). � ° Local Government Finance The paragraph on the Flat Property Tax Rate was removed and corrections were made to the paragraph on the Local Government Trust Fund. ° Regional Airport Policy The first paragraph under the "Recommendations" section was revised because not all cities support the "dual-track approach." A more generic statement was inserted. Please review these positions with your Board/Councils prior to the January 30 meeting. Minor changes can still be made at that meeting. The breakfast with Legislators is tentatively set for Friday, February 14, at 7:30 a.m. Please check this date with your Board/Councils and notify me as soon as possible if there is a problem. � r Dakota County Staff Dakota County Administrators/Managers Dakota County Township Clerks January 6, 1992 , Page 2 ** In conjunction wi�th the policy on Drug Education and Enforcement, I will be surveying cities to determine if you received any of the 51.00 per capita which school districts were authorized to levy in 1991. I will telephone you next week. 2. Miscellaneous Please contact me if there is another item you would like placed on the agenda. Please try to attend the meeting so plans for the legislative breakfast can be finalized. JS/mc Enclosures t � � ' Dakota County Managers 1992 LE6ISLATIVE ISSUES Special Service District Legislation Transportation Finance Alternatives Comprehensive Solid Waste Legislation Drug Education and Enforcement Legislation Local Government Finance 0 Hazardous Materials Response Light Rail Transit Regional Airport Policy Land Use Planning Legislation Road Access Charge and Road Utility Fee Franchise Laws - Telephone Companies �XNl3l'C' � 1/3/92 SPECIA� SERYICE DISTRICT �EGiStATION Position Statement BACKGROUND Minnesota Statutes Chapter 428A allows mun'icipalities ta establish Special Service Districts for the purposes af providing levels of pubiic services above and beyond the normal level otherwise pravided throughaut the city. The purpose of these service distr9cts is to recagniZe thai certa�n types af property require certain additional levels of public services thai shauld be financed from the general fund property tax of the city, Examples of such services include but are not limited to addiiional street lighting, parking lot and street maintenance, landscaping, signage, refuse collection, security, transpor�ation services, as wel] as advertising and promotion. A service charge would be levied an the praperty within the baundaries of the district ta pay for the desired services. Consequentiy, only praperiy inside the district baundaries would receive benefit from the services, M.S. Chapter 428A is standard "bailerplate" language regarding special service districts. Each proposed district must be approved as enabling legislation for the requesting city. Once the enab�ing legislation has been appraved, the city must adopt a local ordinance establishing the district. The statute is very specific about the hearing and publication process that needs ta accur before the district can be approved. If 35 percent of the landowners in the district file an objectian prior ta the ordinance's effective date, the ardinance is vaid. Ail residential properiy within the district is exempt from paying any of the service charge levied by the city. An annual hearing must also be held before approval of a levy to support the �uture year`s work ar pragra�. The governing bo�y approves the levy by resolution. Service charge levies are not included in levy limit calculations. The city may bond far district improve�ents and pay for them by pledging the annual service charge levy. The governing body m� appoint an advisary board ar act as the baard for the district, Twenty-five (25) percent of a71 landowners and landawners who represent 25 percent of the property vaiue musi file a petitian requesting {or approving) a proposal prior to council action; the same 25 percent plus 25 percent ratio is needed prior ta appraval af a service charge and levy. It can be vetoed by a petition of 35 percent of the landowners or owners who represent 35 percent of the properiy value. Action which would approve other types of service charges other than a levy are also subject to a petition of 25 percent of the businesses in the district. If 35 percent of the business owners object to the service charges, ihe adopiion af these service fees would be voided. The service fee veioes or peiitian provisions do not apply io succeeding years once a service charge has been approved and not challenged in the first year. SPECiAL SERViCE DISTRiCT LEGISCATION Position S�atement POSiTTON Special service districts provide the opportunity ta make public improvements ta specific areas of a community and generates the necessary finances directiy from those who will benefit without the restrictions of using special assessments. The service charge is totaliy a 1aca3 optian tool by the governing body and the amount of the service charge is determined by the business proprieiors and praperty awners based on the type of service and level af service they desire to have. The hearing and petition process provides adequate assurances of citizen participatian and flexib3e apportunities to create, modify, and repeal the district and its provisions. RECOMMENDATION Minnesota Statutes Chapter 428A should be amended the approval of enabling legisiation for special establishment of such districts should begin with JUSTIFICATION to repeal the requirement of service districts. The the local adoption process. Because special service districts have no taxing or spending impact on persons or property ouiside the boundaries of the district, and because the provisions of the districts are directed entirely by those being levied and receiving benefit fram the services, legislative approva3 is simpiy not necessary, The use of special service districts recognizes the need of areas within communities that require additional and unique types and levels of public services. Secause legis1ative requests for speciai service districts typically contain standardized language and are of only local consequence, ihey are frequentiy neglected during the iegis3ative process. Finally, aii communities shauld have an equal apportunity to secure special service district approval. TRANSPORTATION FINANCE ALTERNATIVES Position Statement Background The distribution of County State Aid Funds is set by law and the continuation of the constitutional formula providing 29qo to County State Aid jurisdictions should be maintained. The breakdown of this 29qo County share between the various counties is based on 50% need, 30�o center line miles, 10% motor vehicle registrations and 10% equalization. Many transportation issues remain unresolved. Long term funding sources need to be established whereby the revenue sources are dependable and distributed more fairly to reflect population density and growth patterns. The County Board supports and recommends legislation, consistent with the Metropolitan Inter County Association �positions, which would improve this situation. Recommended changes include: 1. The County state-aid screening board make-up should be changed to fourteen (14) members. The municipal approval process of CSAH system mileage changes should be revised. The allocation formula should be changed to use lane miles instead of centerline miles. Changes in State-aid distribution must not be a substitute for additional county transportation funding. 2. New transportation funding will only be supported in conjunction with an amended distribution formula for the new funds. 3. A County transportation fund program based on users' fees including, but not limited to: 1) Motor vehicle registration fees; 2) Motor vehicle excise tax; 3) Gasoline tax; 4) Wheelage tax; and 5) Non-traditional user fee revenue such as parking space and development impact fees. 4. Bridge bonding - an expanded reauthorization of the State Bridge Bonding Program at a level of funding sufficient to: ' A. Replace, rehabilitate or renovate deficient bridges (including bridges under twenty feet in length ) at roadway crossings with streams, rivers, railroads or other roadways by dedicating funds for the total cost of projects, by dedicating funds for the "local match" in federally funded projects, and by dedicating funds for participation in projects under other funding formulas, and B. Construct new bridges (including bridges under twenty feet in length) along new roadway corridors intersecting streams, rivers or railroads; and construct new bridges where existing or new roadways intersect and interchanges or bridge crossing are warranted by dedicating funds for the total cost of projects, by dedicating funds for the "local match" in federally funded projects, and by dedicating funds for participation in projects under other funding formulas. 5. Uses of the highway fund - opposes any additional diversion from the highway fund for non-transit or non-highway uses. TRANSPORTATION FINANCE ALTERNATIVES Position Statement 6. MVET paid by local governments - opposes the payment of motor vehicle excise taxes by local units of government. 7. Highway jurisdiction - supports the planned and mutually agreeable jurisdiction changes of highways. Funding for future improvements and maintenance, and the condition of roadways at the time of transfer are high priority considerations. Jurisdictional changes must not be considered a substitute for additional transportation funding. 8. Railroad abandonment - supports prior review and study of potential rail line abandonment to determine the impacts on local economies. Counties that contain regional rail authorities should have the right of first refusal to purchase rail line in question. RECOMMENDATION The Legislature should change the highway fund distribution process as proposed in the legislative position described above. COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE LEGISLATION Position Statement BACKGROUND Since March 1991 all single family homes in Dakota County have had an opportunity to recycle (at the curb) newspaper, aluminum/tin cans, glass, plastic bottles,with a neck;' and corrugated cardboard. All multi-family buildings also are recycling the items listed above. In addition, some haulers are collecting waste oil, lead acid batteries, mixed office paper, and magazines at the curb. Approximately 1,000 tons per month of recyclables are delivered to the Dakota County Collection Center. The County also completed a commercial recycling strategy in early 1991 and has begun implementation. A major task in 1991 will be to design a solid waste management plan to recycle 35� of the County's waste by 1993 as required under SCORE and 50� by the year 2000 as outlined in the Metropolitan Council Solid Waste Management Policy Plan. It is expected that solid waste management will continue to be ane of the major environmental issues for Dakota County in 1992. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. There should be no major statutory changes for the metropolitan solid waste management system. � 3. � Government and private industry are fine tuning their collection and processing systems to both expand the system and make it more economical. Major changes could disrupt this system. It is important to allow individual counties and cities an . opportunity to implement a recycling program which meets the currently mandated recycling goals and also reflects the individual characteristics and preferences of their communities. Additiona.l legislation should take place only if these goals are not met. Any SCOPE (Select Committee on Packaging and Environment) recommendation should be considered in this context. Current funding mechanisms and levels for recycling and abatement efforts should be maintained or expanded. SCORE monies should be continued/expanded and should be distributed for abatement purposes only. Any new requirements by the State for recycling activities should provide comparable funding. While it is important to expand the collection system, markets must be available and industry should be encouraged. Because of the current economy, market prices for materials continue to fall. Existing subsidies on virgin materials should be evaluated. The Metropolitan Council and the Office of Waste Management should work jointly on regional market development efforts. Existing legislation outlining battery manufacturers' responsibilities should be enforced by the State. DRUG EDUCATION AND ENFORCEMENT Position Statement BACKGROUND During the 1990 legislative session, special legislation was passed on behalf of a group of cities in the northwestern Metro area. The legislation allowed those cities (Maple Grove, Brooklyn Park, Brooklyn Center, and Coon Rapids) continuing authority to levy up to �2.00 per capita annually, above their levy limits for drug enforcement. Specifically, the money can be used to pay salaries and benefits for peace officers under a joint powers agreement whose primary responsibilities are to investigate controlled substance crimes or to teach DARE curricula in schools. In 1991, the Legislature provided that school districts should have the authority to levy an additional �1.00 per capita for drug education, enforcement, and police liaison. The money was to be a pass-througti to city and county authorities. The new law has left school districts in the uncomfortable position of deciding who will get what. Conflicts have arisen because some districts (accustomed to per-student levies) have difficulty in conveying funds raised by per-capita levies to (for instance) support a DARE class in a parochial school. Fundamentally, schools are not in the drug �_ enforcement or police business; the new state levy has proved awkward at best. RECOMMENDATION The drug enforcement/education levy of 52.00 per capita should be specific to cities, in the same manner as the special legislation granted to the northwestern suburbs in 1990. Also a�3.00 per capita levy for County investigation, prosecution, court processing, and community Correction Services should be introduced and supported as a Dakota County special bill.� LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCE Position Statement BACKGROUND � State and federal law, budget deficits, and increased federalism have combined to create a crisis in local government finance. Mandates and customer demands for services have expanded the expenditures necessary while the modification and removal of such revenue sources as local government aid and homestead and agricultural credits have limited local governments' abilities to maintain, much less expand, these services. This problem is further exacerbated by communities experiencing rapid growth as they face the challenges of managing growth issues. The continued application of levy limits has further diminished the ability of cities and counties to raise the necessary revenues through the consent of their citizens. The complexity of the property tax system and aid distribution formulas for cities, counties, and school districts has served to create further inequities among local units of government. Modifications of the property tax system are a necessary and prudent means of assuring the most directly responsible levels of government will be able to meet the needs required by their enabling legislation, demanded by their citizens, and mandated by other authorities. . �_ RECOMMENDATIONS Property Tax Reform � While property tax reform has been a much hailed goal of each legislative session, the results have been disappointing at best. Local units of government in Dakota County support the following initiatives in property tax reform: 1.� All significant changes should be phased in so cities and counties can adequately plan for needed adjustments. 2. Local government aid or an equivalent program of sharing state aid with cities and counties should remain an essential component of the property tax system. 3. While reducing the number of property tax classifications and tax capacity rates, the income-adjusted circuit breaker and renters' credit program should be expanded to reduce the regressivity of the property tax. 4. Mid-year cuts in Local Government Aid should not occur but only allowed to change for each year. Once budgets are adopted, levies certified, and LGA amounts are committed to local units of government, they should not be allowed to change for the same year. 5. All legislation mandating functions to local units of government should contain a fiscal note listing the costs .�o local government.and payments made from the'State to the local urrit of government as compensation for mandate compliance. LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCE Position Statement Beyond property tax reform, there are several issues that need to be addressed: Levv Limits The Legislature should honor its commitment to repeal levy limit laws by 1992, especially in light of the 1990 reductions in state aid to cities and new truth in taxation requirements. Removal of such limits would enhance local accountability and allow cities to plan for and respond to changing financial conditions, particularly declines in federal and state aid. If the State fails to provide compensation for mandated programs, the repeal of such limits is even more important. Levy limits do not reflect the willingness of citizens to pay for specific local services. Such a repeal would eliminate the need for special levies. The population growth of communities precipitates increased costs to provide the same level of services. In order to finance this increased level of services, cities should be able to utilize the growth factor in revenue calculation. Until levy limits are removed, special levy authority currently granted to certain cities for drug control programs such as DARE and Southwest Metro Drug Task Force, should be extended to all cities without seeking enabling legislation. LG HACA � At the minimum, LGA should be increased annually to keep pace with the rising costs of providing local government services. Even if LGA to cities is sacrificed, the HACA program should remain in effect because it represents direct property tax relief to homeowners. LGA should be distributed among cities in a way which alleviates the problems inherent with reliance on the property tax. The ability of cities to raise revenue from property taxes varies greatly. LGA, as a complementary revenue source for cities, is necessary because a city's ability to raise revenue from the property tax does not necessarily coincide with the cost of the services which the city must provide to its citizens. Finally, the LGA formula should reflect both the individual city's need and its local revenue-raising capacity. In the event the State budget crisis and efforts to deal, with it require the reduction of LGA/HACA, such action should be accompanied by an immediate removal of levy limits and/or the authority to levy an additional amount equal to the difference between a local government's certified LGA/HACA•allocation and its amended allocation. Moreover, a joint study of the challenges presented by the difference between State and local fiscal years and possible solutions to these challenges should be undertaken to prevent future ramifications of future budget deficits. In addition, Dakota County cities have been substantially shorted in state aid in recent years based on the U.S. census figures. State aids are based on estimates provided by the Metropolitan Council and, due to the County's rapid growth, those estimates (for Dakota County) have been consistently low. Consideration should be given to means of improving the accuracy of these estimates in the future or providing for adjustment of underpayments in the event estimates can be effectively challenged by special census results or other means. � LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCE Position Statement Local Government Trust Fund The 1991 Legislature modified the local government aid formula by raising the State sales tax by .5 percent and dedicating 2 cents of the total State sales tax to local government aid by the,creation of a local government trust fund. The long-term integrity of this trust fund should be maintained by ensuring that revenues be dedicated specifically to local government and not be diverted from this trust fund to the State's general fund or any other State appropriation not related to local government. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RESPONSE Position Statement BACKGROUND In 1986 Congress passed the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know.Act as Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA). Congress enacted this law to help local communities protect public health and plan for chemical emergencies. To implement Title III, Congress required each state to appoint a State Emergency Response Commission (SERC), and this Commission then established Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPC). Although these Local Planning Committees exist, there is no statewide coordination for hazardous materials response. At a local level, the development of hazardous materials response capabilities is usually dependent on city size and the perceived threat of hazardous materials incidents. It is often too expensive to adequately provide hazardous materials response at the local level. New federal law requires all personnel responding to hazardous materials emergencies to be properly trained and equipped. These standards require the vast majority of fire departments to provide additional extensive training or be in violation of the law. It is impossible at �he city or county level to meet these training requirements within a reasonable cost. One alternative is to pool resources so every jurisdiction does not have to develop and maintain specialized hazardous response teams. Regionally organized response teams are the most effective and economical approach for responding to hazardous materials emergencies. In 1990, the legislature passed a law requiring the Commissioner of Public Safety to plan a statewide system of response to hazardous materials release emergencies. An advisory council was established to assist the Commissioner and consists of inembers from the fire service, the public, business, and industry, and a representative from local government. This plan was submitted ,January 1, 1991. Based on this plan, legislation was introduced which would establish a response system, standards for response and a fee structure to support the system. This legislastion (H.F. 660 and S.F. 738) is pending further action in the legislature in the 1992 Session. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Authorize the establishment of regional hazardous materials response teams to provide response to all communities within a district. 2. Designate a central state organization to establish, direct and coordinate a hazardous materials response system. Under the direction of the Department of Public Safety This organization would provide consistent standards and operating procedures and would insure proper response throughout the state. 3. The State should support funding to cover the training, equipment,-and operational costs necessary to develop regional hazardous materials teams which meet Federal and State safety and training regulations. 4. A funding approach should be developed which places the responsibility for continued funding on the generators of the hazards. LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT Position Statement BACKGROUND The State Legislature mandated that the Regional Transit Board's Joint Light Rail Transit Committee, comprised of county regional railroad authorities, prepare a Light Rail Transit Coordination Plan. The Plan identifies organizational and implementation methods for light rail transit in the metropolitan area. The plan includes a ten-year schedule and budget for LRT implementation. The ten-year schedule presents the costs for implementing the corridor staging priorities adopted by the Regional Transit Board in 1990. The staging priorities for corridors in Dakota County include the St. Paul south to TH 110 in Group B and an extension of I-35W to TH 13 in Group C. The Joint LRT Advisory Cor�nittee has recommended a one cent sales tax for transportation purposes with one-half cent dedicated to LRT construction. Regardless of the source funding for LRT, the County should receive a"fair share" of any new broad-based funding source for transportation. The LRT Coordination Plan will also identify the lead agency for implementing LRT in the region. The County Regional Railroad Authorities have taken the lead in preparing plans and preliminary designs for light rail transit. Under current legislation, the cities maintain an approval authority over preliminary and final designs for LRT. If construction of light rail transit occurs, it should be implemented by a Joint Powers comprised of regional railroad authorities, state and regional agencies. The Joint Powers Board should also contract with MN/DOT for construction of LRT if located within a State right-of-way. RECOMMENDATIONS - If a regional source of funding is approved for LRT, there should also be broad based funding for other transportation needs (i.e., road improvement) for counties that will not be served by LRT in the future. - If LRT is implemented in the metropolitan area, a Joint Powers Board comprised of county regional railroad authorities should play a lead role in the implementation. - Support a continuation of the approval authority by municipalities for preliminary and final design of LRT. - Support the involvement of MN/DOT in the construction of LRT in State right-of-ways. _ - REGIONAL AIRPORT POLICY Position Statement BACKGROUND The Twin Cities Metropol�itan region has actively debated noise and adequacy issues for almost twenty-five years as they related to the Minneapolis/St. Paul airport. At the direction of the Legislature, the Metropolitan Council undertook a study of the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport to consider its adequacy to meet traffic demands in the future and the environmental capacity (e.g., noise) of the community to coexist with the airport. Following eighteen months of study, the Council's Airport Adequacy Task Force recommended that the Metropolitan Council and Metropolitan Airports Commission implement a"dual-track approach" that includes enhancement of capacity at the current site and land banking in anticipation of a replacement airport should future air traffic demands warrant it. In 1989, the dual-track approach recommended by the Adequacy Study was incorporated into legislation which established time lines for various tasks. A number of groups and studies have proposed alternatives for the enhancement of capacity of the current airport which could have direct or indirect effects on Dakota County. These enhancements include the extension of existing runways, addition of runways and a reorientation of departure routes to the south and southeast over Burnsville, Eagan, and other parts of Dakbta County. The Airport Adequacy Task Force also concluded that there is a reasonable'risk that the current airport's physical capacity will be exceeded within five to ten years. To meet demand for ten to twenty years, while land banking and environmental reviews are conducted for a potential relocation, additional capacity may be developed at the current airport. By 1996, a decision will be made to either construct an additional runway at the existing site or to implement a relocation. The addition of a new north-south runway irtunediately adjacent to Cedar Avenue, would introduce additional flights over Burnsville, Eagan and other parts of Dakota County. The addition of a third parallel runway would bring additional flights over Mendota Heights, Eagan, Mendota, Lilydale and other parts of Dakota County. Noise impacts are difficult to predict because the quieter "Stage III" generation aircraft are expected to be integrated in airline fleets during this same time period, but there will be overflights over much of northern Dakota County. The dual-track airport planning process presents a public policy dileroma in which all costs and benefits must be considered. Economic benefits to Dakota County from proximity to an airport could be lost, shifted or gained in a relocation, depending on�the location of a new site. Moreover, the uncertainty of relocation could cause developer reluctance to invest in either existing or potential Dakota County locations. The Metropolitan Council has developed its guidelines for reviewing land use changes in new airport search areas. These guidelines will set the stage for city, county and township involvement in the search/siting process. Dakota County has the entire spectrum of land uses within its boundaries, from urban to suburban to rural. Defining "acceptable land use" within the designated search areas and as potential sites may adversely affect many ..- individuals and units of government in which these areas are located within or adjacent to the existing airport and selected sites. � The Metropolitan Council has already indicated that Southern Dakota County, including the cities of Rosemount, Coates and Vermillion and the townships of Empire, Vermillion, Nininger and Ravenna, is the preferred search area. REGIONAL AIRPORT POLICY Position Statement Regional airport planning is a very important issue for all of Dakota County. Unfortunately, the differential impacts of the various options result in different positions on the part of the various local government entities. The regional airport planning process should include consideration for effects on residents, landowners and existing business, must be as encompassing as possible, and should include social as well as economic issues. The relocation of the airport would change forever the rural/agricultural nature of Southern Dakota County while expansion of the current airport will dramatically expand the impact area in Northern Dakota County. In addition, any changes may affect the northern areas which have experienced development and growth because of the existing airport. Any decision must also consider the enormous costs associated with any alternative and the sources for the funds to cover these costs. Consideration of a new site should also be contingent on�five conditions: 1. Any enhancement of the capacity at the existing airport must be accompanied by an equally zealous commitment to the mitigation of �os�1.e ai rcraft noi se consequences. �try�r� ' i stri bu i on e oun _v s fl ect and be_�m]��d°ed 2. Site selection and protection decisions must be based on the total spectrum of socio/economic issues and must protect the rights of local governments, landowners and residents. The "alternative environmental review process" being utilized by the Metropolitan Council must address this broader spectrum of issues. Existing local governments should have a partnership role in development and administration of a clear, decisive policy which allows local governments to: 3. 4. A. Request boundary changes of the final search area or to "opt out" of the search area. B. Request variances to the land use requirements and strict interpretations of the land use guidelines for "search" and "site" areas. The economic feasibility study of a new airport should be completed prior to holding land in reserve for airport reconstruction. Funds should be provided to Dakota Gounty and its local governments to evaluate the impact of the potential airport relocation on the County. 5. Accelerate the decision to expand or relocate the airport to relieve the uncertainty placed on the landowners in or adjacent to the search area and existing airport. a LAND USE PLANNING L�GISLATION Position Statement BACKGROUND Proposed le islation, which would have superseded the Metropolitan Land Planning Act and created�a uniform land planning law for cities, towns and counties, was introduced in the 1987 through 1990 legislative sessions. It would have had an overall negative, impact, and it did not pass. FEATURES A special AMM task force worked out a compromise piece of legislation that effectively unified planning law while avoiding the problems inherent in the earlier versions. RECO��fENDATION The AMM proposal should be supported providing it adheres to the following principles: � - � 1. The legislation must�not confli�ct with the Metropolitan Land Planning Act. 2. The authority of local elected officials to make land use decisions must not be reduced. 3. The flexibility in managing land use planning at the local level must not be reduced. 4. Sufficient time must be granted in implementing the revised law to minimize the costs to cities in updating local codes and ordinances. 4 ROAD ACCESS CHARGE AND ROAD UTILITY FEE Position Statement BACKGROUND 1. Impact Fee Local governments are using a variety of techniques to privately finance public infrastructure. One such technique is access fees. An access fee can be defined as "single payment (s) required to be made by builders or developers at the time of development approval and calculated to be the proportionate share of the capital cost of providing major facilities (arterial roads, interceptor sewers, sewage treatment plants, regional parks, etc.) to that development." Road access charges are currently not legal in the State of Minnesota. Attempts have been made in the last few years to pass legislation in the Minnesota Legislature that would enable cities and counties to impose a road access charge to all new devel.apments. Proposals have been made in the past that would allow cities to assess a fee up to �750.00 per single family hame against all new developments based upon the number of vehicle trips that the project generated. This legislation was introduced in the 1987 and 1988 legislative sessions. Legislation allowing cities to collect a road access charge would provide cities with a much needed additional source of funding to help keep the arterial and collector street systems closer to fulfilling their transportation needs. By collecting a road access charge at up to $750.00 per single family home for new or expanded land use, it spreads the cost of part of the arterial/collector street system over a larger area of a city since the new or expanded land use would pay regardless of whether it was actually located adjacent to the arterial/collector street. The cities of Dakota County, facing extreme growth and fiscal stress, need the additional revenue that would become available to it as a result of a road access fee. 2. Utilitv Fee Another financing technique used by cities to finance infrastructure and associated operating costs is a utility fee. This fee is in common use for sanitary sewer and water and is increasingly being used for storm sewer. There is no statutory authority to impose such a fee for construction of streets. The Minnesota House Transportation Committee is considering a proposal to authorize cities to impose a street utility fee to finance construction of arterial and collector streets. Unlike the impact fee, this would be a periodic charge imposed on all developed property. This would be an excellent source of revenue to construct badly needed arterial and collector streets that otherwise cannot be financed. RECOMMENDATION Support the passage of legislation that would enable cities and counties to impose a road access charge and/or a street utility fee. 1. � TELEPHONE FRAi�CNISE Position Statement BACKGROUND Minnesota Statutes (Chap�ers 300 �and 2I66) require utility providers to obtain permission through a franchise granted by the city for the installatian and operatian af ut�iity service infrastructure within a muni�ipaiity's right-of- way or other public grounds. In addition, the statute further authorizes c�i�es io i�pase fees on these utilities to a maximum of f�ve �ercent an gross revenues generated within the city. Franchise agreements give authority ta cities to control and regulate the �C�1Vlt3@S Of $h@ U�l�l�y W1��1� Clty-QW�B� right-of-way. , Typicaliy, municipalities have a much higher cancern for pub1ic health, safety, and general welfare concerns than do utility service providers. As a result, the ciiy musi be concerned with the mainienance, f�nancing, and general upkeep of streets or right-of-way. Since franchise agreements grant perm�ssaon for the insial3ation and aperati.on of utiIity infrastructure, ihe city has the authority through the agreement to require such activity conform to pre-deiermined construction, engineering, plann3ng, and development standards set forth by the municipality. Whiie M.S. Chapter 300 specificaliy inciudes teiephane and telegraph caropanies as utility service providers subject to franchise requirements, M.S. Chapter 237.16 prescribes that telephone and telegraph aperaiions are under the exclusive regulatory authority of the Public Utilities Cammission. Therefare, cities have no legal foundaiion to impose a franchise agreement. Case law exists that would lend legitimacy to this position. The city's only regulatory claim addresses the placement af poles and wires. This statutory contradiction has caused ihe PUC to advise telephone and telegraph companies nat to enter into franchise"agreements with cities, Ironically, the PUC has regulatory authority over gasJeleciric utiiities jast as it daes telephone/telegraph service providers. Chapter 237.16 would appear to give ihe PUC addit�onai authority insuiaiing telephonejteiegraph companies �rom local franchise agreements that it does not grant any other utility. It is simply not appropriate for the law ta require that virtually all utility providers have city franchise agreements with the exception of ane; especially SinC@ the issues reiated ta utility infrastracture in right-af-way are identical. The problem becomes more acute if and when telephone and telegraph companies assume control over cable television transmission lines as appears to be the technological trend of the industry. This would undermine cable franchise agreements and essentially make them void. RECOMMENDATION Minnesota Statutes 237.16 shauld be amended ta delete the intended exemptian of telephone and telegraph companies from franchise provisions and bring it inta conformance with M.S.,Chapter 300. ..,,. ' - � O: F OM: ; SU�ECT : CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO January 20, 1992 Mayor and City Cauncil Tam Lawell, City Adminis� Funding Request for 2992 Deer Survey INTRODIICTION The Ci�y has received a request from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) for financial assistance in conducting an Aerial De�r Survey within the Fort Sneiling State Park and the Minnesot�a Valley National Wildlife Refuge.` This Survey is undertaken on an annual basis as a joint effort among those Ci�'ies adjacent to the identified areas. � nzsevss�oN As autlined in the attached letter, the DNR is asking the Cities af Bloomington, Burnsville, Eagan, Mendata Heights and the Dakota County Parks Department, for asszstance in determining Iang range management strategies for the neighboring deer population. The 1992 Deer Survey would be conducted from a renta3 helicopter, and based on Ias�G year�s experience, will likely take approximately two hours to survey the Mendota Heights area, The DNR is estimating that the cost af the 1992 Survey for Mendota Heights will be approximately $350. RECOMMENDATION Given the nominal cost of this Survey, it is recommended that aur participation in this effort be approved. Funding £or this cantribution could be appropriated from the Administration Sundry Accaunt, and I recammend that our participation be capped at an amount not to exceed $350. ACTION REC}IIIRED Shauld the Council wish ta implement the reaammendation, a mation shauld be made ta authorize City financial participation in the 1.992 DNR Helicopter Deer Survey at a cost not to exceed $350. MTL:kkb STATE OF aa��o�a DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PHONENO. (612) �45-9393 Area Wildlife Office 223 Hoimes Street, Room 101 Sh�kopee, t�II�i 55379 Mr . Tom Lawell , City Marsager �ity of Mendota iieights i101 Victoria G�,irve Mendota iieights , Nilv 55118 3amuary 3, 1992 SUBJECT: Ftequest for funding for the 1992 deer survey Dear Mr. Lawell: � -, Please trar�smit this information to the City Council for appraval, if necessary. For the past faur winters I have requested titiat the cities ac�jacent to the Fort Snellir�g State Park ar�d Minnesota Valley Natior�l Wildlife Refuge pravide funding for helicopter rental so tizat I could complete the deer surveys. I have received furuling fran all four cities last year, and I appreciate your assistamce. I am r�questir� Mendota Heights' assistance again this year. We are currently involved with tne Deer Maragement Task Force in determining long-rar�ge maragement strategies for deer in Bloomington, Burnsville, Eagan, arri Mendota iieights . I think th�at al l the Task Force me�ers woald agree tnat we need complete data on aeer populations in the cities in order to mal� reasonaole decisions. DNR arrl the US Fish ar�d Wildlife Service will be paying to survey the lar�ds below the bluffs between I-35W ar�ci the Mississippi River. I anticipate that Burnsville, Dala�ta Co. Parks, Eagan arrl Bloomington will pay for surveys this year. Last year we spent aoout 2.1 hours surveying your city at a cost ofS289.80. I estimate tnis year's cost to be 5350. Since DNR does n�ot have its own helicopter this year, the cost will go up. If you decide to fun�d the survey, please canplete the enclosed cooperative agreanent, filling in the �th,orized dollars. Please advise me of your decision as soon as possible, since we will do our survey in 2 to 6 weeks, depending on snaw cover. � S' cerely, on ParKer, Area Wildlife Marr3c,�er cc: David Olfelt, DAR Parks Roger Johnson, t�NR Wildlife Kathleen Ridder, Mendota Hts. Deer Task Force R,ep AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Vi- '� i D f�! IC 1'1 C T f; O i' C�] I!7 �'i �� 0 TCL �C1�-i � .<-� =7ii 0 .�an ��c� �z _ � �<-_� rao . o��� r' . �:i COGPERA'T"TVF AGREENlEN'� MZNNESOT�'► V�LLEY DE��, CENSUS caH�x��s , xhe Minneso�a Dep�rtment of Natural i2�sources (hereaft�r "State") is cond�zctiing an aerial d��r cer�sus in th� Minnesota Rive� �Iailey during the rr.anths of �7anuary, Eebruary and March 1�9]., and WHEREAS, • the City of Mendota Heights _„_,�_,__ (hexea£ter "Citiy" ) wi,shes tv participate in tY�� census and pay its partian of the costs NOtJ 'x'Fi�REFORE Ckty agrees to pay to the St�.t� as its share afc the deer eost an amount equal to ttYe hourly rate chazged, by the S�a�e {far aizcraft with. �ildt) times the number, o� hours spent on the City's po�tion af th� c�nsus. �he Sta�P agrees tv provide tb� City witt� an �.temized invoice �or rhe City's sh.�re of fi.he deer census Gost; the Sta�e furi:h�r agrc�es that the City wil� nat b� abligated for any costs if the ��nsus a.s cancelled due �o the lack p� snow cover. Upc�n xequest, fi.he State will furnish the Ci.ty' capies of documents estab].ish�ng th� State's a4s� tor the census. The amount to be paid by the City will not exceed $ � . AFP12bV'�,Ja : City o£ bY ,�„� �,� date by dat� STATE OF MINNESOTA D�partment o� Natural Resources: bY — --- � date - - Departmcnt oi Aam�ri�st�`ation: by' � � date � � Dep2.��roent a� Fxrlan�e : • bY da�.e Approved as �o Form and Ex�cutian: bY • date CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS I�I�u�i January 16, 1992 T0: Ma.yor, City Co nc'1 and City Adminis FROM• Tom Olund � � � Public Work uperintendent SUBJECT: Purchase of Snow Bucket for 1991 Backhoe DISCUSSION• We have received our new 1991 backhoe that was approved by Council on January 7, 1992. As you will recall the purchase price of the backhoe did not include a snow bucket. I estima.ted the cost of this bucket to be approximately $3,000. I have obtained two quotes and they are as follows: Johnson Welding Empire Ma.nufacturing RECOMN�NDATION• $2,700 4,200 I recommend that the snow bucket be'purchased from Johnson Welding for their low bid of $2,700. Funding will be through Road and Bridge Equipment Certificates. Total cost of backhoe with snow bucket is well within the budgeted amount. ACTION REOUIRED: If Council concurs with my recommendation they should pass a motion awarding a purchase order to Johnson Welding in the amount of $2,700 for the snow bucket for our new backhoe. TJO:dfw � - , CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS January 21, 1991 T0: Ma.yor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Tom Olund ,�� �� Public Works Superintendent SUBJECT: Snow Bucket for New Backhoe DISCUSSION• � In my previous memo I stated that we received two quotes for the purchase of a snow bucket for our new backhoe. Today I received another quote from Case Power and Equipment. This quote is lower than the previous one I submitted for approval. RECOM[�NDATION• I recommend that Council award the purchase order to Case Power and Equipment for their low quote of $2, 625. Funding will be as described in my previous memo. ACTION REOUIRED: If Council concurs with my recommendation they should pass a motion authorizing the preparation of a purchase order to Case Power and Equipment in the amount of $2,625.00 for a snow bucket for our new backhoe. TJO : dfw CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO . Ja uary 16, 1992 TOi Mayor, City Council and City Administ FROM: Tom Olund ��� Public Works Superintendent SUBJECT: Purchase of 3/4 Ton Chevrolet Truck DISCUSSION• The Road and Bridge budget includes $16,500 for the purchase of a 3/4 ton truck. The vehicle being replaced is a 1978 Chevro- let with over 100,000 miles. The truck is 14 years old and well beyond its useful life. The engine is failing and the body is falling apart. The following quotes were received: Grossman Chevrolet $14,250.00 Jeff Belzer's Todd Chevrolet 14,700.00 Southview Chevrolet 16,414.57 � RECOMP�NDATION• m I recommend that the City Council accept the low bid of Grossman Chevrolet in the amount of $14,250 for the truck. ACTION REOUIRED: If Council concurs with my recommendation they should pass a mot"ion authorizing the preparation of a purchase orders to Gross- man Chevrolet in the amount of $14,250. TJO:dfw t CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO January 15, 1992 T0: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator f 'FROM: Klayton H. Eckles �� Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Mendota Heights Road ImprAvements , Job No. 9013 Improvement No. 91, Project No. 4 t �DISCUSSION• La�t fall staff prepared plans and specifications and opened bids on the Mendota Heights Road (2-35E to Dodd Road) improvement project but the bids were rejected because of high bids, lack of bidder inter- est and a shortage of watermain pipe. The bids were rejected with the �intent of rebidding the project this winter. • Staff has made some minor changes to the plans and specifications �including a construction time frame of June ist to September 7th (when school is out). With these changes and'an early start on the bidding process it is hoped that lower bids will be received. RECOMI�NDATION: Staff recommends Council direct staff to advertise for bids on ,the Mendota Heights Road improvement project. ACTION REOUIRED: � If Council concurs with the recommendation they should pass a motion adopting Resolution No. 92- , RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ADVER- TISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD (PILOT 'KNOB ROAD TO HIGHWAY 149) MSA PROJECT NO. 140-103-09 (IMPROVEMENT NO. 91, PROJECT N0. 4). ; �KHE : dfw t � City of Mendota Heights Dakota County, Minnesota RESOLUTION N0. 92- RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD (PILOT KNOB ROAD TO HIGHWAY 149) MSA PROJECT N0. 140-103-09 (IMPROVEMENT N0. 91, PROJECT N0. 4) WHEREAS,"the City Engineer reported that the proposed improvements and construction thereof were feasible and desirable and further reported on the proposed costs of said improvements and construction thereof; and WHEREAS, the City Council has heretofore directed that the City Engi- neer proceed with the preparation of plans and specifications thereof; and WHEREAS, the City Council has heretofore approved the plans and speci- fications for said improvements; and NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HPREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, as follows: 1. That the City Clerk with the aid and assistance of the City Engineer be and is hereby authorized and directed to'adver- tise for bids for said improvements all in accordance with the applicable Minnesota Statutes, such bids to be received at the City Hall of the City of Mendota Heights by 10:30 o'clock A.M., Thursday, February 27, 1992, at which time they will be publicly opened in the City Council Chambers of the City Hall by the City Engineer will then be tabulated, and will then be considered by the City Council at its next regular Council meeting. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 17tYi day of January 1992. � CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO January 16, 1992 T0: Mayor, City Council and City Administr��;�` FROM: Lawrence E. Shaughnessy, Jr., Treasurer SUBJECT: Transfer of Old Fire Hall DISCIISSION At the time the Tax Increment District was established in 1981, the purchase of the old fire hall and relocation of the department was one of the projects to be financed by the District. The proceeds of the sale to the District were to be placed•in a Facility Reserve Fund, and the amount used to write down the cost of the new facility. We have requested and received an appraisal from Thomas J. Delaney, Realtor, which values the property at $140,000. ACTION REQIIIRED Authorize sale to the Tax Increment District of the property with the process transferred to the Facilities Reserve Fund and be amortized against future fire service contract billings. LES:kkb LIST OF CONTRACTORS TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL January 21, 1992 Asphalt License J& W Asphalt Const., Inc. Masonry Licenses Dalbec, Bruce-Inc. Gresser Concrete/Masonry Greystone Masonry, Inc. Jesco, Inc. Zwinger, Charles-Inc. Excavating Licenses Commercial Utilities, Inc. Coppin Plumbing Enebak Construction Co. Gallati Excavating, Inc. Mack's Excavating Rauchwarter, Inc. Smith, Pete-Exc. Thompson Plumbing Corp. Gas Piping Licenses Air Comfort;'Inc. American Burner Service J& H Gas Service, Inc. MN Plmb. & Htg., Inc. Red Wing Htg. & A/C, Inc. Suburban Air Cond. Co., Inc. General Contractors Licenses Advance Const. Co. (Commercial) Beartown Builders (Framing) Centex Homes (Commercial) Crowley Co., Inc. (Fencing) Fabcon, Inc. (Commercial) Identi-Graphics (Commercial) Sandau Const. Co., Inc. (Siding) Southview Design & Const., Inc. (Landscaping) Heating & Air Conditioning Licenses Air Comfort, Inc. American Burner Service, Inc. Centraire, Inc. Egan Company (The) Gopher Htg. & Sheetmetal, Inc. Harris Waldinger, Inc. MN Plumbing & Htg., Inc. R.H. Heating Suburban Air Cond. Co., Inc. Plas�er/Drywall/Stucco Licenses Kastner, Albert-& Sons, Ine. Zwinger, Charle�-Inc. SiQn Licenses Identi-Graphics Nordquist Sign Ca., Inc. Rubbish Haulers Licenses Knut�on Services, Inc. Roadwa�r Rubhish Waste-Managemeni�-Savage Ciciaret�.e LicenSes —�.Employee Party Club Tam Thu;mb ..\t�'."d�h ,�;i;: . .� � . .. ., . . 4. � ... `.~ ... � � • ' ✓:, �i'!i.::+'.�+: C�'. :::�;�.�r��' �'� .:�;� � �, .. >!�: :;5. %'.1�`<:'", ,. . .,.,' ',YJ'+.Yi�. ,L.�"',:� "D.. � l;i�. h� •�tl(ii••':=���.v�t:yi� ��:��� :f ��l•'%� - . , . '�f� �'•"��. �•�i:, ' , • 1� ^ _.. � . v . ' . _ . ' . J . � ' ti.�. in,X. < �,~ ` . . . . �.� � . ' � �$ t r � Januarg 22, 2992 TO: Mayor and City Cauncil CLAI'MS LIST SUMMARY; TotaZ C1Rimc Signifzaant CXaimc AMM I932 dues HNTB Water study C. W. Houle Impr proj Minn Conway Fixe eq NSP UtiZ sva State Treas 4th qtr s/chgs Unusual CZai.ms American Nat1 Bank 2/1 bond pgmts� Cedar Computer - Laser printer �omm af Trsp� Lillyda.l.e sewer 1st Trust 2/1 bonB pgmts Mh'CC Dea sac chgs Norwest Bank 2/1. bond pgmts Somerset Z9. Fire i.mpr • 0 Z,036,428 2,4Z7 2,753 3,384 3,A33 7,42Z 2,923 78,847 4�?$6 24,731 399,208 b, �I35 469,543 21,970 —' . «,,..__�._� ' ; w ....._, . �...�`�. . —_ ' . ' .. . , 5 ` . . , . � I r,.-'^„"'- �__T_________�__��. Clairns__List.__ "C�.° iv-nwu �y�, .,v-nvauo ��a� ) --d/23/92---- -- - - - _�1 � Mcm �, �M Citv of P1er�dota He� ��-jS-Engr'-'�-- --60-IItYlties ^ 20-Police 70-Parks Terno Check N�_unber 1 30-Fire 80-Planning � 40-CEO 85-Recycling � ��� , � 90-AnimaZ Control ' . " Check � • ' i ). z . z " 3 Nurnber Vendar Name Account Cc�de Cc�mrnents , Amaunt ' 3� ' a � 4I _ ____� � ___�"'_____..__.. ___'��_. '___"__.._ ________ 5 5 1 A M M �t1-44�4-110-10 9� dt1e5 �. 417. Q��C 6� 6 � ._. ___,��� ^��.�./ ,�• 1�_rfjlg 8 7 '_ , , 9 •-- e Tatals Terno Check Number 1 „ , . • . �a � ' n� 9 � � D-Eii2Cli"'iVuMtret"-----'� ' 12 10 13 „� — ------ ,4 i12� 2 Air Canditi�nino Assoc Inc 01-4335-315-30 rors 867.76 �5'� I13 — _�-.'_'.�__....___��.__�._ �'�_._'�_"'_"__ '_'_ _ _ '_ .._'.� "____..�_ .""___ __ __ 1G ,aI . � 867.76 �e I76I Totals Terno Check 'Number 2 � �e� — — � �--•--_�_ _—_ zo •'�� Terno Check Nurnber 3 2.}� 18 23 �.7 �s , tn��-�aaa--E+t�s-i-r,ess-Ftrrns —ti-1=-4,sQ�Q�=-1-1-Qi=d�----__. .�__�oayr-o13...�checks--- 4=, za `•�a , 3 Arneric�n E+usiness Fc�rrns �t1-4300-02@-20 aayrall checks � 91.70 ,� _ ' Z6 st • 3 Arnericar� $usiness Forrns @1-4s00-@30-.;4� oayral l checs 22. 85 27 � 22 rneri-c�n-E+�ts%ness-�Fc�rrns---=T�--^43@Q+=Q�4Q��4Qr — t+avr-ol3.--cMec�cs- -- � '�2..b� 2e 23 3 Arnerican Rusir�ess Fc�rrns Qi-4300-Q�S@-��c� oayrc�ll checks 4�.8� 30 24 3 Arneric�n Eiusiness Forrns Q�1-430Q�-c�70-70 oavral l cherks 45.85 3i �� ss r+er i-ear,-Btis�r,ess--F-cr-rns�---21=-4:�0P�-Q�BF}-8a _ _���__oayrall__cnecks— az - Z6 ' �3 � Arnericari P��si»ess Forrns Q�5-43Q�0-105-15 , oayrc�l l checks ,' 45. FSJ 34 • 27 s" 43 Arnerican Pusiness Fc�rrns 15-4300-fi6@-60 „ oayrc+ll checks " . - 45.85 , - ` " 3sQ za __ :��;��,�:�tsi-we��s-,�-�.,•�rns @1-�F1r�@ 309 0'3 -tur�,l1-ckt " a7 ...•ZB 38 ` ~ 30 30 41�. 48 3g � {;,., rti,�,��.-,.,-.i, niumbe ao 37 r • , . < 47 � 33 Teinp Check Number ' 4, - . " ' . , � ` p �� � Q aa 34 35 4 Aoache 01-4305-@7@-7Q� ' oarts �56_50 47�., 36 c c 48 •- 3e : 7atals Terop Check Number . ' , 4 , , .� . _ : . _ � ' ' • . , ' � . 50 39 . .. . , . , , , x , ... 59 � _ • . ` 62 40 • 53 �aZ 5 Arnerican Natior�al Sank 25-44�6-@�0-@@ 78 irnor bds 4.146.25 551� � „e . n��«v,.,+;�....a�-Etanic 4'"�r456-000-0m r �A se � � , - 5 Rmeric�n Nat ianal' bank �` , � 09-4�26-00Q�-@0 • , fee park bond d . 763. 5@ ' ' ' ' ' ' > 68 .. -- . • : ' �) a , , _________ ' . E. 59 ` 45 .. � . . . • , . - - 60 '� Tutals Ternp Check Nurnber � 67 47 62 . 63 �_ � 48 64 r„� �"_,�--,-�ni"rnbE' 49 . _ � � . . . - . 66 60 6 Biff,s Inc - �. Q�1-4�0Q�-610-70 � - Jan rent � 19�.0Q� � s�� 61 ' ' , . , :.. . , .. �- . . , i � . - - , .• 68 52 6 69 63 1�2. �Q 70 Tatals Temp Check Nurnber 6 �� �) 64 56 . . 72 73 56 - _ • , � . , . : .. . _ 74 .- 7 .. � ' . . ... . . . ' • .• � . . . .., ' W � ' . .. , z ' „ . . � �6' .� ,� �_j ��L�� Jari 1•�7C 1..1�1i0�s L15c rctue - .... • _ _.'�._._. .�...�_. . _._.... ...__ '_ _�_. �._' _'__ �'�' _'_-� _� ` - _ �� Man 3r �M� ��� �� � City af Mend�t� Hei .--� Temo ChecK N�miber 7 rna. -- -- , ' Check ^ � .�j' Nurnber Ver�dor Narne Acccunt Code Cc�mrnents Rrnaunt . (3 j9 ' Y' % Terrv Rl�un`--•�--�.^---�---�V-01-4410-�7@-7a—•-v--'-�-----�— 92 cic�thino allc�w---v 17Q�.@Q� �- 5 ' '" � � ____ ' __ _'_ � 17Q�. Q�� ' Tatais Temo Check Number 7 � , �. 8 ^ . , , .. ,o � ° T-ernp--Gkiec--k-IU�irnber A . " - ' —_____ �_��._�._».._�_._.__._..._ � " ' 1z f10 73 �" 8 R d f W t C 16-447?-Q�00-@0 D " � � 6 - �a � c�ar C a er arnrnissicmers � ec svc 1�0� i.s@ Ker�dc�n 11. @8 ��''� A__Eiaar.ct-o.f-_1Jater C�mrnissi.aners._ _�L-44:=5-31:�-3@_.___._______�___�_ ._.Dec svc._,___ �.___._�_.__ 89� �0 " 8 E�uard of Water Cc�rnrnissioners 08-4425-@Q�Q�-0� Dec svc -�6.53 " ��" 8 Bc+ard c�f Water Cornrnissior�ers 15-44�5-�1Q�-6Q� Dec svc � 7.13 • t6 ---�- -F�c�ar-rJ-.a£-Water •Carnrnissiar�er. s�.01�9��5�.10-7_Qt—__� _�_—_�ec:sv� �_, ' u_�7 '�i � 8 Poard of Water Cc�rnrnissianErs @8-4335-Q�00-00 annl chg BQ+.@@ �'� 8 Pc�ard af Water Carnrnissic�ners �1-44��-315-3� annl chg 80. Q�Q� i s� 19 __.� .. ., -_.� 4_, �__A �--�-- _____ __ zo `�G �'98.31 Tatal.s Terna Check Number 8 zi , , .., ,, .. . , , ^2I Temo Check Number i '3 � � ' �` ^� W� � 3 24 zs or_.land— ---_ _ � 1=; Qi v� _ s�f�.e1�r._e._ 1 Q�4. 95 {z�� - . . g . ` _ - . - " . ° ' ,_. _ iQ�4. 95 ' , ' sa �..�.-_T=sap-Check_Nurnber � ' ' ` 29 Terno Check Nurnber 10 ~ 30 ' 31 ,` 10 �Carlsan Auta Fire F�rat ' @1.-325Q+ n •• ' rfd duol fee ` � < . � ,35. 10 32 ` . . ., . . ' ... _ . "' -. ___ . ..a - . . � � . . , � _ � 35. 1 � . �4 TGtals Terno Check Nurnber 1@ 35 36 pn4 �h�rnhor� 11 37 ,. �s � . " , x• < � �� � ,. , . 5:' . � � 3a , ` � • l i Cedar Cornputer Cntr �_ � ' Q�i-46�Q�-11Q�-1Q� ` � , � . - �' Qrinter ° �F • �� � x 2.775. @0 , ' • ` 3e r, ��,�+oy„ ('ntr '` 01�-4f-��IOl-1 D7�-1'�: z.•. • ' oY�i r r t � " 1 0� 6 40 li Cedar Cc�rnputer Cntr 15-4b00-Q�60-60 orinter 1.0�5.60 a+ , nz-- -------- 43 ' � Totals Temp _Check Nurnber . � 11 - � � ` - � r ' � ' - - • ' ` . �nsl bar . 10 . ' . . . . . . '� - '+.. " . *. . , -� ` _ � � ' • � • . 5 , ..e �'� 12 Cherakee State L�ank 01-4490-110-SQ� safe deoc�sit bc�x �0.80 �ae �°9 1� ,' <s' - _ .'. _- . .. , ' . , . . .` ; �.80 , - , Ig0 > Tota"ls Temp Check Num6er � �12 �,, � ' a' � � • �.�� 51 , . . ,. . < > r " ` . r , ` .. � . . . .< . 62 Ternp Cheek Number 13 �53 fiI i� Rnl-�art ('.n1lPtta pi1-4�'�i-,01841-R0 DeC �y_{" �9Q1 Q10 ', -- �j5'� , ` ` � �' � . ' , ` `, , ,, _ ` . ; ` ---. Q�@ . ' . > !'3 .. � , • � , ; , . . . _ . . . ' 29�1 � � . . , . , � ��� ., � �:.@'Jan 1"�� ---•----------- �_ Llairns_Lis_t� --•-----.� �_� F�aoe 3 M��n 3: M Citv of Mendata Hei 4 Terno Checrc Nurnber 13 - � rna � _ ' Check Y " - - ' . . s . _ . � � Nurnber Veridar Name Ac�sur�t Code Cc�mments � Amount s'�'.� 3 • _.__._.__'_ �.__� �'_.�__._��_ '_�__ _�_� '� ° Tc�tals Terno Check N�_unber 13 5 5 6 � 6 � 7 1^ � �+ 8 � . ' 9 ' 8 ' , . , . � 1 O . 14 Cc�rnmissioner af Trsot 16-446@-0Q�0-00 ' city sh sewer const 14, 645. 7Q� ' • i� � 9 ^ fAH}3-SSi£Yi� ���="F�sot Q1=4tr1�=4�Q��iO _� �—r-ar-s--3,`.iE--tG--1 � � 1z io� _ , n ia i i � ,� -------- � a,� ���� �8 1=4. %Ji. J: 16 �/ �---,T-or•#.a�-�'-erno--Check-Ulurn6er_ ----_1_4.___— ._.T-_--.� ._ ._.__.__.-_.,�.__._ �s 13 � _._.�_.� 17 16� Ternp Check Nurnber 15 - �9 �,i - � »------ ----- zo 16 15 Cantinental Cablevision 01-4�0�-61Q1-2� Jari svc J.�J ZZ " 1� Cc�ntinental Ca6levisian Q1-420Q�-610-3¢� Jan svc 5.95 3� �e __ _____ 24 ZO J� __.�_ ___ ___ 11 . �Q� 26 �zt Totals Terno Check Number 15 • z� �.� ' . zs �123� , Tero❑ Check N�vnher 16 30n 37 �-+ ZQ c 32 25 �.-1-19Eiy�rci1-..5'cl�-e'�?/-�-LI --�-�l-=-�+d.^_'r�-%i�Qt-� -- 1^-.OT=S.�-_�__ " ' __' , ' ° ______ 33 z� . , 16 � , • . 415. Qt0 . , � as � ze , c�+c�Ui�raber 1-6 ' 36 37 � 29 3O • Temp Check N�unber 17 39� ao' " • 17 Carmect�Inc , _ 01-4200-610-30�, Jan svc � ' 16.05 � 47 ` 32 . ,:t ^ . ' ' . , ' Ki 42 .. 33 __ . . �, ' __.___ 43 � � � • 44 �4 Tatais Terno Check lV��rn6er- 17 ' 45 �35 ' 46 /1 36 4� lJ 48 37 , . 49 � i..;, 39 ' � . ' 18 D�hlgren Shardl�aw U6an ° 01-�Q�10 ' 4 � . Dec svc ' . . . � q < , 1.408. @�+ ' . , � � 5�� � 62 40 18 a . 53 41 � 1 . =+Q�B. Q�� 54 GZ Tctals Ternp Check Nurnber 18 65� 56 '� , Ternp" Check Nurnber � , 19 - , , � , - , , ' . - . • .° .. ^ • . ' . . . . , e � . � . ss U ae •-���ttn�-y r�re 6h flssri �� ..h'i@�r Q+3@ aQg � �o � ' � so 46 67 �47 1'3 3Qi.00 sa:.� aa �-S--Ti �"tAf�-�BGS{( IyLifA s4 49� , � ' .. . , 65 (s� Ternp Check Nurnber �@ � � _ � . . < ,, . �, , s;:,) ' 68 6a 20 Dakota Cai�nty Auditc�r 01-43Q�Q�-i l@-1Q+ solys 33.40 �o � sa ----- �t `� n 55 73 :6 Tatals Temp Check Number �@ r �. . � _ .�4: 7 . . . . - , .. ,, „ � . ,.. . � . �e J _ •� � � �-. ''�(2'.1ciYf 1'�'3'._�_ _ _ _.�...----^-----�_"_ l.icR1[ti5 �1st _ .� '..___Man---3: 6i -__� ___ Citw c�f t+tendata Hei� � Ternp ChE�:K Ntun6er �1 � . � . � }�. � ..... ..... ._.. .. - }^ � Check - � � 3 Nutaber Vendt�r Narae Accactnt Cade I I W �1 Thcrnas J Delanev ��� 1fi-446�-Q+�iiL�--@0 �� s �6� . `�� �' 7otals Ternp Check IVumber 21 , , �s .. . . _ �_ ......�� _._.. � o--�-eroo-Gheek-�+l4atnber�-�--- ---�� � �iz� �� Dictaohc���e �8-4335-��h�-Q�� ' 3�_ ^� ._.___._�__'......___ -T_.__.,.._._^___�"_.... F"i .� Tc+t�ls Terap Check Nuraber �W (sr>i ' _ Cararnent s Re a1d Fire st�tiari dict eo___._.. }-'aoe 4 Fir110UYs'� — - - _ _ 354. 5t� . 1'�! Terno Cherk Number 23 n� 's� - :-�-�=s�-Met�u_.Cr-.F�r.ev-Assn-.. m�i�Qt.4-td2�1i. �cr�_. ._ rnCarshcs.._.-�-------.._.,T ��•-�S� ,°, . • � ___.:._ . 'zo� , �� - " , , 1Qt. @fZ� ' . #ss. . . zz --�'c;t-a 3 s-Ternr�--�heck-Nuraber----..�'� ,jt23 Temo Check N��rnber �4 � �� _�....-�._�_�.___. ---- !24 �26 ��i FirstsTrust ' Q�1-�11�5 --- orinc oyrnts _ 25Q��Q�OQ�.�O � . � : ,24 �irst , irust • • , 01-129�A � . ' � Prir�r pymts 250. �C00. Q�Q�cr �, r• --- "i:�-�.Qx---R �:�t �• . •��+=�t�t56-id�ZtQt-thQ7 7? trrl� ` 1 �SQt lt+f1� 28� )�� �4 First Trust 14-42�6-000-00 77 bds 3@6.�r8 •- 3 G4 First Trust 37-44�6-Q�Q�0-00 78 bds �7. ���• ��' .� � _ ��o _ {�j,-trsrn 78 bds 369.76 s� � 24' �ii^st Trust � , ' � 1A-4456-¢�00-Q�¢� _ ' - 77 bds . . �. , 4. 478. 50 32 �4 Fisrst ?rust"� . � „ . ��-4456-Q�00-Q�0 "` . 77�bds ° � � 64�8.45. . 33 •:�i-iJ•G"s.._,-r�v—n�ii�,ir=— , .. , ��-=3tji.�t�-F�Ql�i=F�� 7��3C�5. 1 'l $�'' ��ri " 24 First Trust 14-42�6-00Q�-Q�+� 77 bds 31'3. t�3 '3� 24 First irust • 1�-44�6-@Q�0-0� 72 oark bds i, 4��, Q�Q� 3G ,- ;.. �rt{...��_� ,�.� ?.{� as � 288 �"� ., s.� - < � .. , - � . � � �, z ^'.� . �, f . . . . , " x � - < ' 37. 942. "77 .� , _ ` , 39'�. „ , ,. , t� . - , aa • a+ 42 Ternp Check N�.trnber 2� 43 4 = �5 �First Trust " , ' `1k-445Es-Qi4��t-Q�tn 7Er 6ds <. � _ � r , 3�5. c�ih� , , an �d 25 �.irst Trust . ' ° ' .. �.14-42G6-00Q�--00 � , ° - . 76'.bds , �. � . , 3Q��.58" - , as '.. " -�a-�s�n�.e�� - -��_�.�=�-rh�y�rn�a � a^, t,.��. . '�. ., i � .fZ�S� 50 Iby i� First Trust 16-4455-��h�t-fit4� �^e 83 bds 15Qt, thQ�O. 00 25 �irst Trust 16-4456-000-00 83 bds 12.�25.00 as r� '�s.�-rT-.-�s� 85=s►srSEa-@00-00 �6-..br#s 56, As6�. �'if1�_ as .' �5 First Trtixst � -q '74-4455-0+hfh-il=+h � re 85' bds � . , iQ�O. QO�t. @C� ,, ,60 �5 �irst �,Trust �, � ` . 74-445F�-OQ�Q�--00 "" ' > ' 85 bds` � , " . ' ��z��87, 5tD " $� S ' . . a � � .. .. , y ,.. .Y . , . 52 ��� J�7i. i=��. �l� s3 Tot�l s Temo Check N�vnber :'_5 64 ' se : Terno Check hfurnber ' " _ . ` �6 . < � ` . r > - ' ^ . . � ...; a, �s� � . .. . � . . . . � � � ,� . .. . . . . , .� , . .- .. .a � � - � . f - . . �. 7 .., . . .. , - . � . _ , � � � , • . • . _ ' � ,. ,, � ' � ' , . 42 � 43 ' a4 4B 48 '"Y La ;;t �. ,t '�� � =�a_.Ia�' _,.� _.. �---� —,_Claitns_Lis�- --- - Ra�e S Mon 3: M Citv af Mendc�ta Hei � � Ternp Check IVumber �6 � � rrt . -�Z Check ' . , ' � .� � " - � , s 3• Nurnber Vendar Narne Account Code Commer�ts ' � Arnaunt ' . 3 0 --- --�----- --��r.� �-- - " a 6 -6 26 Fire Marshall Assn af MN @1-4400-15Q-3Q� 92 dues 3�.0� 6� -- ----- � 6 ^ .-� 8 8 Tc�tals Terno Check Nurnber 26 .. �o ' � " ' � �, � ,o � ' '�emo-Etreck-Nurnbe '7 . • � . . 1z 13 71) 14 12 �7 F'aul Giefer @1-4134�-�ti�0-70 rni reirnb 18.70 ie � is ial � �7-- --------=--------____- _--_ __._-__- ----------------------------- 18.7Qr is 75[ Tatals Terno Check Nurnber 27 . �e i� — - -- --- - zo �� Ternp Check Nurnber 28 22/� 78 • 23 �..� 19 "b-�cc�dyQar-Gc+mml-�-i�re— ----Q�-1=1+�30=49Q+-�------- ---ta-r-e-.3�d8 �95�9 24 �Zo , �8 6aodyear Cornrnl Tire 01-4330-49�-50 _ tires 304 3�5."96 , 26 27 ' 28 6aadyear Cc,rntnl Tire 01-4��0-460-�Q� rors • 1�5. 84 � ' z� n Zz � -�c*c-�dvea�-C�rnmi-�'-3-re---•- —�5-4�dQ+-�4�Q�TfiO -- ----nor�•— - +�@;�$k �za �I�3 C8 Go.�dyear Cornm2 Tire 1�-433Q�-49�-E@ tires 4�9 529.48 30 �� I� --- -------- a� .-1 �Z`' 3z Izs — - -- as -26 Totals Temp Check Nurnber �8 • . ° 34�j 27 . • ` ' " , ' _. .. � . _ � 35 C,./ 28 . A�Bl--�9 � ' 36 37 '"`3Q 29 6uadwill Ir�d�istries Inc @1-e010 Dec svc 397.:r0 3g0 at � �� - . . ---- , ao 32 � Tc�tals TemQ Check Nurnber , 29 ' • ' • ,�7 ,� • �' �(� 33 ' . 44 34 45 3s Temp Check Number 3Q� 46 36 47 � "�-p�'.v�=��."�2-9i�E�.d-1-1 t �-L+"� - - o n8 37 __ >. < < . �� . � " , � . ____ . ,. � 49 � ' � J(b., • . . , „ . .. ` y , . � . ; ^ ., . , ^ .r7. iTQi ' - 50 l.:/ � " ' 52 40 ' . 53 �42 Temo Check Number �1 5s�1 56 � � ' ' ' ' 67 ,44 ; . 31 Govt Traininq_ Svc ' 01-44@Q�-1�09-Q�� -' - ` ` regr� Smith • Kach - � ' � • ' 125. Q�0 " ' ,. ' ^ 5a% 1 45 _ . _ • � r � . � , .. ___.___ ' • 69 `-/ " ' •j � 60 A6 ' 67 ,Q_ Tatais Ternp Check Number 31 62 ., �4B 63 +ti.� �tl(A�32 �^i 64 49� ^ . . • � 65 6° ��. 32 H N T R' � ' . D 18-42G4�-701-@@ Re 1Cc WMO ' 2, 753. Q�0 , s� v ` 68 B2 63 �� �. 7�J3. m@ 70 6a Tut�ls Ternp Che�k IVurnber 32 » n i53� . , 73 � Ternp Check Number 33 - . ' - , , , , ` .,� 7 . " ' ' . , > � . , .: 76�� � � � ' ��� "' . !�----��F'�'r..�� ^---��.-...-��'"_.�_��-...���_..._....,.-..-.-� _ -.�-w-.r._ �---^.v ' ='@'.7an 1��2 t;lairns List �� Mc�» 30 +i ----------------------Citv af Mendc�t� Hei " __..____.__. - -_------.--- I - --�Temo ChecK Number 3� i rnt� ' Check Y ^ � .. a �� Nurnber� Vendc�r Narne Rccount Cade Cc�rnrnents �5 33 C W Hc�ule Inc �y' `� 72-4460-835-@0 ^���y ! pyrnt�8 fi6-4 6 '� Tatals Temo Check Nurnber 33 ^� �� ' ..a ' . g —�'�m�-EMec�4t-IUarn�er--- \ 3�r ` ` -_ _.----.-------- ,oi �__ _� �"� 34 I C R 0 Q�1-44@4-Q�4¢�-40 '32 dues ,� --- ���t , ,4 - ------_ - __ __._..r._-----�.�.- --_---_ _ __�..------- �cl 75 Tutals Ternp Check Nurnber 34 . �GI � Terno Check Number -.� „� ----- � ----__�_.._---_----�,_.____ __�._._.��� �� �� ,a :� I_II-S--_—� -@1�3�P��9�t�i@T- �---- � Jar�.-rntcn--------,-- '�� . 35 I O S 01-4494�-109-0'3 Jan rntcn Z0 � �5 I O S .. 01-4268-c�85-85 J�"ri mtcn �zzl ----�'c'-;--�-�— ----- r^1-.4.3:�0�=-.k6Qt:�m ._.__. ' _�Jan_rntcr�_._______..� �23 35 I O S 01-433Q�-445-40 Jan rntcn Z4 35 I O S 01-43c�0-Qt8@-80 Jan rntcr� 25 mJ=�i.'.^',Q�i.9�=1.:J .Jar� _mt cr�----��� xs „ ,�� I O S Q�9-449Q�-Q�00-@Q� Jan rntcn _� 35 I O S ; , , 15-433Q�=4'30-60 � Jan mtcn ze - - 29 'S^iJ -•'3o Tatals Ternp Check Nurnber 35 37 . �v raoe b • Arnaunt � 3, 383, 93 _3,_383 ��_ 75. 0nc T 7�. A0 - 14. 00 .. J. 7.j �,v. CQ� 14. �0 31. 50 6�.�.�. . J. %J . 16. 25 �50. Q�0 a �''7 27 � ' 28 29 30 ( 37 � - �2 33 � . , 34 l ' ' . I,���� 3Z , � Temp Cheqk Number , ' �6 , ; , w , . ` �" � , - 33 ^ .. . _ ' ` � , � ." . . . . � ., , , — r�. ���clViG.l.l. ` ,r'61 _ Oi`� . �34 `36 I C M A R i @1-4134-i1Q�-10 12/27 oayroll 91.3� 35 36 _----_ � ��jy �4 37 Tatals Terna Cherk Nurober t . 36 , .- ` � � •. � � < . •• � • :40 .. 'n� 8heete Nttrnber • • •�.,• �7 , .. ' ' • ` ^ ,- . - ' s.y .� ` . „ , . � ' .. . . . 41 37 Intl Rssn af COP @1-444�4-02Q�-20 �2 dues 1@0.@@ as 43 .. . 37 - . '" . ' ' • , . ' , ` , . S�Q�Q�. Q�Q� ' � � ,. , . sq . o . ., � ' • Tatals;Temp Check Number �� 37 , y •- � •� , ' < � ' ,� , " � d5„ ., , ., , > ' ' _. ... ' . 46 Temo Check Number �8 a� • ae — — — A1V5 �7 qA ae . __ • . � ,, . .. � . . 60 . S8 ' , . , K , . . z, . n' , . � . si • ' . � . • , • ., .. �67.98 . ..n6er ' 38 . . " � 52 ' �s3 Ternp Check Nurnber 39 I54 sG - 39 Kiwanis Club ' , ' - ' 01-440Q+-i1Q-10 • � 2rid qtr � � - ' 94.0Q� e66 __ ,� ' _ , , „ . , > , �... ,• < ., . •< ` � ._ �' ' _____ . . , . < •. � . , . . , . . 1 1 � ��Jar,_i''�'� --- r'� aitas_Lis.t__ _�,_� Mon 3: � City of Mendata Hei ••�� Terno Check Nurnber �9 � np. � 2 Check 3 Nurnber Vendar Narne Accaunt Code Carnrnents 5I 39 -- -----�- --� _ �_. �_ Totals Terno Check Nurnber 39 �e� Ternp Check IV�unber 40 �o —=4Q� '-.�-�.= -� �CJ�Ffi=i�ce-MaeFri-nes--�,3-43eQ�-490-�-Q+ —��oe-rntt�,- ���I 4@ Krechs Office Machines Q�1-4330-440-20 tyoe rntcn �7� 40 Krechs OFfice Machines @1-433Q�-490-�0 __ -- - tvoe rntcn 73. ---40-Kreehs-0ffice--Mach�-ries---- -Q�1=4330=46Q�-3Q�-- --t�ae-r�itcn- ---. l�Qi _4Q Krechs Office Machines QS-4330-490-15 tvoe rntcn �16� '� �� �I � Tatals Terno Check Nurnber 40 I,a r79I -et,tp-Gheek-Pltunber----41-- -- -- --.�-- — �zo• `�11 41 Larsc�n Green Haiise Q�i-2010 xrnas tree etc 2z' I 41 `241 Tc�tals Temn Check Nurnber 41 � 5 _ -__,_�_ ,I26 Temp Check Nurnber 4� . z7 � � . "i.o � ,._..�.� m ' . 28 ' -��.,-,�-alr+=E'�t �es Qii-tF,40� 31O 1 9�-ciir�ctr�y 29 __ '" 3O 42 31 tns-�hec-k-pJurnher �'� Amaunt 94. 00 —��=�„��� 90. nt @ 45. �.'�0 —, ;�,:�.-00 ' 45. @� 4kt2. 8@ 402. 8Q� 79_ .�iU� � , 79. 50 32 Temp Check Numher , 43 • � . " � - •• • � , � �� 33 • ' , ' � '35 43 M A U M A 01-440@-110-ik� 12/19 rntg 10.�@ 36 ----- 37 ^ � . . , � Q " �£;- Tatals Ternp' .Check Number ' � 43� , . , -°- . ` ;a�* ° s . . • . - • ., 59 . .. • �r ; , ` . ' . . . . -'. ' . < 40 41 � 42 44 Mer�dc�ta Heights Rubbish' 01-428@-31@-�0 Dec svc 47.'35 �r�ei-q�,�.�s� .'�bb�sh' Q1�=�+:�80-a1Q�-7m n��- =vc 4�.35 I� , ` • k4 Menda�a Heights Rubbish' , " 15-4�C80-31Q�-64� ' , � ` � . Dec svc ; � , ^"�� � 47.88 " • as � > � :� 44� Mendota Heights Rubbish' � 01-428�-315-3Q� - ' , Dec svc � , _ � __ . �' 42. 60 . ' , . . ______ 46 47 176 186. 38 � Totals Terno Check Nurnber 44 49 „Temp Check N��mber 4� ' � ' . 60 , ' , e1 � � �'��>,,-t-..�.�aste 6entrc-�� 1-5-d��l@ � Dec�ac_c! 52 53 45 64 -�Mec-►F-Ala�raber �f:f- 56 , ' , y « �471 ' , .. � . . � ' . .a ' � a .. ., e • " 6 435 00 � 6, 435. Q�Q� ' � 51 � ' 52 53 54 �"` 55 •..r 56 _ 57 ' " 58i^ , 59 ..� 60 61 62 � 63 64 65 �. 66 , t • 76 ' 7 { -� • _ �0'Jan 1�=�2 Ltairns Listi -- -------- ---�-------- ---------- �•aue n-- -- � � Mon 3: �1 ----------�--•-----•�-�--�-Citv c�f Mendc�ta �Hei � j•- Temp ChecK Nurnber 46 - � (fl j}, ' Check ` ' S ' Number Vendc�r N�me Accourh Cade Comrnents Arnaunt a� 3 • 4 Q� �__�_"____- 5 5 45 Midwest 5iren Service ��� @7-4330-0Q�0-Q�0 �V� � � J�» rntcn ~ u~ i �� 62.40 s �-- ----- , � 6 --'r•b .-_�_ _r�.___��_._._._-_-.- -- — 5;_._4 $ �e Tc�tals Temp Check Nurnber 46 A , • 9 �o �9 .. . . . � ` 11 i�o---�ernt�-�he�k-N�irnber—'��7 -- , ���_ ���.Y�.--�------•---__�.�------- r — is� i+ �"I 47 Minn Deot of Revenue @1-43�Q�-1JnL-J� Dec fuel tax 8�. Q@ Iic�� `'Z� ----- .ic 1T-- __ ,�.___�"__"'___._ ___��_�'_"'_'_�_'�,._�- _..�_ ._ . '"_ ._.. .. _.. _ �.�.' '_ "'_'.__"___-.._ _`__--_ ____ "f 4� 80. Q�0 ` �I16� 176! ,Tat�ls Ternp Check Nurnber 47 • IiG+�� as Terno Check N�unber ••--48 -----• -------------------._�_____�-_---------_�_�...----�--------� �.��,.�� Z�A-) zl lie� ��, ��a�8-.M,i-r.�r+--Mut.�tal_Li.fe�Ins�_-._._0i.=�07��-_�----------����--1/1� payr_al.l.-----------•- - -- �^-'S,�@�--- a _ . ______ • 25i �"G �Z� �►8 ^ . � . � � ' 3�:.�. tnQ� ' �2� `. ) 21 �#,a�-�C�ernp-EMeck-Nurnber . � f -/+9 . < " • za �ZZ __ __��_ �.__.__�__r._-..__ __..__._�._"'__'_"_'�__—__ _� _ �29 23 3C �'1 Temp Check Nurnber 49 s, � 24 �2 'zs . 49..Mirmesc�ta Tcmc Inc 01-4330=490-70 �oarts'--. ------~^-- , 170.00 3ai� 27 . ' .. ., - >. " ` . .. .. . .�__ ��_ 17QI 1hQt_ .. ' , 36 28 37 ^29 Totals Terno Check Nurnber 4'3 39�.� �,3 40 31 .. � , - , . • � ^ , . < , 41 ""32 ' . �. 50 Minr�esota ConwaV . ' Q�1-�@iQ� � • , coats/Pants ' • "857.70 • • a3� ..33 , � 3 �.��,�=�caa��a.9r ' '.�-4M�m=�i3�-60 ' .nar_t.s � ' • aa �34 50 Minnesota Cariway 01-c@10 baats 158.0@ as 35 a6 ''1 --- -------- ,y� q. f 3G � � 3a � Tot�ls Ternp Check Nurnber � � 50 � � , . ° ' ' . ' - < . . e � ��_ � 60�..� 39 - .. ` . , •. 5 c . , . . . " ,"A . .. , .. . , .. . , .. .,. P , , . 62 40 63 42 J� M�J S A Q�1=4404-050-5Q �� dues JQ�. Q�Q� 66'`�� 56 .�. 51 ' ,' , � . . �. ' " •.... �... ' � • , • � , , ,� 50.Q�@. . . �• 68+.) Tctals Temp Check Number 51 � � • . • � � , . . 6s� I46 . _ , , ... . x � � s 6• . . . ' 60 ja6 Temp Check Number 5� s' 147 62 � � 63 `--? ae ��� rnar�t Svctern 01-"-'07� � iio� � S sa �49 . , __ . , . , � _ , . , ' , _____ "' , 65 50 • • , �� _ . 66; � _, Ji �' � ' • " a, . e , ` , �.^'r.�J. Q�Q� " x, • 67 � 61 l� T-�-.�-.,,v--.o.�..of^F.o�r . ' .. ..m - ,. _ - ' ' .,. , .. . , . .. 68 62 ' 69 63 Terno Check Number 5s ��L-% 54 ' 72 `66i � ; 53 Mirm 5CIA p. � . Qi-44Q��C-Q�20-24� • � • •,�spring trng „ ... • 120.@0 . ' � oa ��e " ' .,. . . • � 76 '�. . ' __ , n , • , V , ______ ' • ` o . �: 7 �� , .. , , -..--_--..._.... .-,+-�-�-•-�. . .. 4. • � . ���' _. .. �'--•---�-•---�--�-�-�_ ..��_�-_.�.�. , .�_ `L4kt:...18Y3J.''a`'�`� _..._._.__r �_"�_"�"__.�_"_,...__.'_ __� "_L:1c12ft15._1.»35:�_.__ �».._.�._.r_.,._v." ""'_' ..� "".,..'_� _ 4-'cifl2 '� (+ Mcn 3: M City c�f Mer�dc�ta Fiei. I � Terao Che�K Nurntaer 53 --. �rno. _ �_. � _...� ._..._ _._......_�_._. i � Check �` Nurnber Vendar iVsrne Acec�ur�t Gede Carnrner�ts 3 ...»y.__ .�Y....�.�_�__..._�._'_........__.r..,...__�..�Y._`..�__'�.�__....,..._.._ �_...._..___.�.._.�....,._�......"_'__.�,._...__....»_....�__._... 'a J� 'S Tc�tals Ternfl Check Nurizber 53 6 ' Temp Check Number 54 �� � �� ^ y � . 'e . . . 54-Motorc� I �r- ----�E� 1-43;�0-46Q�-o@ ----o�r>t s- a .�...� __.__�.,. _ io;LL ttI -- !=AK .�.�4 •i��' .- Tatals Terno Check-Number _..--- - �•�---,:,4 ---_.____._.__.__�.__._.__ ____.__----._.._ __ _------ -.--- � _ _ .... i14� .Temp Gheck Nurnber 55 55i . _._.._._. _�.� ' "'___...,_ ic t7 55 M�CIC �1-4404-�c2Q�-20 92 dues I,$ -- � }.19} __.__�,5 ._ _.__ _. ._..- _.___.___._.� _---_._- --_�-_�....., �Zp+ Tot�1s Terno Check Nurnber 55 4z�� ;2.-� �rnc�-Gi�eck-Itili�rnber- �6 - ---- ------•-- --- _ .__ __ �Za� 56 Natl Fire F'rotectiar� �1-440�-030-3Q� rer�ewal �24� -- -- _....�_._ ___.._�______.__.._------------ ��-j . �6 P2�' 7atals Ternp Check N�vnber 56 z� 28 Terno Check Number 5i 29 S0 ewsweel�• �@�44Qt��1f1�=3.�tt r.exiewal....,._ 31 32 v7 ^ , , ' aa , � T-c�a��s��rnfl-Gl�eek--Nt�r+�ber �? 3D 35 Temp Check N�_�mber 58 ae 3? - 58 Geral �te?son Jr �� � A �1-2@1� mi reirnb FF, I trr�o '38 . , � " � 39 '+ . .�� ` � ' . . a ' � ' • - _�__ � ' 1"c�tals Terno Check NLirn6er 58 ai 42 fN{J--�lQ8i4--Q�LLffl��� �� �43 ,. ` ' . . " " , ' °, 59 Ncmthern State F'awer Q�1-4212-315-30 , . , Jan svc • as ,3-n,:c,�,��y.. a+ +c-,�'� E�1 ao� a,� rn=rn Tarc._4vr a5 59 Ncrtt�ern State F'awer Q�1-421ti-31Qs-7Q� J�rs svc �'� 59 IVvrthern State Gc�wer 1�-4�1:�-310-60 Jari svc �4s� � k�r-#,#��r�-State Caiuer rn1-4::j.�=s:�b..:�� T�risavc _� r 49 59 hic�rtherrs 5iate Pc,wer 15-4�1� 4Q�Q�-fsQ� Jan svc - sa 59 Narthern St�te Rawer . i�8-421,�-00Q�-0Q+ , Jan �svc " s, er " 01-4� 1 1-315-30 T..ar�svc -- - 'z 59 hlorttsern State F't�wer t�i-4�#1-31f1�-5� J�rs svc �' S9 hfortherr� 5tate F'�wer 01-4i11-31Q�-70 Jarr svc 54 • 55 �6, ... .. � � . „ .. ` , _ • ., . , ' � . . .. � ,� ' ' ' ' � � . ., � -.-.�.•.__�..�.._._. _ ..-...�-��-,.,., --.--"v-------•-•__•.��-...-.��`-_..... �-,�-..-....- �.. , ....._.... . . ...--....�.......,..-..-�......-,.-�-.�_.. ....-.- .,. . . . _ . i ` � , ' . .: L {�fitGLtYt� � i-��. �� �.44.-�0 144. �� 150. Q�0 :�i ��t�r1 �s •SG 17 �78 .^-�! 9 �z.. cv' ���� r� ; `a (461,' 1 i 55 56 5?s � 58 � �3%. �i% ' , 59 � p j � 60 fii 838. 13 62 � �jj8, (L�� 63 6A ' 24. Q�@ ,, es 66, � 78¢�. BQ� � 67 `..1 c 6$ �J�S. t}Q� . 69 74 : - . �Sfi. 4Qi �, �,._) n 73 , 7 • . • 76 • : � r., � ek�� .�an a'yyc _.____-_._�._.._._ �laisus �isti __ . . _ .- - - --- ---- --_.__.__�.__ r�aoe 1k� i� �? Man 3� ���j - --- _�...__ Citv cf Mer�dc�ta�Hez �. Tecno Che�K lWurnber �'3 � rn;..- ----�_�r._._�_.._._ _,_ � ' Check ' '. � _ , s Nurnber Versdcr N�rne Acc�urct Cade Ccznments Arnc�ur�t a� 3 . . . � _ .,,,_,�_ _.J.... --- 4 ° 59 Narthern State F�c+wer�i�_ 15-4221-31Q�-60 .�.^v�--- _ M. J'an svc`�_-�.� ��56. 32 6 s 6 5� Nc�rtherr� State F�c�wer �8-4�11-Q0Q�-�4� Jan svc 8L4. #9 7 s-------_ e , � 708 `- _ _._.__.______.._____._.� , 5x 9�1: 39 � , �o 8 Tatals Tecno Check N�unt�er 59 , " , � " , rt � 8 ` _.�... _� ___, vx '_ ._.....�__._,...__.__�_��.......__._... . . 13 10 Ternp Check N�unber 5� �a � »I 1s .. .�'�ID_i1lar�hers«^�ai_e_F.'ower___.._____._�_..Q�l.-��1,1=:tt2��4�___._�__._.,._ _______.._ _.Ja» svc -.-----.__--.-----��___S_49,..6�__ __.... ,� I13 6@ Nc,rthern State F'ower �18-4211-0¢�0-00 Jan svc � 731.81 '� na ;r'� 'a� 60 Narthern 5tete F'awer �1-4u11-32Q�-7@ Jar� svc ' 182. 45 �� � " __Qc-t+tEa^-�#aern-8t.ata-Pawer__..__ � �-4�Y2 =_41bQt-6tZt_.__-_ _��.._.___.___Jan sv.c �-_.......�_ .._. _�435�.�7 "�___ " = za zi Zz `4� 1. 499. 41 _a ' 7 's ^ rnpck...lVumher .—_._...-,.EsQ� w za ,e v ' . Y_• . . , . ----____._._._._�..-..--w. _... __.__-----____.._--�----_... . z:, 2a '"� Tetnp Check Ntur�ber, � - 61 , ' � � - _` . , . 26 � 21 .. , 27 28 2� 61 Narwe�t Earrk Mpls'...Y.~- �11-�11� _ �-.-____.._�. band princ __,_�.._ 3@5, 000. �0 � ao � za 61 iVorwest Bank Mols O�a-123k� bc�r�d orinc 305, @Q�O, c�Q�r s� ''•� 24 ..lstar-�aeri-Bar,k-�tt�,1s :''4�-�_4�� ��+���r7� _ 7�_l�sis_._ - �,..i � � s2 zs �- 61, Nc�rwest E�ar�k Mpl s • �5-44.'�r5-0@0-@Q+ 79 hds ... ' 6. 75@. �i+0 . , sa 26 �' " ° c . , , 34 �'? .`- 61 NurWest Pank Mpls • �+�-44�6-04�0-@0 . 79 bds �.. 1. 7�8. Q�@ � ' ' " � ss � Es-tnrhfh-t7st7t 7_9.�ds ' � _ . , as s� t� ;-�_ . � - . aa ro 61 fVc�rwe�t bar�k Mois �Id-4226-i�t0tD-00 79 bds 200. @0 a' ��n �61 IVr,rwe�t H�nk Mpls �t�-44�6-000-@O park bds 59, 530. �0 3g � - '" c't�ii_.k?3� �FtO. ao s� ' . 61 IVarweSt HaYik MD1 s - , 85=44�5-0�0-0Q� , . 89 bds , „ , , 1"44J. �QsO, ft1fD , ,. . a� 42 . 3z ` 61 IVarwe�t Rarrk MpiS • 85-44u6-@00-00 ' . . . � ." 8'9 bds ' . . .N 4'9. 817. �0" , . .. _ , ' ° - aa � as v so--.T''-�x+ic " hl}� 2 � .° " �� �, ='��=thtbsZ!-�� ` . __ A9 t�. � ' ` ` aa �3a M ___ __.._...______ 45 46 "3S 732 ;'_6$, 09@. 0Q� a� 36 �h '38 as t'Temo Check Nurnber � ,. �� �,�' . � . . ., .. 6 .,. _' ,> . . : . � • r , ; x: s � . e� '4 .`r.. " r� � , � . K . : 6� �� 39 - , - 52 {40 fs2 tVarwest Barrk Mols 31-4455-Q�0th-00 87 bds i5�. Q¢�¢�, @0 sa j' 62 tVarwest Fank Mpl s 31-44�6-000-¢�0 8� hds ��• �4�• �� 6� �) �42 `� - 'G"e.-GE1.Jf�QiQk mtL� A� hLi� �6Q1. %4 56 � � �4� , r•-� 62 hic�rwest E+ank htpl.s ' � .."` � 36-4�26-00Q+-�0 " . � 91 "trd, fee ' . � T , < 25�h. Qsf� , . � > . s� 44 . .r • f , a • - 6g � T,yB , ^ 4 , ,.. n � , " . . �� • _' ' -. ... . . � . ` , s > '_, ___«. . „ 60 Bt 4S i47 Totals Terno Check hturnber 6� 62 "•. 63'ti.•� � 64 {6° ' ' �53 fJslar.,d¢ J�ni�teri�lM Spl^y- y '08-4335-@0Q±-�@p ' . Rc p " solys ' . �^ 'a , ° , ' ,84.90n .- „ „ ,. . 6e�--� - 52 �� gtt. �Q� 69 70 (1 �3 Tatals Ternp Check Nurnber 63 '� �"� �64 n • ��' � Temt� Cttecic iVurnber . ,, . � 64 - � ., n ` { e."t - " � . � , .. . R : .' �r k . , .., � � ,. ��t....� � � , �•� -i " '" � '""� _vCiaims List ,� _____ _,___. F�aoe 11 Mc+n 3: ��I Citv of Mendata Hei �' Ternp Check Nurnber 64 1 � rnp A•iZ Check . � � ' ' z 3 N�unber Vendcm Narne Acccunt Cade ` Comments . Amour�t � 3� a - 5 64 Peat Marwick Main & Co 01-422Q�-130-1¢� ` orc�oress billino 432.00 6 64 F'eat M�rwick Main R Cc� @5-42i0-1.?0-15 " 77. @0 ��� � 64-��ea�--iMarwit�Vt-M��-n-Rr--Gc� —z-5-4�2Q��i�Qi-�60 "_ -- --�8,-0� . 9 - 8 64 Peat Marwick Main & Ca @3-4220-130-@Q� " 68.@0 - , �o 9 64 Peat M�rwick Main & Ca 10-4�20-130-@0 " , 23.00 >>� io t�t�-M�.��vi-�-i�-T�rn-'rn-t4-ce •.•, ..2�cQt�;sQ�-Q�0 �� ^'-+ "� �a �� 64 Peat Marwick Main & Cc� 14-4�2@-130-0�C " 96.Q�Q� �a �12I E,4 F'eat Marwick Main & Cc, 16-422Q�-13�-Q�S� " � �13. @� �b `� i6 �54� Y J1� .__'_.�'_ _.-_.___�� _..«.__�._..__'_.""�'_"._.__ _'-.__._.__.__.— 1. Q�Q��. rIL� �78 f76� � Tutals Temo,Check Nurnber 64 79`� � - - -- — zo ���� Ternp Check Number 65 Z� zzl'� 23 �.d i78 ttest-B�t�-Syst em n-4bQ+Q+-B+�-�0• --=�m o-eq---- -',-y-,�-�+rQ++Z+ za 19 , , 25 20� -- . " * ________ • 26 s�� 65 .,- , ` 2. 470. Q+0 z� � .'� _-,���zrefl--Gt�eek-=1Ui�tnber �o� • -- -- za Zz ss Z� 30 Temo Check Nurnber 66 ai {� 24 32 - 26 66 Sharnrack Cleaers Q�1-2@SQ� Dec clno .� ' 64. 25 � 34/'� 26 � u. � . ' � . � _____ ., . � V 35'1J ' , __ < 27 ,. � �.". ' .. � _: , • , , , . • . _ . . ,. . .. , , �. . , . .. . .. . , ' n O : "' 36 � 29 Tatals Temo Check Nurnber 66 , ae 3 , 39 Q 40 "• 32 � � a. ''. , . . . ' �x _ . ` . , . " ` , r .i� 42 ' 67 Sc�merset 19 , i5-4460-@04�-0Q� � _ Fire irnor� reirnb . 21, 97Q�. 00 , -. as'� 33 ` , , . ^ ' _________ . ` . 44 aa 67 21, 97Qt. 0� a6 35 Totals Ternp Check N�unber 67 a�� 36 • � 3e Temp Check Number - . : 68... , � . . . ' . . . w , . .." . t _ , as so Q> .. b .v � . . • . •. "' 51 39 " . . . ... " • � ' � � ' 52 4� 68 Spectr�vn @1-2m1Q� uporad 309,n�0 54,. ___ ________ 65 �� 42 66 43 Tot�ls Temp Check Nurnber 68 � - - - ' ' , " � ° � � . ' , ` 58 .. a. ' - . , - . , , �' . ' ^ .. .. . • � � . " � - 59�� 46 ' ' , ' ". " 60 a6 61 d� 62 ;+ ± 69 State Treasurer 01-�Q�10 4th otr s/chqs 2.9�3.55 63'�_� •60 _ . s ae "� 69 � �, e , . � - , � , � . � , 2�9�3.55 66;. 50 , Tatals Temp-Check Nurnber " 69 P_ � ' . , 6�1� 61 ' . , ' .. .. . ,. , . . ' 68 6' Ternp Check Nurnber 70 �a� 53 71 64 _ �,.� 72 66 ' . . _ _ — . F _ 7 �5� ' %� � . .. • � .,�. - , ' , � .. . ,.. .. . ' , , , � ��", 8Q18.�3 " + � � •� I 7 } 7 �,. –_ " ' 2nc'Jan �n^? l.lairns_List ---.. _,._.--- – ----- -----_ ._._.—._ 1-'aoe 1� Q '�-M�n 3: h ���� � � �� Citv of Mer�dc�ta Hei Ternp Check Niunber 70 `~ � era� ' Check - —' ---------- ,_ . < ` s ' ��lurnber Vendor Narne Accaunt Code Comments Atnaunt � a� 3 " • 4 ° Totals Terno Check Nurnber 70 ���`--�---�`--^- --`.__._._..__._�___.�_____�.�_.—� � 6 b 6 � 7 6 �� rtiA�li N�itabEr �t a � r---�---�- , _ __�__�..._ .._�_ . ' _ 9 � 10 � 8 71 Sun Newspapers 01-4240-@5Q�-5� bid ad < . �3.56 �� f » ' __; � Sr�_,___�n Newspacer_s.- — —�m1=4�40-mem-R�------,--------------_�.Re...Fur.ls�r,a��c._.__ � .zB._4�_ ' ` 1z 10 71 Sun Newsoaoers ¢�1-4240-080-8� Re util vac ��.3� �4� I>> _____ �5 ,� ��_ 12 14 _ ? 1 .� __�_'_'.....'_� _._._ _. 8 16 _"__'__"'._ '_..._` "_"_' ._ __'�_._.."'_"' ' ..... _'."___. __`__'_._' _�" J% Tatals Ternp Check Number 71 � ` " '� , , �a � 75, . '�erna-Ciaeck-Nu�nber —�_ 7r 19 so iG--- . _ .. _ . ' __ __.."�' "`_�"_��____• _____�_.v._. 21 7 7. 22 7� Svrnantec 01-4301-110-10 scftware 37. 0�c� �3 � �a ' za 79 . %� ' __'_. F _'_.__"__'_ _'__._—'�'_ '_ _.' •. J^%�. �Q� � � ' 26 12� s Tc�t�ls Ternp Check Number ' +7� ' , � , � , „ ` . - x < • z' `� za 2� Terna Check Nurnber 73 � V • 29 :23 30 � 31 24 ^ti Tv�i (`ni�ntv 1 aw�r.,f.c�ssn �Qi�-_ 44�4.��¢�-20 �_`�2_dstes .� 45.00 az 25 " � � � � ' - 33 � y6 ' , , 34 z� 73 . . � . , . . ^ z A . ,45. 0@ - , � 35 0 T„+�i � To��� r►,eclt-l�luca6er 7-+ ._.._ � 36 ae • 37 '�3o Temp Check Nurnber 74 390 ao 31 '� ` 74 Total �Weather � - • 01-4490-05Q�-50 Ncv svc � � ' . ` JQ��OQ� • '' 42 0 '32 . .. q , ` ' - __ , �33 . � ,71F . . . _ . < , ' _ " , . , , � � � .. .. � ' 44 34 Tutals Terno Check Nurnber 74 45 135 46 � 47 36 48 37 ' . . " � , . . , , vo . . � c � . '. E . 49 '`e •75 Uniforrns Unlirnit�ed • " � �1-201QJ " ' � " � � solys' Plsckfeliner " � �µ . 170.35 � ' . '` � So� 39' � - « _� .. .. ' ... . <, o • 52 ;4° 75 Ur�ifc�rrns Unlirnited @1-2@1@ solvs Fiatraschke 158.JS 63f i 75 Unifc�rrns Unlirnited - 01-�010 splys Currie 49.SQ 65�•� r2� ^ , --- , . ° . _ ... � . ' . . } � • ' � . ' --J---- . � , s� ,4°E � 375 � . . � ; . ; > " i. , `; . , - ; . ; .. ,.�. 912. 01 ' . " , � . 68 ��) �s a uu�her �� _ eo a6 � 61 62 : "' i°7 Temp Check N�vn6er 7b sa •-� '�I sa j'19 '`� 76 United Hc�spital� ' , Q�1-449Q�-@.�,0-50 - " Y � Re Licland . ^ ' •, V a, 84 Q�Q+ " ` , `. , ss�.� 60 . ca .. ' a. _ � . _ , . 6: � ... .... � . � � . .. . . , ' ,.. . . _ . , r. , r _ * 67 68 s� Tc�t�ls Terno Check Nurnher 76 7a`y) 53 ` 64 7z 65 . - . . . . . w � .. ... ' 7 5s m 77 Ve»tura Software @1-201Q� � � � uograde ' _ ' ' 144.Q�Q� ` . �e'�•� ' ' � � ' • � • ` ' • � . �_ ---- , _ . . . , ^ . .. _____ __..,.�_. __ _._._.����� ____ _ �_ _ �__.�-------- - . . . , , ' . .. - j . . . !� rS � -:... -�� = L7 __ _ Claims List _ Mon 3:� I Citv c�f Mer�dc�ta Heic � _ . �� Ternp Check Nurnber 77 �nr ^�' - Check Z Nurnber Vendc�r Name Accaurh Cc�de 3 � 4 __�_�.. _ —__._ .... 6 % % 6 ao--C.t�eck-Numher �.7 _ � . . . • 8 ' • - fl ' ` ' �0 7@4� '�Gr�nd Tatal �.__�. -- --.---------- � z' 13�14 . �' 6) MA7VIlj{y_CHECKS _ .�,e -- . � N7i / - -- --------- E�a o e 1 � � � .. - . � . 2 ments Amaunt s � ...__�___'�"�__�r. 4 b •:�;`• 144. @0 � � _ g 9 � . io . ' n� ° ' 12 •------ 1.036.4�8.35 . �a ta 75 � " �c ' " __'__..'_�'_""__'_. - 17 78,�+� , 19 �-j , � 20 _✓_ 2, �.� �.�Y.a� o�w�.i� Fcia �.c�ai yayr�l.c o� 24 �137 .400. 00 _—Dakota.•-County _Bank ._ ____._�.1/10_pagroll 'Z �26 • � � • 13438 ' 14,097.08 � , . ^ Z'-10 fit � 34 • 27 . , . � •. - .I3439 3;182.73 Cormn of Reuenue 1'/10 payrolZ . ' . 3s � 440�46.,147 57—=Payrol2--a/ �� 36 � Z9 1'344I 94.00 DNR r warrant 37 s 38 � 39 30 . 40 .. 32 - > . ' ` . W ' . ,. • 78, 504.10 , �� a� nz t', 33 ` . • • . , . _ 43 \. 3a Tl'-]d4,.932.4- as 35 46 ' � 47 � 36 48 37 . ' , •- . ' . •. , � 49 '38 4��t. ' �' � , s ' - , , ' • . ' • , e• `' � p ' � 50� 3g. ' .. . .. .. .. - . � , . . • - ..� . ., . 52 40 53 47 ' ~ 54 r' � 55 ��•- 4Z 56 4� . ... ' . , � , � � . , - ,. . ,. . - .. ` , ' 57 ` . ' ` , ' , ^. , . " �., 59 �✓ 44 �. . , _ e .,. . . . . � 45 , 's� , " ` 60 46 , � 61 a7 62. 63 :.J � 64 49 � . �� . � „ ' � • , . � , , , 65 50 . . • . , , . . . "` . 66 — � , . � .. � � . " , 67'.... 67 . ,. „ . , . . . 68 b2 69 . 53 �� �` � • • 71 64 72 4�G6 , 73 E� . .� .. . ' � , � , . � ' ` . � .r » .� � " � ., _ � . . �b. ,I � � \ ! � January 21, 1992 Mendota Heights Police Department MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council City Administrator FROM: Police Chief �� SUBJECT: Replacement of Unmarked Squad Car The police department is requesting permission to purchase a replacement for a 1987 unmarked police car. We budgetted $8,000.00 to replace Sgt. Wicks' 1987 unmarked car in 1992. Sgt. Wicks has found an appropriate vehicle that will cost $8,300.00 with the trade-in. The additional $300.00 can be made up from the unusually high return we received from the sale of our two year old marked cars. As usual, I would prefer not having the make, model or color of the vehicle discussed at a public meeting. The vehicle we have decided on is a 1991 model with a three year warranty. :- .e�t�-i.. .� That Council approve the expenditure of $8,300.00 for the purchase of a replacement unmarked squad car from Quality Lincoln-Mercury in Bloomington. The price will also include the trade-in of our existing 1987 Mercury Cougar. 0 � � To: From: CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEDSO January 16, 1992 Mayor, City Council and City Adminis Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assis��� Subject: Kensington Park Concept Design Approval Ordering Preparation of Final Plans and Specifications BACRGROUND The Park and Recreation Commission discussed the preliminary concept plans for the development of Kensington Park at its October, November and December meetings. City Council accepted the Parks and Recreation Commission's recommendation at its December 17, 1991 meeting, with the exception of design details for the comfort station. At that meeting, City Council held over approval of the final concept plan and directed staff to begin discussions with Northern States Power (NSP) and Centex Homes about moving the power lines, or the western boundary of the park, to alleviate the proximity of the powerlines and the eastern soccer field. At the January 7, 1992 City Council meeting, Council approved a contract with Station 19 Architects for the design of the comfort station and picnic shelter facilities. Station 19 Architects met with staff and Councilmember Blesener for direction prior to _presenting their preliminary sketches to the Park and Recreation Commission on January 14, 1992. Staff has met with NSP and Centex Homes to explore options for soccer field enhancements and reported those options to the Park and Recreation Commission for their review at their January 14, 1992 meeting. (See January 14, 1992 Park and Recrea�ion Commission minutes.) DISCIISSION Parks and Recreation Commission Chair John Huber and Parks Project Manager Guy Kullander will be in attendance to again present the proposed design for the construction of Kensington Park. The only design changes since December involve the layout of the comfort station area and the floor plan for the comfort station. (See attached drawings showing Option B and Kensington Park South Buildings.) Cost estimates rema.in essentially the same since December for the approved design items. As Council considers the options for � adjusting the power lines or the western park bound�.ry line, they -• will have to consider the additional cost.s involved in pursuing any desired implementation schemes. Parks Project Manager Kullander will have more definitive cost estimates available Tuesday evening. � � . OPTIONS TO ADDRESS POWER LINE/SOCCER FIELD PROXIMITY Staff reported to the Parks and Recreation Commission about the available options through either NSP or Centex Homes to alleviate the proximity of the eastern soccer field and the power lines. NSP reported that they have no plans�to update their existing power pole equipment in the foreseeable future and provided staff with a written estimate on the approxima.te costs to move or raise the power lines in the vicinity of the eastern soccer fields. (See attached January 6, 1992 NSP letter.) Powerline adjustments are highlighted on the attached drawings labeled as Options 1, 2 and 3. Option 1 involves burying the power lines through the 1,800 feet of the park area. Centex Homes had offered to pay half the cost of this option, if it proved feasible, as it would increase the value of their single family lots. However, this option did not prove feasible at $500,000. Option 2, raising the power lines with a taller, "mid-point" pole was estimated at $25, 000 and would eliminate the sag point being over the soccer field. This option would raise the power lines approximately 20' to 25'. Option 3 would be to move the power poles eastward and would involve easement acquisition on private single family lots. The cost of the moving the poles and lines and purchasing easements is estimated to be $100,000. Options involving the movement of the western park boundary were discussed with Centex Homes. These options are illustrated in the drawings labeled as Option 4 and Option 5. The acquisition of a 23 foot strip of land described in Option 4 has been estimated by Centex Homes at $35,000. This includes $13,500 for planning and replatting costs and a land price of $2 per sq. ft. Centex indicated a willingness to negotiate these cost items in exchange for consideration of allowance of surmountable curbs in the single family portion of Kensington. Option 5 would involve the purchase 2.6 acres consisting of Lots 1 and 2. The land purchase cost and lost profit costs on 22 townhomes is estimated at $400,000, as illustrated. The Parks and Recreation options, was of a consensus that to budget $25,000 for the implementation of which would be the fields occur and an analysis eastern soccer field. COMFORT STATION/PICNIC SHELTERS Commission, after reviewing the the proper option for the City is raising of the power lines, considered after construction of can be made of the impact on the Station 19 Architects reviewed the preliminary plans for the South Kensington Park buildings witYi�the Parks and Recreation Commission. dI'he Commission recommended approval of a preliminary design and the ordering of final plans and specifications for the building design that includes a concessions area with a 3'8" dutch door for service, single compartment toilets, and storage for � � v soccer equipment. Two picnic shelters flank the comfort station and provide shelter for persons active with either the play equipment area or the soccer fields. ACTION REQIIIRED Discuss the concept design and soccer field alternatives with Parks Chair Huber and Parks Project Manager Kullander. If Council so desires, they should pass motions: 1. Approving the final concept design for Kensington Park and directing staff to prepare final plans and specifications based upon the preferred final concept. 2. Directing Station 19 Architects to prepare final plans and specifications for the construction of the South Kensington Park Buildings, as proposed in the concept design. �• � J COST ESTIMATES FOR RENSINGTON PARR January 17, 1991 North Kensington Park - Grass Field Onl,y Grading $ 10,000 Turf (seed 3.5 acres) 7,000 Spread Black Dirt (1,800 yd) $ 3.500 Sub Total $ 20,500 Contingency Overhead, Inspections 15°s Sub Total TOTAL South Rensington Park Grading and Topsoil Storm Sewer Turf (seed) Irrigation Regular Fencing High Goal Fence Goals, Bleachers, etc. Parking Lot (80') Picnic Shelters (2) Building w/ utilities Landscaping Trails Sub Total $ 2,000 $ 3,000 $ 5,000 $ 25,500 $ 50,000 * 30,000 17,000 20,000 17,000 15, 000 18,000 56,000 12,000 50,000 20,000 17.000 $ 322,000 Contingency l00 $ 32,2,00 Eng., Overhead, Inspections 38.640 Sub Total $ 70,840 TOTAL $ 392,840 * Includes current Centex Grading Contracts North Kensington Park South Kensington Park TOTAL $ 25,500 $ 392,840 $ 418,340 Plus any desired options to address the power line/soccer field locations. � e. � ���'�. 9 a\��.`�F �`4 �.� Illrl�ll��l����� � 11 � � ��� _ .� " �`b�, �I �I� �►, � % . • �i�� J a,�!�'i � ��; � �'!'��" � : � ��..!�fM � / .. � ! � ' � ►` N�TB: GOAL3� BLEACHERS AND PLAYEILS BENCHES WILL Bl3 PQRTABLE � � � ^'y� � � a� - - —F' x-�—�s—x—y`---s � $ � ��"� tLiJi'31�6�'itN�1T OF ca , +�'`'a'L" � «� ; �»sP x�x crNc{2a� • � • �— '—z-- �'�,�__ – ' ' ''C^0:a �'�:,, 1---• 10� FEA1Gt ' ` „�� s . � F. , �. � '••••�^ `. A�eA uwro�R ' ^� ' • UNES ;� 5'�`[C'')$. �. :'� {' � � � Y ` ti �, Nt4 �% �� \ " G[+WU 4FNu46C �t � • V � ; '. �1` �t \ cmaa � � �• aevw+s� � i' , � �� t? ',�� �� � � � } _` Zk,� "'� 240, a � �} ,t � .f �r�--�� � �� � t` ( �' ....� ,� � � �.�L.�. � 2C� FWL6� ��� } ' ��iL�XE' _ a�_ �a�+ce � � ��.�rtiT� �14 � WEST 9Ww UuiS � � 1. FZEI,D �2 FULLy CR4WNED 240' x 350� 2. FIELD �2 FULLY CROWNED 240' x 350� 3. INTERS'PATE HZGAWAY 49A 4• I'ARK BOfTNDARY FENCE – 6' HIGH 5. BARRIER FENCE – lOt HXGH 6. HIGH GOAL FENCE – 28' HIGA 7. NSP HIG$ LTNE PCIWER PpLES 8. AREH OF FTELD IINDER PGWER LZNES 9. TRAIL TO NORTH AND EAST 10. PICNZC SIiELTERS & AMfiNIT2ES 11. PLAY EQUIPMENT 12. COMFORT STATION BII2LDING 13. pARRING IAT FOR 80 CARS 14, ENTRANCE SIGN rrs � . 'iRAt4 � � . – TO GW�-DL�'� Ii{NR� sTREEt� ,.— PldK LIMfPS.% ` t�s • � ,� �. ��\\\`�. �� \ � . �``\ � . N6Te ; LAN1}�AT�G 1`jaT 5}IOWt�{ .�.D. •` ���� Oi��oot� ��p.. �i�II��'0� p� bK r n� 2 _ ___ _...,. � ,�f_dr i (�__—____...___�________� t DIpNRINO FOUNT�IN I I � ('"-� nTlt[�NpNt � ...,s _ � � ( � � I i E i woM�r+ � { MEN a � � � wntta MECHANiCAt � I NlATU ' iit0 EtNK � � � � � C CESSIONS/STORAGE � � � HET � I S70RA E � � VENDIN6 � ( I � � t � i I � ��----"--- "------"-------"-t � COMFORT STATION FLOOR P3.AN � COMFORT STATION R40F Pf.AN u.• • r-r u.• • r_.• � - � �� \ � \ �„ � \\ % � \ \ ` \ � � / � � \ \\l� ) • ��I1KIN0 \ `, oy � - / CHIIDIIlNl. \ � ��`/ KAT AR[� \ ,,� y � � ��� MCNIC SXEITCM �1 `\ ,\ oROP ��` X` , � < s-s-• a-a-� � • � � 'JGCCCN fICLD a �\� � ' , PICMIC SNCt7[R� \ \ f-a....�[ �� �. \ ` � SOCClA f1ElC r, \ �Sifi� �LAN � \ � f•50 . XOtlTil Y� � � � i i ( � � I 1 � I � 1 � ------= —' --- -----' � p PICNIC 5HELTER FLOOR PLAN v�• • r-o- n PICNIC SHEITER ROO� pLAN ��A1' • 'r-'r a � �— su'+vAnr ea, nu soo� ..,.�,>.,..,«..., KENSINGTON PARK SOUTFI BUILDINGS YCNDO7A NCIONT�� WNXd34FA :� COMFORT STATION ELEVATION COMFORT STATION ELEVATION vP . r-r va• - r_e• �COMFORT STATION ELEVATION v.• • r-o- � ('1 COMFORT STATION ELEVATION vr - r-e• TYPICAL PICNIC SHELTER ELEVATION vr � r_o. � � � d r y� ' �H JUWART U. H�f soa� 'n.e�s..��u..� KENSINGTON PARK soun� BUILDINGS YlMOOTA IfLI6MTS. WNNElOTA P '� `] � F.1u.� �l<�� L';�/� January 6, 1992 Mr Guy Kullander City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights MN 55118 SOCCER FIELD - Kensington Park Line 0822 Sec 36, Twp. 28, Rge 23 Dakota County, INinnesota Dear Mr Kullander: Northem States Power Company 414 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-1927 Telephone (612) 330-5500 I have been asked to respond to your ]etter dated December 23, 1991 to Roger Johnson. NSP's response to the two proposals in your Ietter is as follows: Item 1: Because of ihe tension on our conductors at the ]ocation you specified between Structures #12 and #13, we cannot install a new H-frame structure to raise the line at mid-span. The reason for this is that if we shorten the existing span Iengths, it would cause high vibration condiiions to our conductor and cause damage. We could, however, install a new higher H-frame siructure and remove the two existing structures. The new structure wouTd still be in the range of 1'15,000-$20,000 plus an additional cost of �5,000 to remove the existing two H-frame structures. Item 2: The cost to relocate approximately 1800 feet of this 115,000 volt ]ine underground would be in the range of �500,000. This cost cannot be justified and would not be NSP's preference. Per your conversation with Roger, you described where the existing conductors would be in relationship to the corner of the new soccer field, it is his opinion that the ba11s would not normally be kicked into this area. The conductors would normally be no Iower than 22 feet off the ground, should the ball hit it, the ba11 would be on its way out of the field of p1ay. Si erely, % � JUDY S VIK Rea1 Estate Representative Land & Right.of Way 330-5619 c Roger Johnson � w�u.a.r.s. ;k o»x.ur�N�K ' �,.,,, _---�-�- '""..'__ l a � . �'c�".' "/,/ ;�- - �s�."" �.33 �, r f o � ` n=rcda �w � i �� � / hlno �r�.j � � �" � �� �� .� x�d�' NEALL`Y 4 � C•, J4 �.. �_.._.��'``'^�. �S / ./� tQ�'` l��d �°° --- ,_.._ .� ,..._-j� \� a-' t'r°'� ' � �� _i�lENQOTA HfiGHTyS'HOA '`�- � • P'� :�� �°'�" ' / . _ �.�1� �7.�, �,,,, �,/ _ Da� k„�� f F� c r;,-a 45p �``=�. -.'_.-Gt9.5S -�'�� � ± (-7 ��° «s i'" �'+ � sF c° M'p' 35 x 3 .'� L.� �..�_ 15L s�4r,/� �L7 � �' �� 1`� 1y r f 2 � 'b• y,p 'sr � � x�yrc... & ti.<cosv, i . � .e,oecscQ I 25�Cm � � w0 I4� ` 7 � 0'2%:�s`G 1 PARK :o, °' �s �, �' P g � �.�� ;, � �4o,ao9 ar. � 6c y �t' ...+' ie. ee., r.F O zey .� \ 4.4.. .Kxn9 � �1�, i' � � i� �� + � �{} . • .4� ' „' 4 j� � Y• � p \ \` `` � � �� `�,�� � ti � �.w�OV' � � f � �• 24�000 SA M' QF r s*a \�!} � )J v �c,�oasr; � t �`' � & `�� M t7�Q:2J i1� Q f � Z �� qp � , ♦ \�`\` £: �� � � Y �M�xO'..i.� q l8a .f i� iF"CT[7 Ftyoo�p bZ. � , , ., � \,�� t0i �O ! � ra x �a �j � a n �� ` � ... � r s � t�.«��r`� � � ` �{J ai.� � ¢ Q a $ � ~p aacsoo �r. �� � .. ' : � ' ' P : '. ' • � M x�, �'°°. . . :1 ' �. , `\ , fTt Q •� � r'. �,•<. ''� � �� • • . w��(.r�^ ,. a 3 � �� � ,�, t�,�:.�. ' .a n . � � . � � aO\�` '� - '-� � �U � �t+'����5'K Z4I {' .�P' % sn�m eo \\\` ` !} C�.14ayRK M � � �q� � .;xj O �� � " g n � 9 b �' ;� � `'� �.: �ro � ; ,. a 5 ri,7no sc u,roa aa � 3� a r, ar � g �' � ' zz.�o aF , a:, �o ,�e �V� Q� < � ',,nosc. $ :mo �Ir�� � •'"e g �r Q �,£!y q,� 0 � � 3�, �,p ' . �•F .�soa a�. � G,�OQ � `}�� � 1' ,y�ax aF � v'6 $ �S � '" �-' wa �h �O ` a7 ; r u.-,.o... 4g : - �� � ' y . � +t' � � :„ � .ir . ; ` ' ` : � ``\ � Y�'J� � 4 � ` ���� � w �� '�-.. t !¢,00e �; \ y P a . �`' � qo ` ' � �� .i - (� � 3� � �� s�s �fy7 i �F � N � Fti�AC1� �. iC 7j . , t' j . p , ac,.cooav. 4� %, zw�.w,►Y ' w � � ES'f• t.dsT �.� �. 3 ,� bs ; . .� � �. . � �,.�. �. � _ � ¢ 1 � � ����Q �� ` :� s8 Q� � Ti,9` ------ �' � sx,ea� :.s. � AG� \ � S � � ����i \� \ ` � � , �� � � +9e � x.s,t90 e�. � \ �.6 �stas \ \•� � MO�E �0 WQ� pIp � s Le ``4 `�� ' O OW � � CN�►N6ES EuT � ��� , K n ���'� ` � , s ,qfl,� E roc,sm sr. ",�° �` QEQWIRES �IASEf'11�11�'j' au�-�cr�.s -. . SA � 3A]. Laa � t \ - ___.__ v �r� sz.�a�•' w 9do.9o----,� � ' - - gv.4e 4= �('!7X'36 '�' � . � i�T Rp �os°: Tg _ ti ,�--V-,_ i #`l . �BURy. .pOi:J� ._�L.1 r.iE 5 -_ � ��o� . : #2. AD� "M�D-Po�NT.� .PO4E -- - �_ � ._�5,000 � _.___.__3. MOUE p+�c.E--.- �-LI N�S._C SE� :��Au�_IN� � _ _ I �O�oO� .. . .- 4PT1tiHS: I, 2, � 3 - '�Ow�RI.i�1�5 --_______� '� *1 .. O�r1a�i: 4 - -- PCIRCH�4SE C�NN°t'�X - 1���� S ��� �' P�•�0� l � a'L. cr�Te,: �/ �,3�" '"�, �, �'� "'c�! F � t, � t.IttiJA.M1S. M7.0l:4J�K 1 ' � � a �.....�"'.. �Mcw¢�. // � ! �u'438. • 1 � / y° o l� . enrti'a7`3�,�• � �� � `3s�bo ar. � \ `' � _.__,za.a7 laEnL[Y � , �. 34 � _...��..�.. _..... �` `, 1' �1' �L � a ��' f �a w' �� " _MF�fQOTA HQC�fiTjS��aa —�—. ~ -- -- _....,_ .... � . �„' �- -•9�. _� ��/ - As�.k"1� ��� �� �� Q r,ty�c <so � .�,,,,_, -'_-bt9.56 �"''� / '� p - o )a •n.ioa sc. w �'�t +�� �m� �- ,�,.,�x: °' f° 35 x 3 � L� "��. 15i fO� �L7 A {�f1 �, 6r � �' �s �3; �m �; fi 4. <FG,�p Y �rt ; r t6Z,oeo ss; g i ao 2�y 1""l'iRf� :ot �' `6 $ LS�a� �e s I4T � P � & Ip '27,Lcc�G�,'}c ! 7V � 3 � �' ;� � rso,x<i `r. �c ,�° sr .+'^ i�...��aF r o zvs � a..a �c.g�s � $ 14 f � % �y, �� � • "' ^ -- s �g �� � � w.xw�. ^ �V �y,.ansr- � 4 � zqauo s' � , p � � a � • a ;.: �+ 4F � { u j } �e,u,as,: � s <a4 .��q� ax \ \� n�'3�i: iTTFAGF� f �. Y !u4^Xf'NF.+7 � tb t C WTJ� FCq,qYf Sf�. ` O '\ , \`\ tBi � J � C � i5 s� ! g ... yf` • � \\ a Mv� `b J ::j t ax �• p p µ* .`.y tl t3..anst�� � � •-- \ \ C� �V �G� � � Q M p � . i4'S�o �v. � . • ,Q ' ' � 79, aP. ` � � � �, r3 \�' , , ftt � R Yy9PG M. �1- L+ '::' 4•7,1 y'. �� S/ '� ., y� iT _`��k r,'iV �icw�PD 6 � ,t0 i `�"< � \ w FbvOl1' M: tYf ' � to \• � � a . tds C�i w �s°' �y�+o�4c,�.riN � � d ,a� %' C a�.,x' xr. S' k ' � � � r� n .�o.se s Z 4Mv ..i " 2, \ \ 1 \ P(�M j� � 71 N �r } � a �? � � � '� r�� � u: '�o $: r �' � � �� � u,ioa aH � � o �'' � yr � 4f� `�1' '22.'Lao bR � S't.wv fP. • V � ay �t., � (9� ��.� �'slaOfo. fi iBe �l��� lf : ``� n A�G'f � � \Q� $ •y o 3�. .v �.iIXi' '�'. ` \ • ` � M v � �% 'Y �,4 � � rs.«n aF +r * s �...' ' . � v �• \ • 47 ..$ �, .- z.,,.K,«: �gg � - ,�r��`` � iIS �� . ` \ � ,� Y'IY \ 1 � t )3. �<' x 1 0 �\ � \ :�yxo ac f ? "'� :° . � . . sc 6 �� �`"` � \ 4'fi o i �'�� � � 4n �� � � � sis � }� � j I � �- � �s \ . ! , � � � r �i��s�o �. . �_ � �� � R�t� M�4SE �. � \.� ��.�� 45 � � � . �7� � dz � ` a..s • '1 zao sF. p � , 'i• V 1 �!' e Q � ti ���� . � � � \ � � \ I! Z - s W Q 1� �Ri`e s � ��AG � ---- sz,w� s. � `p � ` '�' � PI�,RK � . \ t'� N S � � � 2 V � �,�.x.b,tno ++'. `� � • ` Ny�Fr b.S �wass ♦ b \ o� ToWNMo�I�s � -� ��� -�� . �` `� � � � � � � t •574. � 2s��`E �,� :�:. ��1 �� . - ��,� ' ou-��r�'�,s �. . saz z.s� �� a,, ce,owt af. � `t \ - ___.__Ai C�F'62.aT''W 9dO.qo---'-- `_'_' . _--599.48 �'O \ . . iiQiERSiAT� 494 ���f��� ��'��':T4_\ � �hIoTE: EI.11�11Nt�'tCs __ 2? ul�t��'rS -� _..__..LOWERS.-�ENSIt� . . ..__ �'PTIoN �-_ �.�_ . _._ -�-� pURCHASE �NTEx _. �,o-r s__._.� � 2 __. . . � s' , _ u NORTH RENSINGTON PARR Grass Field Onlv Grading � Turf (seed 3.5 acres) Spread black dirt (1,800 yard Sub Total Contingency l00 Overhead, Inspection 15� Total SOIITH RENSINGTON PARR Grading & Topsoil Storm Sewer Turf (seed) Irrigation Regular Fence High Goal Fence Goals, Bleachers, etc. Parking lot (80 stalls Picnic Shelters (2) Building w/utilities Landscaping Trails Play Equipment Sub Total Contingency 10% Eng., Overhead, Inspections 12% Sub Total Total ADDITIONAL ITEMS• Add NSP Highline Poles $10,000 7,000 3,500 $20,500 2,000 3,000 $25,500 $50,000* 30,000 17,000 20,000 17,000 15,000 18,000 56,000 12,000 50,000 20,000 17,000 30,000 $352,000 35,200 42,200 $77,400 $429,400 25,000 * Includes current Centex Grading Contract. u- PARRS AND RECREATION COMMISSION RECObIlKENDATION NORTH PAR.R 1. Grass field only -(temporary solution) - grading - spread black dirt ESTIMATED COST: - seed & fertilize $25,500 S OtJTH PARR 1. Designed as shown in Option B - fully crowned fields - two fields 240' by 360' 2. Reserve $25,000 to raise power lines if necessary 3. Fencing on west 6' high, north and south 10' high 4. Irrigate fields 5. No backstops - 6. No lighting of fields 7. Construct comfort station ESTIMATI�D COST: - restrooms $429,400 - concession area - net storage - mechanical room • - vending machine space - fountain, phone, signage 8. Two 16' x 16' picnic shelters 9. Play equipment CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO January 17, 1992 . T0: Mayor and City Council FROM: Tom Lawell, City Administr��� SUBJECT: Air Noise Mitigation Part 150 Program At the Council' s January 7th meeting, we discussed the subj ect of air noise mitigation funding through the Federal Aviation Administration's Part 150 Program. At that meeting, Council asked that the item be rescheduled to January 21st to allow residents and a representative from the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) to participate in the discussion. DISCIISSION Mr. Steve Vecchi from the MAC has been invited to attend our January 21st meeting to provide a brief overview of the Part 150 process and to answer any questions we ma.y have. He has also been asked to provide additional information on the following topics which may be helpful in deciding our long range Part 150 plans. 1. LDN Noise Contour Assumptions 2. Allocation Deferral Agreement 3. Avigation Release Document 4. Description of Additional Funding A letter from the City to the MAC describing the importance of each of these issues is attached, along with the MAC's partial response. In an effort to keep affected residents up to date on this subject, ma.iled notice of Tuesday's meeting was sent out to all single family addresses encompassed by the 1996 LDN 65 Eligibility Contour. In all, a total of 74 notices were mailed along with a brief summary of the three available program options (see attached letter) ACTION REQUIRED Council should discuss with Mr. Vecchi and those residents in attendance the various options available to Mendota Heights in implementing the Part 150 Program in 1992 and beyond. Based on that discussion, Council should provide staff direction in completing our application to the MAC for such funds. MTL:kkb January 15, 1992 Dear Resident: At its upcoming meeting, the Mendota Heights City Council will be discussing the Federal Aviation Administration Part 150 Air Noise Mitigation Program. The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) has informed the City that you are potentially eligible to voluntarily participate in this program based on your close proximity to Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport. You are invited to participate in a presentation/discussion session with the City Council, and representatives from the MAC, on Tuesday, January 21st beginning at 8:00 P.M. at Mendota Heights City Hall. Hopefully, you were able to attend the two previous informational workshops hosted by the MAC on August 21, 1991 and October�9, 1991. As described at the workshops and in the attached material, the various noise mitigation options allowed under the program include: 1. Residential Sound Insulation 2. Purchase Guarantee Program 3. Property Acquisition Program On January 21st, the Council will be deciding which option(s) to pursue as Part 150 Funds are received over the next several years. Of course, the implementation of any of these options is dependent upon the annual allocation of FAA funds to Mendota Heights. To date, the City Council has not formally expressed its preference for any of the available options. Your input is important to the City Council as they address this issue. If you are unable to attend the meeting, feel free to write or call with your comments. Hope to see you on January 21st. Sincerely, CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS �0'� Tom Lawell City Administrator MTL:kkb � C lty O� .,.11.1 � - : 1Vienc�ota Heights December 17, 1991 Mr. Richard Keinz Metropolitan Airports Commission 6040 28th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55450 Dear Dickt m As the Policy Advisory Committee (PACj works to finalize the details.of the FAR Part 150 implementation program, each City is now being asked to forecast its intended future use of anticipated Part 150 proceeds. It is our plan to schedule this issue for City Council consideration on January 7th and 21st in order to report back to the PAC at our meeting scheduled for January 29th. As we progress in the development of our Part 150 Plan, further information on the following topics is necessary: 1. 1996 LDN Noise Contour Assumptions The 1996 LDN Contour is vitally important in determining who is eligible for Part 150 Program participation. Please provide a full a copy of all• assumptions which were used� in the generation of the 1996 LDN Contour Map. This data should be detailed enough to allow our air noise consultant an opportunity to replicate the contour modeling, if necessary. 2. Allocation Deferral Agreement Please provide a draft, written joint powers agreement between the MAC and the City of Mendota Heights which would allow us to defer the expenditure of annual Part 150 Program allocations in any year, and ��bank" them in accounts kept by the MAC. As discussed by the PAC, we would expect these deferred amounts to be guaranteed by the MAC for future use by the City. . 3. Avigation Release Document We have on many occasions discussed the Avigation Release which will be required from Sound Insulation and Purchase Guarantee Program participants. We have seen several outlines of what this release may actually look like, but have yet to see the actual document our residents may be asked to sign. Please provide an actual copy of the draft Avigation Release for our review. 1101 Victoria Curve -1Viendota Heights, 1ViN • 55118 452 • 1850 Mr. Richard Keinz December 17, 1991 Page 2 4. Clarifiaati.on af Additionai Fundinq Throughout the Part l50 process, references have been made to additional funding sources, above and beyond the Part 150 FAA f'unds, which wi.l1 supplement naise mitigation measures araund MSP. We request further clarification r�garding the availability, of these funds in 1992 and beyond. Of part�,cular concern is a recent indicatian that Passenger Faciiity Charges colleated by the MAC will be earmarked for "on-airport" improvements only. P3ease clarify the MAC's cammitment and pledge of additional. funds to assis� in "off-airpart" noise mitigation measures. � The assistance that you and your staff have provided in guiding the PAC through the Part 150 process is greatly appreciated. I thank you in advance for your efforts to provide fiirther infarmation regarding the above questions. Please fee2 free to gi.ve me a call if you have questions regarding this request. Sincerely, CITY OF MEN TA HEIGHTS ��'" /�°�� .�:.�Ut G Tam Lawell City Administrator MTL:kkb cc: Scott Bunin � Steve Vecchi � � y�1 � \ � �,�, � ��.�,� � �.�,� ,�����l.:.N.r�� �-�1 BEGIN. FT. � �'TUP : LE <1996 N.E.M. -(w/Base Tracks; 4-22 Ext; r��t2PORT <Minneapolis-Saint Paul International> ALTITUDE 841 TEMPERATURE 60 F RUNWAYS �,�Lc..c��.�-� c.J ��,� ;`C1 E�' � �� / �� /GZ Nosie Rule) - OCT 91> RW 04-22 -1924 -1963 TO 3900 3885 HEADING=41 RW 11R-29L -880 3790 TO 7700 -1450 HEADING=118 RW 11L-29R 2580 5610 TO 9550 1350 HEADING=118 RW 04C-22C 0 0 TO 5950 5900 HEADING=41 AIRCRAFT: TYPES AC DC850 AC DC870 AC DC9Q7 � AC DC9Q9 AC DC950 AC NID8 2 AC DC1040 AC DC10H AC 707320 AC 727Q7 AC 727Q15 AC 737QN AC 737300 AC 747200 AC 747H AC 757PW AC 767CF6 AC A300 AC L1011 AC F28MK4 AC CNA441 AC DHC6 AC SF340 AC CVR580 AC LEAR25 AC LEAR35 AC CNA500 AC CL600 AC GIIB AC C130 AC DC850N AC DC870N AC DC930N AC MD82N AC DC10N AC 7073N AC 7271N AC 7272N �C 737N AC 7373N AC 747N AC 757N AC A300N AC L1011N STAGE 2=NWDC9S STAGE 3=NWDC9S STAGE 4=NWDC9S STAGE 1=NWDC95 STAGE 3=NWD10 STAGE 4=NWD10H CURVE=CF66D PARAM=AP58 STAGE 6=TOP208 CATEGORY=JMIL STAGE 2=NW721 STAGE 3=NW715S STAGE 4=NW715L STAGE 5=NW747 CURVE=JT9DFL PARAM=AP2 STAGE 7=TOP13 CATEGORY=JMIL CATEGORY=JCOM CATEGORY=JCOM CATEGORY=JCOM CATEGORY=JCOM CATEGORY=JCOM CATEGORY=PCOM CURVE=JT3D CURVE=CFM562 CURVE=2JT8DQ CURVE=2JT8D2 CURVE=CF66D CURVE=JT3D CURVE=3JT8DQ CURVE=3JT8DQ CURVE=2JT8DQ CURVE=CFM563 CURVE=JT9DFL CURVE=PW2037 CURVE=2CF650 CURVE=RB2112 PARAM=AP10 PARAM=AP12 PARAM=AP30 PARAM=AP75 PARAM=AP58 PARAM=AP7 PARAM=AP21 PARAM=AP22 PARAM=AP32 PARAM=AP72 PARAM=AP2 PARAM=AP80 PARAM=AP25 PARAM=AP18 STAGE STAGE STAGE STAGE STAGE STAGE STAGE STAGE STAGE STAGE STAGE STAGE STAGE STAGE 1=TOP56 1=TOP69 1=NWDC9S 1=TOP224 1=NWD10 1=TOP38 1=NW721 1=NW715S 1=TOP161 1=TOP235 1=NW747 1=TOP27I 1=TOP138 1=TOP104 CATEGORY=JGA CATEGORY=JGA CATEGORY=JGA CATEGORY=JGA CATEGORY=JGA CATEGORY=JGA CATEGORY=JGA CATEGORY=JGA CATEGORY=JGA CATEGORY=JGA CATEGORY=JGA CATEGORY=JGA CATEGORY=JGA CATEGORY=JGA AC F28N AC LR25N AC LR35N AC CNA5N AC CL600N AC GIIBN CURVE=RB183P PARP,M=AP61 STAGE 1=TOP218 CATEGORY=JGA CURVE=CJ610 PARAM=AP39 STAGE 1=TOP182 CATEGORY=JGA CURVE=TF7312 PARAM=AP38 STAGE 1=TOP181 CATEGORY=JGA CURVE=JT15D1 PARAM=AP41 STAGE 1=TOP184 CATEGORY=JGA CURVE=AL502L PARAM=AP56 STAGE 1=TOP199 CATEGORY=JGA CURVE=SP5118 PARAM=AP63 STAGE 1=TOP211 CATEGORY=JGA PROFILES APPROACH: PF IFR3D SEGMENTS=7 DISTANCES 94406 56243 35254 29530 25714 -1000 STOP ALTITUDES 5000 3000 1900 1600 1400 0 0 SPEEDS TERMSP 180 170 150 FINSP FINSP TAXI THRUSTS 500FMS 500FMS 3DAPFS 3DAPFS 3DAPFS REV PROFILES TAKEOFF: PF NWDC9S SEGMENTS=9 WEIGHT=94000 ENGINES=2 DISTANCES 0 3957 10599 16603 17603 ALTITUDES 0 0 1000 1700 1778 SPEEDS 16 144 144 194 194 THRUSTS 12426 12426 12426 12426 8100 PF NWDC95 SEGMENTS=9 WEIGHT=105000 ENGINES=2 DISTANCES 0 4701 9978 15917 16917 ALTITUDES 0 0 1000 1700 1781 SPEEDS 16 151 151 205 205 THRUSTS 14297 14297 14297 14297 8824 PF NWD10 SEGMENTS=9 WEIGHTS=370000 ENGINES=3 DISTANCES 0 5240 10700 20658 21658 ALTITUDES 0 0 1000 1700 1791 SPEEDS 16 149 149 210 210 THRUSTS 35650 35650 35650 35650 17681 PF NWD10H SEGMENTS=8 WEIGHTS=395000 ENGINES=3 DISTANCES 0 5330 11580 22944 23444 ALTITUDES 0 0 1000 1700 1740 SPEEDS 16 159 159 228 228 THRUSTS 35650 35650 35650 35650 18875 PF NW721 SEGMENTS=9 WEIGHTS=130000 ENGINES=3 DISTANCES 0 5463 11483 23247 24247 ALTITUDES 0 0 1000 1700 1756 SPEEDS 16 149 149 217 217 THRUSTS 11895 11895 11895 11895 6124 PF NW715S SEGMENTS=8 WEIGHT=140000 ENGINES=3 DISTANCES 0 4273 9491 19120 20120 ALTITUDES 0 0 1000 1700 1756 SPEEDS 16 149 149 217 217 THRUSTS 13550 13550 13550 13550 6124 PF NW715L SEGMENTS=8 WEIGHT=160000 ENGINES=3 DISTANCES 0 5197 12450 28384 29384 ALTITUDES 0 0 1000 1700 1740 SPEEDS 16 149 149 217 217 THRUSTS 13550 13550 13550 13550 7400 PF NW747 SEGMENTS=9 WEIGHTS=490000 ENGINES=4 DISTANCES 0 4305 11556 20755 21755 ALTITUDES 0 0 1000 1700 1740 SPEEDS 16 149 149 210 210 THRUSTS 34530 34530 34530 34530 22500 T'�KEOFFS BY PERCENTAGE: OPER DC850 STAGE 1 D=0.4 OPER DC870 STAGE 1 D=0.3 33204 34204 3000 3088 194 194 8100 10821 31894 32894 3000 3093 205 205 8824 11895 34972 35972 3000 3077 210 210 17681 27750 61504 106758 5500 10000 250 250 10821 58880 104625 5500 10000 250 250 11895 67598 100227 5500 10000 250 250 27750 39893 40893 85065 3032 3131 7500 228 228 250 18875 27750 46582 47582 3000 3123 217 217 6124 10712 66891 102236 5500 10000 250 250 10712 42455 43455 83457 3000 3110 7500 217 217 250 6124 11360 60884 61884 117702 3000 3079 7500 217 217 250 7400 11360 53005 3000 210 22500 54005 79252 124625 3095 5500 10000 210 250 250 23954 23954 � � , i OPER DC9Q7 STAGE 1 D=0.5 STAGE 2 D=4.3 OPER DC9Q!� STAGE 1 D=10.4 STAGE 2 D=0.7 OPER DC950 STAGE 1 D=17.5 PER MD821 STAGE 1 D=16.2 STAGE 2 D=1.2 OPER DC10�0 STAGE 2 D=3.9 STAGE 3 D=5.0 OPER DC10I� STAGE 6 D=2.0 OPER 7073:Z0 STAGE 1 D=0.1 OPER 727Q'7 STAGE 1 D=2.3 STAGE 2 D=1.8 OPER 727Q:15 STAGE 1 D=8.8 STAGE 2 D=1.1 OPER 737QZJ STAGE 1�D=7.1 OPER 737300 STAGE 1 D=31.8 STAGE 2 D=7.4 � OPER 747200 STAGE 2 D=2.0 STAGE 4 D=0.8 OPER 747H` STAGE 7 D=1.0 OPER 757PT�T STAGE 1 D=69.0 STAGE 2 D=40.9 OPER 767C�'6 STAGE 1 D=0.5 STAGE 2 D=0.3 OPER A300� STAGE 1 D=2.4 STAGE 2 D=1.0 OPER L101:1 STAGE 1 D=1.1 � OPER F28M}Z4 STAGE 1 D=0.5 i OPER DC851�N STAGE 1 N=1.3 OPER DC870N STAGE 1 N=1.3 OPER DC931�N STAGE 1 N=8.6 OPER NID82�i STAGE 1 N=4.2 OPER DC101�T STAGE 1 N=4.3 OPER 7073Zd STAGE 1 N=0.1 OPER 72711d STAGE 1 N=1.3 OPER 72721�1 STAGE 1 N=4.2 � OPER 737N; STAGE 1 N=0.7 `PER 73731.J STAGE 1 N=5.8 PER 747N; STAGE 1 N=1.3 OPER 757N� STAGE 1 N=13.6 OPER A3001+1 STAGE 1 N=0.4 OPER L1011N STAGE 1 N=0.9 OPER F28N'�, STAGE 1 N=0.1 OPER CNA4�1 STAGE 1 D=7.4 N=8.4 OPER DHC6� STAGE 1 D=33.1 N=6.2 OPER SF34q STAGE 1 D=29.8 N=4.3 OPER CVR5l30 STAGE 1 D=24.6 N=5.8 OPER LEAR�5 STAGE 1 D=4.0 OPER LEAR:35 STAGE 1 D=8.8 OPER CNA5q0 STAGE 1 D=7.5 OPER CL600 STAGE 1 D=5.7 OPER GIIB� STAGE 1 D=2.6 OPER C130I STAGE 1 D=9.1 N=0.1 OPER LR251J STAGE 1 N=0.5 OPER LR3 51.J STAGE 1 N=1. 2 OPER CNA5N STAGE 1 N=1.0 OPER CL600N STAGE 1 N=0.8 OPER GIIBN STAGE 1 N=0.4 STAGE 3 D=42.4 STAGE 4 D=4.4 STAGE 4 D=18.1 STAGE 3 D=12.2 STAGE 4 D=10.3 STAGE 5 D=3.5 STAGE 3 D=2.8 TRA.CK T1 RWY 11L STRAIGHT 8500 LEFT 95 H 8500 STRAIGHT 24000 LEFT 54 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=7.0 GA=3.0 ` :K T2 RWY 11L STRAIGHT 8500 LEFT 100 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=6.9 GA=2.0 TRACK T3 RWY 11L STRAIGHT 8500 LEFT 105 H 8500 STRAIGHT 22000 LEF�,54 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=9,1�GA=13.2 TRACK T4 RWY 11L STRAIGHT 8500 LEFT 110 H 8500 STRAIGHT 23500 LEFT 54 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT.COM=3.8 GA=1.0 TRACK T5 RWY 11L STRAIGHT 8500 LEFT 115 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=0.9 GA=2.1 TRACK T6 RWY 11L STRAIGHT 8500 RIGHT 120 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=0.7 GA=2.0 TRACK T7 RWY 11R STRAIGHT 10000 LEFT 95 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=0.1 GA=0.0 TRACK T8 RWY 11R STRAIGHT 10000 LEFT 100 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=0.3 GA=1.1 TRACK T9 RWY 11R STRAIGHT 10000 LEFT 105 H 8500 STRAIGHT 19000 RIGHT 178 H 10000 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=3.6 GA=18.8 TRACK T10 RWY 11R STRAIGHT 10000 LEFT 105 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=1.3 GA=6.7 TRACK T11 RWY 11R STRAIGHT 10000 LEFT 110 H 8500 STRAIGHT 26100 RIGHT 171 H 10000 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=5.6 GA=3.0 TRACK T12 RWY 11R STRAIGHT 10000 LEFT 110 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=1.9 GA=1.6 TRACK T13 RWY 11R STRAIGHT 10000 LEFT 115 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=8.3 GA=3.5 TRACK T14 RWY 11R STRAIGHT 10000 RIGHT 120 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=3.2 GA=0.0 TRACK T15 RWY 29L STRAIGHT 7400 LEFT 242 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=0.7 GA=0.7 TRACK T16 RWY 29L STRAIGHT 9300 LEFT 242 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=2.1 GA=2.2 TRACK T17 RWY 29L STRAIGHT 12100 LEFT 240 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=3.7 GA=3.8 TRACK T18 RWY 29L STRAIGHT 15400 LEFT 250 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=1.3 GA=1.4 TRACK T19 RWY 29L STRAIGHT 15400 LEFT 286 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=1.1 GA=1.1 TRACK T20 RWY 29L STRAIGHT 15400 RIGHT 350 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=0.6 GA=0.6 TRACK T21 RWY 29L STRAIGHT 8100 RIGHT 350 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=0.5 GA=0.5 '�RACK T22 RWY 29R STRAIGHT 7300 RIGHT 350 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=3.4 GA=2.7 �RACK T23 RWY 29R STRAIGHT 11700 RIGHT 350 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=3.7 GA=2.8 �RACK T24 RWY 29R STRAIGHT 15600 RIGHT 350 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=1.6 GA=1.2 �RACK T25 RWY 29R STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=3.4 GA=2.7 °�'RACK T26 RWY 29R STRAIGHT 11200 LEFT 244 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=2.4 GA=1.9 'I°12ACK T27 RWY 04 STRAIGHT 8700 LEFT 310 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=0.8 GA=0.6 �I2ACK T28 RWY 04 STRAIGHT 13000 LEFT 30 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=0.4 GA=0.3 �i3ACK T29 RWY 04 STRAIGHT 8700 RIGHT 105 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 � PERCENT COM=0.5 GA=0.4 `3'RACK T30 RWY 22 STRAIGHT 7900 LEFT 165 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=6.0 GA=5.5 �'�ACK T31 RWY 22 STRAIGHT 11400 LEFT 165 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=3.2 GA=2.8 ��,CK T32 RWY 22 STRAIGHT�12300 RIGHT 350 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT�COM=3.9 GA=3.6 � ti � TRACK T33 RWY 22 STRAIGHT 8300 LEFT 180 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=6.0 GA=5.4 mRACK T34 RWY 22 STRAIGHT 12300 RIGHT 250 H 8500 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=2.0 GA=1.8 TRACK T35 RWY 04 STRAIGHT 13500 LEFT 30 H 11000 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT MIL=12.0 TRACK T36 RWY 04 STRAIGHT 13500 RIGHT 135 H 11000 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT MIL=14.0 TRACK T37 RWY 04 STRAIGHT 13500 LEFT 310 H 11000 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT MIL=14.0 TRACK T38 RWY 22C STRAIGHT 135Q0 LEFT 180 H 11000 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT MIL=14.0 TRACK T39 RWY 22C STRAIGHT 13500 RIGHT 350 H 11000 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT MIL=12.0 TRACK T40 RWY 22C STRAIGHT 13500 LEFT 165 H 11000 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT MIL=34.0 LANDINGS BY PERCENTAGE: OPER DC850 PROF=IFR3D D=0.7 OPER DC870 PROF=IFR3D D=0.6 OPER DC9Q7 PROF=IFR3D D=5.0 OPER DC9Q9 PROF=IFR3D D=60.6 OPER DC950 PROF=IFR3D D=19.0 OPER NID82 PROF=IFR3D D=44.6 OPER DC1040 PROF=IFR3D D=28.1 OPER 707320 PROF=IFR3D D=0.1 OPER 727Q7 PROF=IFR3D D=4.5 '�PER 727Q15 PROF=IFR3D D=32.5 PER 737QN PROF=IFR3D D=6.9 OPER 737300 PROF=IFR3D D=13.4 OPER 747200 PROF=IFR3D D=7.1 OPER 757PW PROF=IFR3D D=113.8 OPER 767CF6 PROF=IFR3D D=0.8 OPER A300 PROF=IFR3D D=3.3 OPER L1011 PROF=IFR3D D=0.9 OPER F28MK4 PROF=IFR3D D=0.6 OPER DC850N PROF=IFR3D N=1.0 OPER DC870N PROF=IFR3D N=1.0 OPER DC930N PROF=IFR3D N=4.2 OPER NID82N PROF=IFR3D N=4.8 OPER DC10N PROF=IFR3D N=5.2 OPER 7073N PROF=IFR3D N=0.1 OPER 7271N PROF=IFR3D N=0.9 OPER 7272N PROF=IFR3D N=4.1 OPER 737N PROF=IFR3D N=0.9 OPER 7373N PROF=IFR3D N=1.2 OPER 747N PROF=IFR3D N=1.5 OPER 757N PROF=IFR3D N=14.9 OPER A300N PROF=IFR3D N=0.5 OPER L1011N PROF=IFR3D N=1.1 OPER CNA441 PROF=IFR3D D=11.4 N=4.4 PER DHC6 PROF=IFR3D D=34.7 N=4.6 �PER SF340 PROF=IFR3D D=33.2 N=0.9 OPER CVR580 PROF=IFR3D D=28.3 N=2.1 OPER-LEAR25 PROF=IFR3D D=4.0 OPERILEAR3�5 PROF=IFR3D D=8.8 OPER CNA500 PROF=IFR3D D=7.5 e � � OPER CL600 PROF=IFR3D D=5.7 OPER GIIB PROF=IFR3D D=2.6 OPER C130 PROF=IFR3D D=9.1 N=0.1 OPER LR25N PROF=IFR3D N=0.5 OPER LR35N PROF=IFR3D N=1.2 OPER CNA5N PROF=IFR3D N=1.0 OPER CL600N PROF=IFR3D N=0.8 OPER GIIBN PROF=IFR3D N=0.4 TRACK Ll RWY 11L STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=22.4 GA=15.8 TRACK L2 RWY 11R STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=24.2 GA=19.1 TRACK L3 RWY 29L STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=24.6 GA=39.9 TRACK L4 RWY 29R STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=22.8 GA=18.3 TRACK L5 RWY 04 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=0.8 GA=2.6 TRACK L6 RWY 22 STRAIGHT 100000 PERCENT COM=5.2 GA=4.3 PROCESS: CONTOUR LDN AT.65 70 75 PLOT SIZE 30 40 SCALE=2000 ORIGIN 15 15 END. T 100000 PERCENT COM=5.6 GA=3.0 TRACK T12 RWY 11R STRAIGHT 10000 LEFT 110 H 8500 S SAMPLE DOCUMENTATION PART 150 FUND ALLOCATION DEFER�LS Assuming a$4,000,000 total MSP 1992 Part 150 fund, this scenario exhibits sample documentation and calculations if the cities of Eagan and Mendota Heights deferred their city-specific allocation. i �� DRAFT MEMORANDUM Me�opolitan Airports Commission DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJEGT: January 17, 1991 Cities of Minneapolis, Richfield, Bloomington, Eagan & Mendota Heights MAC Staff MEMO OF UNDERSTANDING: YEARLY PART 150 FUND ALLOCATION DEFERRALS Each year Part 150 monies received from the FAA and MAC will be divided and allocated to the five eligible cities based on the following method: City-specific yearly allocation = a guaranteed 2% allocation of the total MSP Part 150 yearly fund + a percentage of the total balance �based on the cities population within the 1996 Ldn 65 noise contour. In the event a participating city wishes to defer the expenditure of yearly funds allocated to them by the above method for Part 150 programs, the amount of money will be documented by MAC staff and be reused by the remainder of the other eligible cities. At the time a city would like to expend their deferred monies at a future yearly interval, the deferred dollar amount would be subtracted from the yearly allocation funds of cities that used the money. SIGNED: MASAC Chair City of Minneapolis City of Eagan MASAC Vice Chair - City of Bloomington City of Mendota Heights City of Richfield Sl�IIPPIaS WOBICS�T OF RR�T Tlf[`�T� DElA�RED �p$ ORI(iIli!►L l�LIrOClITION IISP PIiIRT 150 199Z BIID(�ET : $4,000,000 DRAFT � � CITY (�T�D �_�'-�'�'I� [2�) _(1996 I.Dli65 POP) z[Be�ai.nder of TOTl1L !OlID) TOTIiIL CITY l�LLOC2lTI�f Mendota Heights Eagan Mianeapolis Richfield Bloominaton TOTAL $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 S80,000 $�i00, 000 4.1% of $3,600,000 = $147,600 3.1� of $3,600,000 = $111,600 52.4$ of $3,600,000 = $1,886,400 18.7$ of $3,600,000 = $673,200 21.7� of 53,600,000 = 5781,200 100� of $3,600,000 = $3,600,000 1992 DSL�SRR�I. Olr 1rO1D8 � E!1[�11f ic 1�OTS HTS Originall?-111.located �djnstaent of Citi-apecific Potaulatioa Percentaaea �llocation Perceataaea Eagan 3.1$ Minneapolis (52.4�)/(92.8$) x 100 = 56.5� Mendota Heights 4.1$ Richfield (18.7�)/(92.8$) x 100 = ZO.1� �otai 7.Z� Bloomiagton (21.7$)/(92.8$) x 100 = 23.4� 100$ i9gZ RRaTTl)['�TI�I Olr DSFERRED iQHDS $227,600 $191,600 $1,966,400 $753,200 S861,200 $4,000,000 e RSVISSD � CIT7C DSSI(�E ORI(;I1Q�I. �_�'�►mIOH S RSCIBVSD 1rROi[ Ss(i1�1f S RBCISVSD 1rROiI 1�IDOT� HTS AL•t -�'"�'IO�f Minneapolis $1,966,400 56.5� of $191,600 = $108,254 Richfield $753,200 20.1$ of $191,600 = $38,512 Bloomington $861,200 23.4� of $191,600 = $44,834 $191,600 56.5$ of $227,600 = $128,594 $2,Z03,Z48 20.1� of $227,600 = $45,748 $837,460 23.4� of $227,600 = $53,258 $959,292 $227,600 $4,000,000 � z� S�IMPLE . METROPOLTTAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION MSP PAR.T 150 SOUND INSULATION PROGRAM DEFERRAL OF CTTY-ALLOCATED PART 150 FUNDS 1992 Total MSP Part 150 Fund: $4,000,000 1. DESIGNATOR(S) OF DF�_i�t� MONIFS: � C� Total $ to be Deferred Eagan $191,600 Mendota Heights $227,600 2. DESIGNEE(S) OF DF.FFRRFD MOIVIES: C� $ Received from Eagan $ Received from MH Minneapolis $108,254 $128,594 Richfield $ 38,512 $ 45,748 Bloomington 44 834 53 258 $191,600 $227,600 (Designator) (Designee) (Designator) (Designee) (Designator) (Designee) MAC Executive Staff (Designee) MAC Part 150 Staff (Designee) PAC Chairman Part150\expendit.frm PAC Vice-Chairman DRAFT 0 � - � . ' � �d�C�c�;,u�G� � �'�i�. ' :'{�ki .� �wNc� � I � Z i�4 Z• . �� � . �' `` M5P PART 150 LAND USE IlV�LEI�IENTATION DESIGN . - FORMATION OF CONSULTANT TE�►M - Atittion Plaaniag - p� � • - Wyle I� • - AdAC StaC � -CEUE � ' � ' • ' • . FORMATION OF POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE (PAC) �►�x.� -nrx.� � �►c �vrr�►pous �►v�tv � . FAA RICi�LD �rIDOTA i�IC3HTS � N�I' COUNCA. , HIAOMIIVC�TON S?.PAUL 0 FORMATION OF CI1Y CORE TE�AMS � �r�por�s �►v�rt RIQ��LD �ENIDOTA i�iCiHT3 ffiAOMINC370N 3T.PAUL . PRESS CONF�RENCE CORE TEAM 8t MEDIA EDUCATION�I. WORKSHOPS DEVELOPMENT OF LAND USE MEAtU Jc�r.� - s�.� . _ DEMO HOME OPEN HOUSE PUBLIC EDUCATIONAL WORKSHOPS PUBLIC FORUMS oc'r.� - J.�v.� I CITY-SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PI.AN DEVELOPMENT J�� -�.� � MSP MASTER IlViPLEMENTATION PIAN DEVELOPMENT M�� I PUBLIC CQbIlVIiJr1ICATION� , '�� � LAND USE IlViPLE�MENfATTON * SOUND INSULATION PROGRAM DEFINITION Intended to retain "residential" status of land use. Voluntary program for homeowners residing within 1996 Ldn 65 contour. Priority: single and multi-family residences, schools. "Block by Block" implementation. City will be responsible for selectin� and prioritizing blocks for program participation. Degree of sound insulation modification packages determined by: Exterior noise level . Construction type of house Window/wall area ratio A recommended sound insulation modification package will be drafted for each home within the Ldn 75, 70 and 65 noise contours as follows: SINGLE FAMILY HOME Ldn Minimum/Maximum Average Average Cost Area NR Increase NR Increase �per unit) 65 0-S dB 70 5-10 dB 75 10-15 dB 3dB $0-$11,500 8 dB $11,500 - 22,500 13 dB $22,500 - 25,000 * Homeowners can modify recommended packages, select from an"approved- contractor" list and determine window, door, wall replacement type based on FAA guidelines. . * Air conditioning and ventilation will be included in program modifications. ., : : Signing of an Avigation "Rel'ease". MAC will contract with a central agency to administer the program among the 5 participating cities. . 1-2-92 PART 150 SOUND INSULATION PROGRAM A sound insulation program is a corrective land use measure intended to alleviate the impact of aircraft noise by providing indoor locations where normal activities can be enjoyed without interruption. The program involves modifications to reduce the amount of noise entering from the outside. Priority will be given to the sound insulation of single and multi-family residences, and schools. Homeowner participation in the program is not mandatory, but is encouraged. Program eligibility will be limited to homeowners residing within the previously- approved 1992 Ldn contours in neighborhoods identified by each individual city. When the 1996 Ldn contours are approved by FAA after MAC's December '91 submission, they will be used to determine program eligibility. The program will be implemented on a block-by-block basis. The individual cities will determine if a house-by-house priority system within the blocks will be established. Within these guidelines, the responsibility for selecting and prioritizing specific blocks will be assigned to the individual cities. Once a block has been identified by the city as eligible, the homeowner will be responsible for submitting an application to the program admininstrator requesting participation in the program. If a homeowner chooses not to participate in the program at the time it is initially offered, he may later submit his application and be eligible for funding. Each individual city can determine what the priority will be for homeowners who delay participating in the program. The criteria to be used in the program is essentially to achieve an interior level not exceeding Ldn 45. Whereas this standard is probably applicable to the largest airports, it does not take into account the very high single-event levels - up to Sound Exposure Levels (SELs) of 110 db - experienced at many of the homes adjacent to MSP. The noise reduction proposed for residences will be designed to provide an interior noise environment similar to that provided by the Ldn 45 standard at the largest airports. Typically, this means that habitable rooms directly exposed to aircraft noise would be provided with the following additional noise reduction (NR) : __ Ldn Areas SINGLE FAMILY HOME Minimum/Maximum Average NR Increase NR Increase Average Cost (per unit) 65 0-5 dB 3 dB $0-$11,500 70 5-10 dB 8 dB $11,500-$22,500 75 10-15 dB 13 dB $22,500-$25,000 Page 1 of 3 1-2-92 The actual amount of additional noise reduction required within the 5, 10, or 15 dB packages for any given directly-exposed room would depend on the exterior DNL, the type of construction, and the window-wall area ratio. Other habitable rooms in each home that are not directly exposed to aircraft noise would receive addi"tional noise reductions equal to, or less than the amounts shown above. Air- conditioning and ventilation will be provided as part of the sound insulation package. '_ Homeowners would have some limited ability to select alternative modifications to some elements, i.e., windows or walls, provided that the overall sound insulation was not degraded by more than a specified amount. MAC will contract with an outside agency or firm who will administer the sound insulation program among the five eligible cities. This would include program management, engineering, quality control, and supervising the remodeling contractor(s). In the event homeowners want to upgrade to a higher level of sound insulation, or make other misc. improvements, additional work can be done simultaneously by the same contractor at the homeowner's expense as long as the proposed changes are consistent with the scope and character of the work being performed. Construction guidelines for sound insulation and lists of approved material suppliers will be provided to eligible homeowners who wish to remodel their homes prior to the availability of the program in their area, and to homeowners living outside the 1996 Ldn 65 noise contour who wish to add sound insulation treatments at their own expense. The costs of this remodeling would not be reimbursable. Program participants would sign an Avigational Release as a condition of participating in the program. Eligible homeowners who .grant an avigation release to MAC would not be required to contribute toward the cost of the program (according to FAA guidelines). Those not granting such a release would be required to contribute 20% of the cost of modifications to their home. Page 2 of 3 1-2-92 m During the construction of the sound insulation modifications to each of the eligible residences, the program will pay and provide onlv for the following finishing work: � - Walls and ceilings of treated rooms would be repainted either "off-white" or with a paint provided by the homeowner. - Surfaces modified or altered by the sound insulation construction would be restored with a finish surface of similar materials comparable to the surface prior to construction. (For example, existing "sculptured" surfaces would be replastered.) - All mouldings would be replaced. - Any exterior stucco and aluminum window trim would be replaced. - All applicable building permits must be obtained by the contractor or homeowner prior to sound insulation modification work. There will be a$25,000 cap on sound insulation modification work to be done on single residence. The individual homeowner will have the ability to reject recommended sound insulation modification plans, as long as the final insulation modification plan selected has no less than 5 dB of attenuation in any directly- exposed room. Homeowners with hot water heat would be able to keep their e�sting heating system, in the event they received an air-conditi�ning (forced air) package through the sound insulation modifications. . Each city will be responsible for determining how long a participant in the Sound Insulation Program must wait before being eligible for another Part 150 program. Page 3 of 3 m 1-2-92 n MIN/MAX AVERAGE SINGLE FAMILY DUPLEX FOURPLEX ROWHOUSE APT $LDG LDN NR NR Avg Cost Avg Cost Avg Cost Avg Cost Avg Cost 65 0-5 dB 3 dB $0-$11,500 $0-15,000 $0-25,000 $0-21,000 $ 0 70 5-10 dB 8 dB $11,500-22,500 $15,000-24,000 $25,000-40,000 $21,000-39,000 $ 75 10-15 dB 13 dB $22,500-25,000 $ $ $ $ m a c t r � i LAND ACQUISITION PROGRAM DEFINITION * Intended to change existing residential land use to either airport or non-residential use. * Either voluntary or condemnation program for homeowners residing within 1996 Ldn 65 contour.. * "Block by Block" implementation. * City will be responsible for selecting and prioritizing blocks for program participation. * Program includes payment or reimbursement of moving/relocation expenses in addition to "fair market value" reimbursement. * Avigation Easement to deed. � 0 0 12-16-91 � ty .. PART 150 LAND ACQUISITION PROGRAM In general, a land acquisition program is a corrective land use measure intended to alleviate noise effects in areas of incompatible land use. Under the land acquisition program for the MSP International Airport, properry would be acquired only at the initiative and approval of the local jurisdiction where it has established there is a reasonable consensus among residents to vacate the area. Program eligibility will be limited to homeowners residing within the 1996 Ldn 65 noise contour in neighborhoods identified by each individual city. The neighborhood boundaries will be identified by each participating city to include areas which may be outside of the Ldn 65 noise contour. (Areas outside of the Ldn 65 noise contour are subject to FAA approval through the MSP Part 150 Update/FAA review process.) Acquisition priority will be based on the location within the noise contours. The homeowner must have lived in the home for two years prior to the implementation of the'program unless adequate funds are made available to allow the purchase of all properties within the identified area at the same time. Properry will be acquired by voluntary agreement with the homeowner �or through standard condemnation proceedings. The fair market value of all properties identified for acquisition will be determined by the current federal and local guidelines. Property to be acquired will be identified by the individual cities on a block-by- block basis. Once a property has been acquired, homeowners will be processed through normal appraisal and closing procedures, as with any other type of properry sale. No specific timeframe for completion of the transfer of properry will be defined. The payment or reimbursement of moving/relocation expenses will be determined by current federal regulations (Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Properry Acquisition Policies Act). The properry will then be cleared immediately to reduce maintenance and upkeep costs. All acquired properry will be held by the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC). If the properry is not to be converted for airport use, it will be released by MAC for resale as a compatible land use (non-residential), as soon as possible. 12-16-91 � PURCHASE GUAR.ANTEE PROGR.AM DEFINITION * Intended to retain "residential" status of land use. * Voluntary program for homeowners residing within 1996 Ldn 65 contour. * Only "owner-occupied" homes with a minimum of 2 years owner residency. * "House by House" implementation. * City will be responsible for selectin� (program participation and eligibility) and prioritizin� homes for program participation. * Participating homeowner is guaranteed "fair market value" reimbursement. * Sound insulation modifications are included. * Process for eligible homes: . - Fair market appraisal process - Determine length of time home will be marketed before homeowner is reimbursed. - Signing of "Letter of Intent". * SCENARIO l: House sells before predetermined period. - Normal real estate transaction (with Avigation Release to new owner) - New owner is given sound insulation modifications. * SCENARIO 2: House doesn't sell before predetermined period. - Original homeowner is reimbursed fair market value. - Home is taken off market and given sound insulation modifications. - Home is re-appraised. � - Home is re-listed on market and sold to new owner (with Avigation Release). 0 - 12-16-91 PART 150 PURCHASE GUAR.ANTEE PROGRAM In general, a purchase guarantee program is a corrective land use measure to alleviate noise effects in areas where neighborhood stability can be maintained and existing residential development is considered a compatible land use. With most purchase guarantee programs, if aircraft noise levels are found to be intolerable by individual homeowners, and the owner has made a"bona fide" effort to sell the properry, the properry is acquired at a fair market value and returned to residential use with appropriate sound insulation measures, releases, and restrictions. (The fair market value of all eligible properties will be determined by the current federal and local guidelines.) Homeowner participation in the program will' be voluntary and based on the city-specific implementation decisions. The purchase guarantee program is not intended nor designed to acquire all, or a substantial portion, of a designated area but rather to provide the homeowner the opportunity to sell his home at a guaranteed fair market value on a"house by house" basis. ' Purchase Guarantee Program eligibility will be limited to homeowners residing within the 1996 Ldn 65 noise contour in neighborhoods identified by each individual city. Each participating city will be able to determine the location and number of homes eligible for participation based on their yearly Part 150 dollar allocation. The participating home must be owner-occupied. (Owner-occupied condominium units are also eligible.) Homeowners must have resided at the properry for at least two years prior to being offered participation to enter the program. Once a home has been deemed eligible for participation in the Purchase Guarantee Program, a fair market value will be established for the properry through a certified appraisal process that meets federal and local guidelines. Then, a Letter- of-Intent will be signed by both the homeowner and the program administrator (Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC)). The Letter will be a binding contract which describes the program elements, such as: * Predetermined length of time that property will be listed for sale before owner receives reimbursement of fair market value. (Note: this defines a "bona fide effort" and is based on the Multiple Listing Service data (MLS) for each individual neighborhood provided by each city.) * Sound insulation package modification details and schedules. * Granting of an avigation release to the MAC. Page 1 of 2 12-16-91 There are two possible methods within the Purchase Guarantee Program to transfer the ownership of a participating home. If the house does sell on the open market before a predetermined period expires, the transfer of ownership is similar to a normal open market real estate transaction. If the house does not sell on the open market before a predetermined time period, then the owner is reimbursed the fair market value of the home and the property is re-listed by the administrator (MAC) on the open market until it is sold. Each home participating in the Purchase Guarantee Program will receive a complete sound insulation package modification based on its location within the Ldn 65, 70, & 75 noise contours and its construction. In the event the house sells before the predetermined listing period, sound insulation modification will be done immediately after the new owner takes possession. In the event the house does not sell during the predetermined listing period, then sound insulation modification will be done in the interim period after the original owner is reimbursed the house fair market value and before it is re-listed on the open market by the administrator. (It should be noted that before being re-listed, the home will be re-appraised to determine a new fair market value that reflects the sound insulation improvements.) MAC will develop an educational program that participating realtors will be required to attend in order to become "certified" by MAC as having a workirig knowledge of the purchase guarantee and sound insulation programs. This will insure that prospective homebuyers are aware of the location of the properry within the noise contour, that the home will receive sound insulation treatment as a condition of the purchase, and of the avigation release. Additionally the homeowner would be certain that his home is being marketed by a qualified realtor. Note 1: Based on the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Properry Acquisition Policies Act for voluntary programs, the Purchase , Guarantee Program will not include payment or reimbursement of moving/relocation expenses. Note 2: Any adjustment of the 1996 Ldn 65 boundary to determine eligibility will be subject to FAA overall approval. Each city will be responsible for determining the length of time for either acceptance, or refusal of program participation, once a homeowner becomes eligible. This determined length of time may be different among participating cities, based on each city's specific yearly implementation phasing goals. In the event of refusal, each city will be responsible for determining how long a participant must wait before being eligible again for another �art 150 program. Page 2 of 2 12-16-91 f ' AVIGATION RELEASE DEFINITION * Recommended replacement for easement. * "Release" on current and future noise litigation from Part 15Q program participating homeowners. * Signing of an Avigatian "Release" before implementation af Sound Insulation and F'urchase Guarantee pragram. * Reiease Ianguage wouid be based on cunent noise levels from operation and maintenance of existing MSP runways. * Any increase of 1.5 db (Ldn) or more over a yearly Ldn "base" contour will invalidate the Avigation Reiease. * Ldn base contaurs wiil be updated yearly. > 12-16-91 : CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO January 17, 1992 T0: Mayor and City Council 1. FROM: Tom Lawell, City Administr SUBJECT: 1992 Pay Equity Implementation Report Every year the City is required to submit to the State of Minnesota a number of financial reports. Beginning this year, the City must now complete a Pay Equity Implementation Report for submission to the Minnesota Department of Employee Relations (DOER). The deadline for submittal is January 31, 1992, and the report requires formal City Council approval. BACRGROIIND In 1984 the State Legislature adopted the Local Government Pay Equity Act which mandated that all units of local government in the State conduct an internal analysis of their work force and adjust compensation levels based on the results of that analysis. The purpose of the Act was to ensure that "reasonable compensation relationships" existed between comparable male and female dominated work classes. P,s part of that mandate, approxima.tely 150 Cities across the State jointly developed a formal job evaluation system in consultation with a group known as Control Data Business Advisers. Implementation of this system was carried out in 1987, and we have continued to operate in accordance with the system ever since. In 1990, DOER was successful in requesting from Legislature an amendment to the Pay Equity Statute. that amendment, Cities are required to report 1991 Statistics to DOER by January 31st (see attached instructions). DISCIISSION the State As part of Pay Plan reporting While the report submission itself is of no great concern, a number of Cities have questioned the valuation system DOER intends to use to evaluate compliance with the Pay Equity Act. Specifics of the valuation system are being developed through the State's "administrative rule-making procedure" and that process is not yet complete. In addition, DOER has retained a statistical consultant to prepare a computer evaluation model which will be used to analyze each City's pay system. Because the specifics of the evaluation methodology are not yet known, Cities in general are wary of being unknowingly out of compliance with the pay equity test under development. The pay equity implementation process which took place in Mendota Heights during 1987 was well reasoned and well accepted. While I am confident our 1991 pay plan maintains "reasonable compensation relationships" amongst comparable male and female employee classes, there does exist the possibility that the new DOER evaluation system will disagree. To further compound the issue, DOER expects to be flooded with compliance reports at the end of January, and therefore predicts that it may be a number of months before they respond back with their compliance decision. In accordance with the instructions provided by DOER, I have prepared our 1991 compliance report for submission (see last two pages of attached ma.terial) . Most of the information on the report is self explanatory, however some may reguire additional explanation. Parts B, C and D of the report affirm that the City does not show favoritism to male dominated employee groups over female dominated employee groups with respect to benefits, salary range progression,-or longevity pay. Part F of the report lists for each employee class its treatment under our 1991 pay plan. For those employees subject to the City's Pay Matrix, maximum/minimum salary ranges are shown. For positions not subject to the Matrix (i.e., public works maintenance workers under union contract), the maximum and minimum values are identical and represent actual salaries paid. Wages for part time positions have been prorated to reflect comparable monthly salaries. RECONSI��iENDAT I ON The City is required by State Statute to submit the attached statistical information on the City's 1991 pay plan. I recommend that the Council approve the proposed report for submittal. ACTION REQIIIRED Council should adopt a motion approving the Equity Implementation Report for submittal to Department of Employee Relations by January 31, 1992, the Mayor to sign the report as necessary. MTL:kkb attached Pay the Minnesota and authorize . r i. a State af Minnesota £: ' �ARTMENT Oi :MPLQYEE itELATItJNS . Administrative Services Compensation Equal Opportunity Healfh & Benefits Information Services Labor Rclations y/Workers' Compensation Staf�ng Services Training & Devetopment joh infor�naliotr liue fh12)29b-2616 7'Ill? t612I 29�-2�f13 .ral appnr�uiritv empl�ti�er January 8, 1�992 � F'RQM; RE: Local Government Officials City Clerk, Administrator, or Manager Superintendent of Schoals County Persannel.Director or Auditor ���,� ,�� L1 nda Barton��►�,,,, C4�i ssioner PAY EQUITY.REPORT FORMS � � This is a packet of the materlals you will �eed to prepare your Pay Equlty Impiemeniation Repari. This report fs required by Mlnnesota Statutes, chapter 471.9981, subdivisioa 5a. You will find the fo]lowing materials 1n this packet: • Pay Equity Implementation Report Form <one page, two sides). • Instructions for campletinq the Pay Equity Implementation Report. • Benefits Worksheet and Instructions (green). • Salary Range Test Exampie and Exceptional Service Pay Test Example (orange). • Definitions sheet tblue). • Notifiication farm (yellow). , • Mailing iabel for returnfng yaur repart P1 ease note that the repart forms are dne on January 31,1992. Any reports received after January 31, and not postmarke�d o� or before�that date, wiil be retarned to the jurisdictlon and the jurisdiction will be 1=ound not in compiiance. The penalty far failure to submit a�repor# is a five percert reduction in state aid payments, school ai.d payments, or other payments from the�state, or $�40 a day, whichever is greatest. ?tX) Ccrrtc�ttraiul OJ/ire B1rilcli�r,s;, 65ti Cc•rlcr!• Strc�c�t. St. t'rrtrl. MN SSlSj Local Governments O1/08/92 Page 2 The department has been working on an administrative rule which describes in detail how the compliance decisions will be made. The rule (Minnesota Rules, Parts 3920.0100 to 3920.1300, as adopted by amendments on 11/14/91 and 11/25/91> has not yet been formally adopted. The Office of Administrative Hearings has determined that the contents of the rule are "needed and reasonable" under the law, and that none of the amendments represent a substantive change from the rule as originally published in the State Register. The rule will be published in the State Register when it is final. Meanwhile, if you would like a copy of the rule as proposed by the department, please send us a written request. Because of the large number of local governments, and the complexity of the compl i ance revi ew process, you may not receive a compGance decision from the department for a number of months. P1 ease be assured that you will be informed when thls decision is made, and that no penalties or other �egative consequences will occur before you receive that notice. As you can imagine, the department is receiving many requests for information as the report deadline approaches. We will do our best to assist you. However, please be aware that our staff resources are very limited. Before calling us: � • Please read the enclosed information carefully. You will find the answers to many of your questions. • If you have a question which does not need to be answered before January 31, please send it in writing and we will respond as soon as possible. For urgent questlons, you may call the department's pay equity coordinator at (612) 296-2653. Please be patient if you call us and receive a recorded message. We will do our very best to assist you as soon as possible. Please let us know if the address on your envelope needs to be corrected. FNZ/120 e r • i INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING PAY EQUITY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT General instructions. This form must be received by the Oepartment of Employee �� Relations by January 31, 1992, or be postmarked oa or before that date, or the jurisdiction will be found not in compliance with the pay equity law. Except as specified in these instructions, all information on the form must be for Oecember 31, 1991. The report must be submitted on this form. Please do not submit the information in a different format. PartA: Jurisdictionidentif'ication. Please list the name of the jurisdiction (for example, City of Winona. or Lincoln County, or Independent School District #281, or Minnesota Valley Regional Library System). Check the appropriate box to confirm the type of jurisdiction. Provide the full mailing address. including zip code, for the jurisdiction's central office. List the contact person and a work phone number for that person. "JurisdictionN and "employee," as well as other important terms, are defined in the Oefinitions sheet enclosed. If there is a question or dispute about the jurisdiction responsible for establishing pay equity and for completing this report. please call the number listed at the top of the reparting form and ask for information about requesting a jurisdiction determination. Part B: Official verification. 1. Please check the box showing what kind of job evaluation system was used. and write the name of the system on the appropriate line. If you fiave used more than one system in recent years, please list only the system currently in place. ?. Check one of the two boxes to show how benefits are treated in your report. The Benefits Worksheet explains how to evaluate benefits. 3. a�d 4. No notations are �eeded for these items. 5. If your jurisdiction has any salary ranges for any classes, check "not applicable." If all the conditions described by the first box apply, check that box. Please do not enclose the documentation with your report. The department will contact you and request that documentation, prior to making a compliance decision, if that information is needed to determine compliance. 6. Write in the location (for example, "courthouse bulletin board") where the required notice has been posted. You may use the notice form provided by the Oepartment of Employee Relations for this purpose. If you use some other form, that form must include all the information in the yellow sheet enclosed in this packet. Signaturelines. This information must be completed and signed to verify that the information provided in the report is correct. Failure to complete this part, or any other part of the report form. may lead to a"not in compliance" finding. On the line marked "governing body," write "city council," "county board,t' "sch�ol board," or other governing body for the jurisdiction which has reviewed and approved the report. On the next line. print the full name of the chief elected official of the jurisdiction. If there is no chief elected official, irint the full name of the chief appointed official of the jurisdiction. The ,�ext line must be signed by the chief elected official. or if none. by the chief instructians Page 2 � appainted afficial. On the last line in this part, piease print the title of the official (for example, umayor," "caunty board chair�a "school board chair"). Fart Cs Salaryrange test. Please complete Part C after completing Part F� and after comp7etinq the salary range test. The Salary Range 3est Example enclosed (orange sheet} shows you how to da this test. Fill in the result af step five of the�test in this space. For a jurisdiction to be in compliance, this figure must be 80.0 percent or higher. ., If your jurisdiction does not have any ,�ob ciasses with an established r►umber of years to reach maximum salary. you may leave this part blank. For example, you may leave this part biank if there are no salary r�anges far any af your jobs, or if there are ranges but employees move through the range based solely on performance and not on years of service. Part D: Exceptional service p�y test. "Exceptional service pay" means longevity pay or perfarmance pay. "Langevity pay" means payment abave the salary range maximum to employees with specified years af service or seniority. "Performance pay" means pay�nent above the salary range maximum ta emplayees who meet specified performance or production standards. If no employees receive any of these payments, please check the box which states that "less than 20� of male classes receive ESP." If any employees receive these payments, you wi�] need ta complete this part after completing Part F and after completing the exceptional service pay tesfi. The Exceptional Service Pay Test Example enciased {back of orange sheet} shows yoa how to do ittis test, You must either check the box stating that less than 20 percent of male ciasses receive tfiese payments or fill in the result fram step three of the exceptional service pay test. For a�urisdiction to be in comp7iance, the box must be checked or the amaunt listed must be 80.0 percent or higher. Part E: Totalpayrall. Please write �he amaunt af the �urisdictian's total actuai annual payroll far the year ending Oecember 31, 1991. Part F: Job class information. Please list again the name and address of the jurisdiction and the telephone number for the contact person. Please make additional copies of this form as needed to allow space for all the jab c3asses in yaur jurisdiction. A. Class titie. �ist ali ciasses, S'�dt"��11� W7tF! �4Wg5� QOliitS, in your jurisdiction. For a definition of "class," review the Oefinitions sheet {b1ue� enclosed. Examples of "classesp are "Assistant Librarian," "Custodian," "Teacfier Aide," "City Clerk." Do not list pay grades ar jab points or ratings in this column. � This list must include all classes which had emplayees at any time in calendar year i991, unless the ciass was abolished on ar before December 31, 1991. The informatia� provided in columns B through J must be as of December 31, 1991. instructions Fage 3 However. for ciasses which were vacant on that date, the informatian must �� be as af the most recent date whe� the class was occupied. If the jurisdiction has a two-tier pay system. and there were emplayees in bath tiers on Decemher 31, 1991, the jurisdictian musi report each tier as a separate class. B. Number of male employees. For each job class. list the total number af male employees as of December 31, 1991. The term "empioyee" is defined in the Definitians Sheet. ' C. lYumber of female employees. Far each job class. list the total number of female employees as of December 31, 1991. D. Classtype. Ta determine whether a class is "male," "female." or "ba7anced," you must determiae what percer�tage of employees are female. First add the number of maie employees and the number of female employees. Divide the number of female employees by the tatal number of employees, and multipiy the resuit by i00. If TQ� or mare af the emp'ioyees in the c3ass are fema'te; the class is female, Write "F" under "Class Type." If ZOX ar fewer of employees in the ciass are femaie, the class is maie. Wt~ite "M" under "Class Type." Ail other classes are balanced. Write "6" under "Class Type." Exampies: r� t� 1"�s ti tl t t. Sox Office 2, . Staqe Crew 3. Props Ch�ef 4. Costume Desiqner , B Mu�be� of M�l e E�3.O�Ctti 1 6 1 0 C Nu�ber of fewls E�p�ta�r�i 1 1 0 1 0 Cl �tss Typt �� B M M F E, Comparable work value {jab points}, Write #he number af paints for each �ob class as determined by your �ob evaluatian system. If you use the Ernst and Young Oecisian Band Method {DBM?, list the numerica7 value. not the aiphabetical notation. {Be sure to contact tfiat firm for the mast recent table to use far converting alphabetic ratings to numerica7 values.} F. Minimum Montl�y Salaty. "Salary" includes wages and additional cash compensation. as defined in th� Oefinitions Sheet, Jurisdicitians may round ali wage and salary information to �ihe nearest whate doilar. For ciasses witfi an established hourly wage� multiply the minimum hourly wage by 173.3 to determine the minimum manthly wage, When there is no esiabiished haurly wage, and there is only an annual wage, divide the minimum annual wage by the number of monfihs worked to determine the minimum manthly wage. If the wage is for a ciass in which a11 employees work less than full-time equivalents, you must adjust the minimum monthly wage to represent the Instructio�s Page 4 full-time equivalent wage. To do this. and multiply that amount by 173.3. m determine the minimum hourly wage � If any employee in the ciass is paid less than the minimum of the wage range, or if no wage range exists, determine the lowest wage actually paid any employee in the class. G. Maximummonth�ysalary. Jurisdictions may round all wage and salary information to the nearest whole dollar. For classes with an established hourly wage, multiply the maximum hourly wage by 173.3 to determine the maximum monthly wage. When there is no established hourly wage. and there is only an annual wage, divide the maximum annual wage by the number of months worked to determine the maximum monthly wage. If the wage is for a class in which all employees work less than full-time equivalents. you must adjust the maximum monthly wage to represent the full-time equivalent wage. To do this, determine the maximum hourly wage and multiply that amount by 173.3. If any employee in the class is paid more than the maximum of the wage range� or if no wage range exists. determine the highest wage actually paid any employee in the class. Possible additions to item G. There are several items which you may be required to add to maximum monthly salary: benefits or additional cash compensation, or both. For a definition of these terms� review the Oefinitlons sheet enclosed. To determine if benefits must be added, see the Benefits Worksheet enclosed with these instructions. Additional cash compensation must be added to the salary range maximum for any class which received these kinds of payments at any time from July 1, 1991 through December 31, 1991, if that payment resulted in pay above the wage range maximum. The amount must be prorated to determine a monthly equivalent. H. Years to maximum. Please write the number of years required to qualify for the maximum monthly salary for each class. If there is a salary range, but movement through the range is based solely on performance and not on years of service, write "0" in this space. If no salary range exists, leave this space blank and go to item I. I. Years of service. If there is no salary range for the class, write the number of years of service in the class for the employee with the highest actual monthly salary. J. Exceptional service p�y. If any empl oyees recei ve thi s ki nd of pay (defined in the Definitions Sheet), and if those payments result in a salary above the salary range maximum, write "longevity" and/or "performance" here. Oo not add the amount of these payments to maximum salaries. e Instructions Page 5 Example: � . � c a e ► � e c a M�rber �f ihrder ef Ctass [M►arait� kiniira Mtxiw Y�an / Yeus f�cc��tio�al IN1• fwl• i� MoNr Valu� IMntl+ir IM�thly q � d ��qc� Gla:: iitlr � � M_ f_ R LyE �ni�t:l Sal�ry j�� � �vies - pay �, Box Office �,_ 1 8 110 ; 22Q4 � 1400 � 2, SU9e Crew 6 1 M 130 � 1250 ; 1450 5 longevity 3, Proas Chief 1 0 M 140 �, 1260 � 1�60 5 1on9evity 4, Costuae Ik siyner Q 1 F 142 ; 13'i5 � 1575 5 `_ After completing items A to 3 for all classes in yaur 3urisdiction, please go back to the first page of the repart form and complete Parts C and 0. . � Pay Equity Implementation Report rbmit by January 31, 1492 fio: Pay Equiiy Goardinatar Departrnent af Employee Relatians 200 Centennial8uilding b58 Cedar Sireefi 5t. Paul, MN 55155 (612-296-2653) For Deparfment Use Only . �— � � Postmark Dafie of t2eport �— �� Jurisdicfion tD Nurnber C Name af Jurisdiction � 0 �c . 0 n� ❑ City ❑ County ❑ Schaol ❑ Other: � � Address tm _� _ — Contact Persan Phone � ,(� The Job evoivatlon system used measured skill, effart 0 Na ranges/pertormance differences. Check one: respons(bliity and working condltions and the same system was essec! for all class�s of empioyees. Q This Jutisdictian does not have salary tanges far any of its Check one of the following: classes. Documentatfon about pertcrrmance differ- ences ls avQIbble upc�n request to explain c�pparent ❑ State Job Match G�equitles befween mate and femate classes. Q Q Des3gned Uwn (specity} 0 TtsGc ifem cioes not appl}r to this Jurlsd(ctfon. � „ . � 0 Cansuttant's System CspecifY} {� An ai(iclal noftce has be�n posfied ot �► U ❑ O#her CsP��Y) C�xam�i�entbca»on) � informin� empiayeesthatthe Pay Equtfylmplementation Report tias been fl2ed and Is availabfe ta empioyees upon � request. Aiso, a copy of the report has been sent to each � � Benefits far male and female ciasses of comparable �xclusN� representative, ff any, and a copy has been made � value have been evaluated and: t�val[abie in fhe pubilc library. The teport was approved by: ❑ There is no difference and female classes are not � at ti dlsadvantage. t9o�9b�Y) ❑ There I� a difference and the maximum sala�ies teporfiecf include the �r�onthty ar�nt pald by the emplayer for heafth insurance. �chtetelectedotflck�, prtrrt) Q tnformcrtion in this repart is complete and accurate. Q The re�ort iriciudes ali classes of erx�ployees aver tchtefe�ectedax�clal,stsnatrxel which the jurisdlction has ftnai budgetary approval autr�c�d#y. Cittfe) tdate) � Resutt from Satary Range Worksheet o �� ,� ��- 96 is the resutt after average years to salary range maa�mum for male cicuses is divided by the crverage yefars to saEary rcange rnrnamum for female classes. � ��, f.'esults from Excepfionr�l Service Pay Worksheet i �' �, c �� �� ❑ Less than 20°� of male classes receive ESP. �.� �� % is the result from the worksheet (percentage of female classes receiving ESP is divided by �� � m the percentage of male classes receiving ESP). � � o 3�� S is iFae annuai po}rrol! for 399I. , a, {Part F on Back) , � PAR7 �: Jab f' -s Infaniation D�tte __,_ �` (Name of Jurisdiction) (Address) Ta converi houriy Phone rate to monthly, (Address) ' multiply rate 173.3 A B C 0 E F G H I J Number af Number of Class Comparable Minimum Maximum Years # Years Excepiional MaTe Female Type Nork Value Monthly Monthly to gr of Service Class Title �i]sryees �loyees M. F. B (Job Points) Salarv Salarv Max 5ervice Pay 1. � # 2, � � 3. � � 4. � � 5. �, � 6. � � 7. � �; 8. � � 9. � � ' 10. � � 11. # � 12. � � 13. S � i4. � � ts. � � � t�. S � Please Enake additional copies of this form as needed to allaw space for a13 the jab classes in yonr jur,sdiction. ;r 2eturn to: Faith Zwemke, pepartment of Employee Relations, 2p0 Centennial Building, 658 Cedar Street� St. Paul, MN 55155 �uestions: Cali tb12)296-2653 i4HPPCOMP . s BENEFITS (HEAL7H TNSIlRANCE) � WORKSNEET ANO: INSTRUCTIQNS ��;� .�';�=�,. . � . f . ., �- : . , . • . . . . - • '�.`" . x . , _. .. . -��,t t• ;�:._:- For a definition of �"benefits" see Oefinitions�"sheet: � - ' � •. '~�' � � °�' - ` . . . ,� .,�- `�.�, �.. . . . � - � . . � . ; . . . . .. . �, . . , You may skip this worksheet fIF ..: . . , . , : . . � � . ' . ' . . . .. benefits are the�fsame for all classes. •��You wi.11 not need ta��add' benefits to salary., informatian. You must add. the emplayer's contri'butian ta maximum monthly salaries IF ... .. the differences�in eligibility or employer con�ribution represent a lower va�ue or disadvantage for fema3e classes af camparabie value to male ciasses. � � Step 1. List of job alasses ia order of points. ' �� - (Na need to rewrite. llse infarmat�on in Part F af repart.}' �� Example: City af _Stageville � - � � - . : � . . .., ° • :... . FYr . . �s .n .. r � . . _ Class° Tit1e . . �.,,. .. Ty,,�e �_ Job £valuation� Ratin�s . � '3 �.,>�.` ' <.:`;::-`�._ � =�:`, : �_; ' - � Ty fi; .,, :"s' .,,,.`�::- �:,i:i:�•_' ,�i;, .c ' s �:;`r �'.�r:::;.ii. Cv�:' ,:Y'.� s'�.* `� '���;:,� � .:1�;t�h^'t.,'�+.., .r;�. :Se.,-� . i.,,'- ; � , . f :��i s�( f!'r o'{.�,.. . �':.:"r :.�.`...i)�....�, ;�;::^e�� ,'S: '. ` , ri' . 1't: ,. . . " . 4r", " - ' - . I,.Y� i. '«.ti�•. �� ��_rR ';i �� " rF. "'. � �„ - : L ":a•�'• . # • .:, 7.�..w1; �.1�t x �'v..� ;.�.'q7. � � ... 1 . :�n �r» :t..�it.�rNc. �'�,^�:•.. t,y�s'v�'�:iti{yy � Stage ~C rew � :� r �;� �� - ,' Nf _ ;� ��,�: .. ��t � �;:.� :1 QO �-� :.��z r , ,: . ,r,.._.� k-=�- �: • . {. , . ..�. sTr _ .•h�- �.;'. : ..,; ,.: :.,,.�;.,s.�:.r��.�,� ��''- n'�..,.. . _ - • � � {� '�s � �� .. r � �7:y>' . ... ::�:. ; 3.,, �.•� ' Pt~aps��Cfiief�Y.... . : � M . � • .� , ... 740 ��� . ... __�:,:= ��.•<:,�� �f.:`�..:��;�,,---M. .. i,. ,•7.';::• . i. :3' .e;r.e e,a�i: ;-� Costurne Oesigner . - .� F �. ' ' - 142 � . . • � ;^�°+ � �.. J�. i. I ,{�.{�.li rj� - � ... -"�•U %.Y:.. ,�,. f^�9,J,t%��:; r4 �:.v : tiy:.'.• .. � .. .. t � .".>. i-. '.� JV :5,�.. �. � .i� i't; r.,.�:i� �. T_. �ighting Tech • . M • � ' •- j� .164 � . . ,.• �. ,.' �':�: ; .: .;:,,, . . Effects qg - �,3. . . '} �� ... . } . ; ,,.t,-�•�- � �=.:�_::�.... . . €.EIi •,f'�. •�:S�S,."1`�:u-�4-�'r � 'f:>�.; �� rr._,i •iu.,ex.'`X� i� :!1"i: ' v37',:::n�s,w,-•rn�: :'`t?ix, ,.'iZ'.�.�::�T�% .a.:,:.r • ._�yl,s � .; . i. ' .".i, _.. . ' �' . . ✓ — ':.n�.D ; . �,<s. .- '�..�u,,:y .,..," .` • tt.. �,i.i:; �'v i# i: � _ � • Stage. Mana.ger,,,: ;:�:;=�x� F .. '" ���� .;'i80 z...� :'„�$�:-<,- �, .:.�.�; :� :�,.:���:=_ ..:. , �'{.', f � 1.� �"lc.t;� . ;t,.a�,•::'; v -" .'.,- , ., � ' Writer. .. � • � � �:M . �� � _ ^'��0:�� < i' r'.`��.:•, « _;�?, 'y�`i�:`n�n"F��"ir��i,�Y :�`r:: •.."nai.t�.'.�:,,. . Marketing"Dir. ''r:.. _ M�+ ° ''� ..� �200 - `t::..��r�- �� ,�,;.,. _:. Oirector` • �:. M . : �� . ,248 � �i:,' . . .,�...� .. • ,_'y �r :.._ .. _ ::.:;. • At"OdLICet". ' ` . _ . x>: _ . _',..,, ::�� ; ::�:. :� ' r,.�.r � 3 � ' . - �, � - F� , . _`--� r 2b0•, - : �.�. .•� . .. . :,._ ; - . . Gen. Manager. : . .. ' F _:�. .. _ :. . : := .. 300 . , � : -�� . . . � . .. . Y�,�, - �:.,, :..;: � . __��.,.; � , n �,:.•».. i.o..; ', ., � �^ e::;<�:.;Fz.: ?�'i'q"' , ::t�.'• 2,,,� { . a�F: ; , ",- . �'a<' i � { , . ..3 .- � 1,-�1.3 : =.ti �.> r.. Y. ,� : i, .. . M1C .> �� , 7.k�'';�f". � i.�, ''tf,ft.�Yf`tj +" ' Step 2. Determirie �which'classes -are �comparable. � ;''�� ; `:.:. � . . `" . .' ' � . • ` � ;`. . ��': � � , � �...:.,-:: :,.., :�. �...:. .��•;�.:.�- ' • ' - :., �� ' „4_ > _ ... .. � .. �' . ,, �i.. � t...:: .. : _ : . . ,. ` .:4�.�:y`:_. .. • . , .. + r": "r . . r '.Z':`�'��'� �5�:�}�;.''�. 1''li;N.�i':ryt'. i�ati .� .„ For benefits`�purp ySe`""� `�a� ,:. ; , .. ..., -t= �..,.�. p, .;-. ...i: .�. . . , �;::.r �� �� �:. . ' � .,-.. M N �" �'- �`a- `�;�° .i t���3:;., o s,'A ,male`rclass�risn;�com arable :<to`� a�..female�,�class, i.f.;:;it.�lis: -,..;.< rated within`;;70� above.�or:.below,the:female�ciass.���-�'.r-4`�'�x-:�''.�� .:�`��'��.:�t<f�1;=2;x;;r,z.s;,;::,a'�:r . . . �' � � �� :a.. > f,, , . ^4'w xi:-, . f. .. .,':..'r;,. ;:a:-.; ':fi'.:th=3.'���«,: . . �';.rl`i[f Y .r,. '�� �<t '�'��.'<�3:;'f.�':.'•,:a . , . 3,� �x ,• , . �� ;-�t �y;br:t'3` :i` '�.;,, •1::� zt�;.�'�'d���.:-•' : i.{!�'��>:�W.e,.;X�y �r': . 5':. ',"-�.,��kr'*rt "�y,,,�,: � . 5�':�ii���'�'�4^.r-t:.�' ew . "� '�,,,.», ' : . ;�L�'' . �"4 4M'� ..',�'�fi `4a '.F: ��•��t.': t . ..i"'�_ ' 7.i�r: '..'yy'.. n . ��� �`..�.: • . In .the�� S� a � :. . .:.. . �-. : , , , . ,�. .. , . ;;_ , . ..��;•.: �--�• rr;:.u:�, u.��:h � x�r n�� - t gevil.le 'exampl�e-.above;,�the;:-over 11`-poin "�ra '�` �"+ ��� �'�'� �'��;�'"�� :'� a t- nge� is�y200..(the �highest';.�°�y:�::,,:_ :_;'.'.:-�' .- paints.�vf �3Q0;�'�minus the°�lowesi poir�ts� of i00}.���=Ten percent af�`that"-rarige is'.. �`., ... 20 points.. For the Castume Designer.class,� the male classes of �Props,Chief �.:; ��r.� � , and Set,7echnic�an are camparable:because:they are'wiih�in.the`�range;;from�122-:�"��� .� points.(10X below the��female-class) to x162-paints'�(lOx=above='the female'�class). � » . . � ' . • . <� .°i . .. . �! �.. . _ •j :ti�:. � ' . . Far the next—highest rated.female class, Stage Manager, the comparability�: '.;:� range is from .160 to 200 points; and .,the follawing male classes are":`'"�r�� �; ' ��- comparable: ' Lighting ;Tech; Effects Engis�eer, �Writer, =and �Marketing, Oi.rectar. . . ' , , M . - „ Y t .i t h . �' _ it ".•. r �.. ` � w„ gi".i�,� rrf�w�XnLi{�,' � ` • ' . ,�c ::, _ .. � -. - . . -.:' . : .1-;, � . :. , y . .. _ ,P; . . .. . . . . . �s : ni „,,`?.;`��':_.?,2'x",f ,' �..� _'i, ;-yi.: .; _4 . . • . ' � t: . � .� � r � . � _ � .. .. . . . : � {�� � � � � : � , �. , . . .. ..- : �.. . , . ' •" , ' , `. ••'�t ���Tr:?�^''. ` � k.';•..:i. ; �,; : ..�>,„G;:' y.,.� •_ .'t�,•: • � � .. � .. 1 >y<�' . s'�t . . '� ^ i / ' _ 'Y''� ` - . i� i ♦ 4I��:T �.: � , . -- ` ' . . � ' x . , . �:r,. r '"r .< .."✓:•: _ ;`:,i'�:,-;: .. . , , ,.. _ . ,, x . . ' " ' ' .. . . . . ..-' ,. , . � .. � �t,Ry .:+Y : t.: . �`"' ', . , i , . . � . '<;' .. . � . ... � . . . "x't . 1't.�. j . Benefits worksheet, page.2 For the next female class, Praducer, the comparability range is fram�P40 ta. ` 280 points and only the Uirector is comparable. The comparability range far the Genera7 Manager is from 284 to 30Q, so �here are no male c3asses�which are comparable. Insert your jurisdiction's infarmation below (from colamn E of Part F of the Pay Equity Implementation Repart). . f 2a. What is+the highest number of points given to any class . in your jurisdiction under your job evaluation sys�em? ... 2b. What is the lowest number of points given io any class in your jurisdiction under your �ob evaluation system? ... 2c. Subtract 2b from 2a�and multiply the result by lOx ....... 2d. Subtract�the result in 2c from points for the female class � with the iowest points 2e. Add the resuit in 2c ta the points far the fema3e class with the�lowest paints � . �'��,�:;. _.. _ The male classes which are�{comparable to the fema7e class with the lowest points for�benefits purposes are those with points ranging from the amount . 7isted in 2d to the amount listed in 2e.' ' ' ' Steg 3. Compare benefxts for comparable male aad female classes. . . . , ' � �- - Oo any of the fernale classes have less favorabie eligibi3ity for benefits than any of the male�classes of comparable value? Ooes the'employer contribute� more for any of;the male c7asses than�-for any of the female classes of , comparable value? �' � _. , . � : , .. , � if tfie�answer to either questian is yes. at least one female class is at a disadvantage and therefare benefits must be caicuiated and reported far all classes.. There=is na need to.ga an and determine comparab2e value for other female classes. � Piease skip ta step 4 of ihis warksheet. "'. .' °�� . ., - , , . � . If the a�swer..to both�questions��•Ais�,.no,-ngo on to.examine'the next'female`�class� by repeating all parts af step 2.�,:,YThe-male classes comparable'to this female� classa.re�those with paints ranging f rom the new amount listed in 2d to the new amount listed in� 2e.;$�Cantinue�this.,•process �for each•female class until one af the follawing oc`,curs: . .. . . . . . �s�s�;. . . .. . .. . - � . . . , .. ' :" . . . . � . . , ., ,� ' ` . ._�- , � � - , .. 3a. Any fema3e�class�is�found�to be at a disadvantage'in camparisan with a camparable male class (If this�occurs. skip to step 4 ta calcu]ate a�d report benefits for all classes�; OR � 3b. All female classes have been compared ta all camparable ma7e classes, � • and nane of the female classes are at a disadvantage ,in comparison with comparable male classes. If this.occurs. stop fiere. check the appropriate box in Part B of the pay equity farm. You will not need to ca3culate=or repart benefits for any classes. , i � ' . � You are nat required to report benefits if there are benefits d3ffere�ces anly among classes which are not of comparable value. For example, the employer may cantribute more for health insurance far the Lighting Technician than for the Costume Designer. Nowever, since these twa jobs are not camparable, 0 r Benefits worksheet, page 3 . • , • € . . ..'- . ,� . �, ` � • - � . ,, .• -t t � ' benefits should not be reported unless differences are found among other,-.,.' comparable, jobs. . . Step 4. Calculate the dollar value of the benefits. If any female class is at a disadvantage in terms of benefits in comparison with a male ciass of comparabie value, this calculation must be made far every class in the jurisdiction. � If there are both full—time and part—time employees in a class, and only full—time employees are eligible for heaith insurance, determine the employer's maximum contributian far the most comprehensive coverage available for a fu11—time employee. If no employees in a class are eligible for health insurance, because they work part—time or fvr other reasans, the @Ftlp'iQjt�i`�5 contribution is zera. If employees in a class may choose between single caverage and family .� coverage, determine the employer's contribution for family coverage. _�-•' �.�. •-_ � ' e. . � .. . .. _ " _. . .. _ . . . . ' � .. s ' . ;i , + y � �' Ta caicuiate'�benefits for'classes with an estabiished hourlv waqe` in vauri�r�°' .��_��:°�� •� �, .� • ��urisdiction: ,, ��: >� .;� . . . ,�' � � �' � �_� � - _ - F. -• � , ., �ts rk. . -.t'��� ,1,�'�r.M, . � -. . „ ' a�... -�� � .. . . ._., ` ' .�� _ s _�;' - - -- ` � � � � ,4a.' Maximum annua�lf employer contribution��for an�' .'' . ..I" �_�.:�'� ' ' w . � , . � ,. , .� , . . . . . employee {or employee plus dependents) in the ciass ,.. ` � _ : �. 4b: Number �of. hours �worked� annuai3y� - � : � , '� � .,• � • �k'�. . � , . . . : .'. . .�. . . . . . : , . - . , , � - , - , ,. . , ., _ � ;,= - .;:� - . , � . � r , � � , � , � , . . _ � - . �- � � •. , 4c.` pivide 4aR by� 4b ta determine� cost per hou'r � ..::.. ' ' ;, : '. .. . " , ° . . . . ,_ . ` . � 4d: Add the result'�from 4c to maximum hourly�wage (and �a:�'` ^ • � • � Y�` �r"�f '.�� ' ~ � �'' k .c; .t :;t,..�;•.�. �'rr' �„ . ' . • . ._ • , a "� �.,� . N •r* ... . - � additionai cash compensaiion, if app3acab3e� and , . - _ .- . A�" "�'= .��� multiply by 173.3 to determine maximum manthly amount..'` � ��� �. �- �-_ �.�. . . . . . � . _ �. -., - . - � - a .�: :, , . �.' . Jurisdictions may; roun�d�the'result "to the nearest whole dallar.4.. Enter��the =:�.- ` f.;'�� , � � resu7t .from 4d in Co7umn�� G af •the� report form. �,;� .' �z �k.���- :��� `: - �-��.°,; _ ::� s - -.� � �,..., . ,� • - - - _�.'" . �,'�"`�;: - s' '.r. .ip,. :�, :a,�;F . - . .w • `y^'`;'��; %�y:<,' .., 6�: i'� -,..' .� �.- �,.5.:._ - - " . . , .-i ,. ,`,- • •;�` . c ;. � For exam �le�f ,i` �}... ,.,- . ;:�. :< <:... .. _ . . - .-... �,.. ,�- �.� >,�- :,., � �� .� p. .�'• n'Stageville,��_the�'annual emplayer contributio�n'�for� the. Stage��x�• �� � ��. � i4.,� -^� ': � _ �Manager's-famiiy health�insurance.coverage�is-�3000:�"�:Since'�she�works 2080�='�`�>�;� �;��.,,���r-�`',.' '-�' ,haurs per year,;��he;contr'ibutio� is ;1'.44 pe�r; hour� or b250��pe .mo - J:'�'��'.. "�a:.='`'4{`� r nth`.•=.��When�`��- -� •. -, added. to her maximum manihiy=salary� of .�1550 per �month,`=�the amount to' be� `{��t.s:.�'t,: `.: .:� -�''�.*--.'°. listed an the report�:form:is $1800. � -� � - � '. . � • �. , � � ' . �' ' � - ' � . . : } . To calculate benefits for'ciasses with �an annual salarv'in 'vour iurisdiction: � " �'� - • � .. � ` 4e.� Maximum annua3 employer contributian for an' ' ` , � �. � ' � � employee (or:employee plus dependents) in the class ... ,� ' 4f. Number of months worked ' ............:.......�. ........ _ . . .. , . . . . . • _ � � . � 4g.,Divide 4e by,4f-�to determine cost per.��monthr:.:..:.:.:; - • . . , , . `t ;*: ;. ::�: . . ' - . � . . . � ` 4h. - Add tfie � result from' 4g to� maximum monthly wage (and -�� �,,. �additiona1.cash compensation,`�if applicable�-......'..':, . .. ^ Jurisdictions may round the result to the nearest whole dallar. result from 4h in Column G af the report form, -�_' - . � - Enter the " DEFINITIONS "Additional cash compensation" — s e e"Sa 1 a ry ." "Benefits" means health insurance or health self—insurance programs to which a jurisdiction contributes on behalf of an employee or an employee plus dependents. Benefits do not include pensions, life insurance, dental insurance, disability insurance, or other insurance programs. ' "Class" means one or more positions that have similar duties, • responsibilities. and general qualifications necessary to perform the duties, with comparable selection procedures used to recruit employees, and use of the same compensation schedule. "Compensatioa" consists of salary, exceptional service pay. and benefits. Compensation does not include overtime pay, shift differentials, or uniform allowances�, as defined below. Compensation also excludes any other payments not defined as salary, benefits, or exceptional service pay. *"Overtime pay" means payment to employees for services performed in excess of the normal work period. when the payments are required by applicable state and federal overtime laws, by an applicable collective bargaining agreement, or by written personnel policies. *"Shift differential" means payment to employees for working other than the standard daytime weekday shift. �"Uniform allowance" means payment to employees for purchasing a specified, required uniform. � "Employee" means a public employee as defined by Minnesota Statutes, section 179A.03, subdivision 14, except that employee also includes employees of charitable hospitals as defined by Minnesota Statutes, section 179.35� subdivision 3. Employee does not include employees of charitable hospitals who would be excluded under Minnesota Statutes. section 179A.03, subdivision 14, paragraphs (a) to (f). "Exceptional servxce pay" means longevity pay or performance pay. "Longevity pay" means payment above the salary range maximum to employees with specified years of service or seniority. "Performance pay" means payment above the salary ranqe maximum to employees who meet specified performance or production standards. "Jurisdiction" means a political subdivision, governmental subdivision. or public employer responsible for achieving equitable compensation relationships under Minnesota Statutes 471.991 to 471.999. For purposes of pay equity compliance, jurisdiction means a public employer as defined by Minnesota Statutes, section 179A.03, subdivision 15, clause (c). except that jurisdiction may also include charitable hospitals as defined by Minnesota Statutes, section 179.35, subdivision 2. If a charitable hospital does not have final budgetary approval authority for employees in the hospital, the jurisdiction for purposes of pay equity is defined as the public employer with final budgetary approval authority for employees in that hospital. If the governing board of a joint powers agency does not have final budgetary approval authority for employees in the joint powers agency, the jurisdiction for purposes of pay equity is defined as the public employer with final budgetary approval authority for employees in that joint powers agency. � "Salary" consists of wages and additional cash compensation. "Wages" means all regular payments for routinely scheduled labor or services made by a jurisdiction to a class of employees, whether these payments are made on an hourly, monthly, or annual basis, except for payments defined as exceptional service pay, and except for payments excluded from the definition of "compensation." Wages refers to the maximum monthly payment for a job class if there is an established payment range for the class, or to the highest actual monthly wage paid to any member of a class if there is no established payment range for that class. "Additional cash compensatioa" means all payments made by a jurisdiction to a class of 'employees when the payments are made to all employees in the class and when the payments .exceed the maximum of an established payment range. Additional cash compensation includes lump sum payments and bonus payments except: � Additional cash compensation does not include retroactive adjustments to wages when those adjustments do not exceed the reported wage maximum, and does not include retroactive contributions to benefits when those contributions do not exceed the reported benefits contribution limits; and . � Additional cash compensation does not include payments defined as exceptional service pay, and does not include payments excluded from the definition�of compensation. _ "Wages" — see "Salary." .• Posting date: NOTICE PAY EQUITY REPORT This jurisdiction is submitting a pay equity implementation report to the Min- nesota Department of Employee Relations as required by the Local Govern- ment Pay Equity Act, Minnesota Statutes 471.991 to 471.999. The report must be submitted to the department by January 31, 1992. The report is public data under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13. That means that the report is available to anyone requesting this information. This notice is being sent to all exclusive representatives (if any) in this juris- diction. In addition, this notice must remain posted in a prominent location for at least 90 days from the date the report was submitted. For more information about this jurisdiction's pay equity program, or to request a copy of the unplementation report, please contact: (local contact person's name, address, telephone) For more information about the state pay equity law, you may contact: Pay Equity Coordinator Minnesota Department of Employee Relations Second Floor, Centennial Building 658 Cedar Street St Paul, MN 55155 5ubmit by January 31, 1992 to: c 0 � u � m > 0 t`s � Q m � � Pay Equity Implementation Report Pay Equity Coardinator Department of Employee Relations 200 Gen#enniQl Building b58 Cedar Street St. Paui, MN 55155 (6]2-296-2653) Name of Jurisdictian For Dapartment Use Only . �� � � Postmark Date of Report � �� Jurisdicfion ID Number i:I�:Y C1F MENDO�`A FiEIGii'1`S 0 City ❑ Gounty 0 Schoo! ❑ Ofher: Address 1101 Victoria t".urve, Mendata Heights, MN 5511.8 Contact Person M. Thomas Lawe11 0 The Job evaluatton system used measured sklll, effort resporuSbiilty and working condiilons ond the same system was used for ail ciasses of empioyees. Check one of fhe following; ■ ■ State Job Match Designed �nm (speciiy) � ConsultanYs System t��Y) �on�rol Data 0 Otner esP�KY) 0 Benefits for male and femate classes of comparable vt�lue hove been evc�fuaied and: . [�fhere is no dlfference and female ciasses are not at cs d3sadvantc�ge. Q There Is a dlfference and the mtutimum salarles repottted inctude the monthly amount paid by the employer far heafth insurance. Q Informcrtian in this repart Is compiete and accurate. Phona �12-452-1850 Q No ranges/pertormance difFerences. Check ane: ❑ Thls jurisdictton does not have salary ranges for any of fts clQsses. Documentatian abaut perfarmance dlffer- ences is avcsilable upan reqcr�st to expiatn appc�rent lnequities between male and fema4e classes. � Thls item does nofi apply to this Jurisdiction. Q An officlal notice has been posted vt City Hall - Bulletin Baard (praminent bcatk>n) informing employeesthat the Pay Equlty Implementation Repott has been filed c�nd is ava€labte to em�ayees u�an request. Also, a copy of the report has been sent to each exclusive representative, tf any, ar�d a copy has been made avali�ble En the publ(c tibraty. The report wos appraved by: City �ouncil ��►���Y) Char3.es E. Mertensatto (chiete�ecteclofficial, prfnt) Q 3he report inctudes ati classes af empioyees aver {chistelectedatf�tQ! s�gnoi�xe) which the )urisdlction has flnal budgetary 6pproval Mayor 1/21/92 autr,;;ri#y. (tftta) (date) Result fiorrt Salary Range 1�Sjarksheef � .9 � �"rn'� 4��� 100 % is the result after average yeors #o salary range mcramum for male cicssses 3s divided by �e average years to saiary range maximum for femate ciasses. t?esults fram Excepfiona! Service Pay Worksheet � Less than 20°�6 of mafe classes receive ESP. � is the result from the worksheet (percentage of female classes receiving ESP is divided by the percentage af male elasses receiving ESP}. 4 1,369 452 ��� S ` is the annual payra!! far 1991. a. (Part F on Back} PAR7 F: Job Ctass Tnfarmation City of Mendota Heights -----------------------•- (Name of Jurisdiction) 1101 Victoria Curve To convert hourty Mendcts Neigfits, MN 5511$ phone 452-1$50 ; rate to monthly -----------•----...-----• •----•---- multiply rate 1T3.3 CAddress? A B C D E F G Number of Number of Ctass Gomparabte Minimum Maximun Msle Femate Type Work Value Monthly Manthty Class 7itle Employees Employees M, P, B CJob Points7 Salary Sala�y -------------•--------------- •-----•-- --------- --------- ------------ -•-----•---- ----••------ 1. Custadian 2 0 M 43 � 1,081 S 9,2b2 -------------------------•--- -----.._- --------- --------- ------------ -------._.-- ---._.------ 2. Clerk Receptionist 0 2 P 46 � 1,G96 S 1,819 •-----------••----•-•----•--- --------- •----••_- ----.•_-- " -----•------ -••----••--- ----------•- 3. Maintenance Worker I 1 0 M 49 S 1,643 S 1,643 ----------------------------- --------- ------•-- ----...-- ---.._------ --._.------- -...•------- 4. Maintenance_Worker_II----••_- -------0- -------0- --- M-•-- ----_----51• S------2,025- S----•-2_025T 5. Maintenance Warker III 3 0 M 53 S 2,420 S 2,420 ------�---------------------- •-----_-- --------- •-------- ----•------_ ___-----•--- -----•------ b. Secretary 0 3 F ' Sb S 1,823 S� 2,21b ,.��.�.�."'���"".�.""�"' "'��'��� ..��"'��� »'��...«�� ��".«���'�« �.�����...'�' ����.�.������ 7. Senior_5ecretarY--•---------- -------�- -------1- ---_F.___ _-----•--5g- � -•----1_916, S ----•-2_328r 8. Maintenance Leadperson 3 0 M 60 $ 2,532 S 2,532 -------•-----------------•--- -----__.- --------- -----•--- ------------ -•-----•---- ----•------- 4. Mechanic--------------------- -------�- •------�- ----�---- ---------�3_ � _..---2,532- � ------2_532� 10. Police Officer 10 1 M 65 S 2,358 S 3,09p -•----••----••-----•-----•---' --------- •----••-- -----•__- -----•------ -..-�_------ - ----•••--_•- 11. Accountant 0 i F 67 S 2,167 S 2,634 -------------•--------------- •-------- --------- -----•--- ------•----- -------.._-- ---.__----_. 12. Engineering Technician 3 0 M 75 S 1:983 S 2,980 ------•-----••--------------- --------- ----_••_- _-------- ----••------ --•--------- ------------ 13. Police 5ergeant 3 0 � M 78 S 3,139 S 3,815 ----------------------------- --------- ------•-- -----•--- -----•------ ------------ -----•------ 14. Seniar�Engineering.Techr►ician .------1- ------•0- ----M---- ---------82. $ -•.---2-6G1- S ------3_290_ 15. Code Enforcement officer 2 0 M 82 $ 2,641 � 3,210 •----•------'•-�_--------•--- --------- ------•-- -----•--- ----•------• ------------ ---^_=•_-__ 16. AdministrativerAssisCant-�--- •'-----1- Mr---,TO- w---M,--- ----}-,--87� S_,l---2;844- S----r-3_456_ i7. Civit 6ngineer I 1 0 M 44 S 3,062 S 3,722 ' •-•---•-----._.---••--------- ------•-- --------- •---__.-- ------------ ------------ ------------ 18. Public Works Superintendent 1 0 M 94 S 3,062 � 3,722 .. .. _ __ --- -- -•--- --------- •-------- ----•------- ------------ -----•----_- 14. City Cterk 0 ,____M+1_ - F __102_ S 3,465 � 4,211 ----------------------------- --------- --------- ----•_ ___.-------- -----•------ Z0. Police Chief 1 0 M 102 S 3,465 S G,375 --------------------------•-- ------•-- •-------- •----•_-_ _----------• -•----____-_ -_--_•--___. 21. pirectar of Public Works 1 0 M 102 3 3,465 � 4,375 ----------------------------- ..------- --------- --------- ' ------------ ------------ -----•----•- 22, City Ac4ninistrator i 0 M 1i7 S 4,593 S 4,593 --------------------------•-- ---.__-.- ----...-- ----.__-- ------------ --------•--- ------------ ,� Fiease make additional copies of this form as needed to sElaw space for atE tise Job ctasses in your jurisdiction. • Return to; � 2wemke, Department of Er�toyee Retations, aao c�„t�►�,;8� e�,�a,n� i Cedar Street, St. Psut, MN 55155 . H Years Ta or Max _.._3_... --- 3---_ . 3 ._ Date Janusry 22, 1992 -------------•-- I J # Yeat�s Exceptionai Of Service Service Pay ---1.5�-- -•----_---- __.---... _-------- ••-.08y• VacantM 15 �! __ $ -_- .._ 2--•_ Longevity