HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-10-25 CC
....
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2000
6:00 p.m.
I. CALL TO ORDER
1. Roll Call
II. SET AGENDA
III. PUBLIC HEARING (S)
IV. APPEARANCES/AWARDS
V. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
1. October 11, 2000 Meeting Minutes
VI. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS
1. The City of Centerville October 12, through October 25, 2000
2. Centennial Fire District Expenses
VII. PETITIONS AND COMPLAINTS
1. Intihar Complaint - Center Street Driveways Heaving
VIII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Northern Forest Products - Tax Abatement
IX. NEW BUSINESS
1. Resolution 00-26 - Special Assessment Abatement
2. Resolution 00-28 - Electing to Continue Participation in the Local
Housing Incentives Account Program Under the Metropolitan
Livable Communities Act
3. Resolution 00-29 - Calling for a Public Hearing on Proposed Special
Assessments for Delinquent Sewer and Water Accounts and Other
Outstanding Balances Owed to the City by Individual Property
Owner(s)
4. Shoreview Good Neighbor Program
'-~
X. CONSENT AGENDA
1. Resolution 00-27 - Providing for the Issuance and Sale of $650,000
G.O. Improvement Bonds of 2000 (Hunter's Crossing)
XI. COMMITTEE REPORTS
XII. ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
XIII. ADJOURNMENT
.~~
~-
:fi
f:
~~
~.
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City of Centerville held their regularly sche ~ ed meeting on
October 11, 2000, at City Hall, 1880 Main Street. ,_ 15
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
OCTOBER 11, 2000
6:00 p.m.
PRESENT:
Mayor Tom Wilharber
Council Member Dick Travis
Council Member Terry Sweeney (arrived 6:01 p.m.)
Council Member Mari Nelson
^",. ~'-
lftl~
, ',5:1'
i ~<;
Council Member Linda Broussard Vickers
~ ",
\~'. ,.", ~
';-'C, "~. .;
k ..~ fD;'>~
}~ "" i~' ':k~
}.,_".,~.'~'. ,c .; .oJ
~0 ':~i'7~}~~
~:~:~'\'
,:;~
~,
STAFF:
J:
,
.Jl.
ABSENT:
~'
City Administrator, Jim March
City Attorney, James Hoeft
City Engineer, Tom P rson
I. CALL TO ORDE
II.
rove the
III.
u ty a k, and D ve annon, Color Sign, appeared before Council to review
sign to be placed at the northwest comer of the intersection
n 2 st Avenue. . Bode explained that County Bank is requesting a larger,
nd i cl a time and temperature reader board. The size exceeds Ordinance #4's sign
ts a d the time and temperature reader board is not addressed. Mr. Bode explained that
se t d revised, schematic for the sign shows a two (2) foot taller sign than previously
o ed and includes an instant cash sign below the main sign. Mr. Bode also explained that the
os sign would be approximately 26.58 feet tall and two hundred eleven (211) square feet in
SIze.
The Planning and Zoning Commission denied recommending this variance and consensus was that
the sign section of Ordinance #4 be amended to create a special sign district for commercial
property located east of 20th Avenue and on both sides of Main Street. This would allow
businesses to have similar signs to the City of Lino Lakes'.
Mayor Wilharber opened the public hearing at 6:02 p.m.
Page 1 of 14
Mayor Wilharber questioned the desired installation date of the sign. Mr. Bode stated that County
Bank would like to install the footings prior to the ground freezing and prior to their anticipated
opening date of February, 2001.
Mayor Wilharber questioned whether Mr. March felt the Planning and Zoning Commission
intended to modify the ordinance to allow larger signs and Mr. March stated that the Planning and
Zoning Commission had not determined the proper modifications; however, consensus was that
the current sign section of Ordinance #4 was too restrictive.
Council Member Sweeney questioned the proposed sign dimensions comparative to others in Lino
Lakes. Mr. Shannon, Color Sign, stated that the Amoco sign is taller and the square footage of the
sign is larger than what the Bank is proposing.
Mr. Bode stated that the sign is similar to signs the bank currently has installed at their branch
offices in Forest Lake and Center City. Mr. Bode stated that the Planning and Zoning
Commission expressed concern in regards to the proposed reader board and the possibility of
visual distractions. Mr. Bode stated that the bank intents to use a color of light that is pleasing to
the eye and not distracting. Mr. Bode also stated that if the City desires, "traveling messages"
would not be used.
Mayor Wilharber stated that County Bank's request comes at a time when the City recognizes that
the sign section of Ordinance #4 is inadequate and is in the process of being amended. Mr.
Wilharber stated that it was his opinion that the City needs to accommodate businesses that come
to town and provide a positive approach to their signage. Mayor Wilharber felt that by approving
the variance it would show good faith on behalf of the City.
Mr. Bode ensured the Council that the sign would be in proportion to the building and would not
look out of place.
Motion by Council Member Sweeney. seconded by Council Member Travis to close the
public hearing. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Wilharber closed the public hearing at 6:10 P.M.
2. Hasiak Variance Request
Mr. and Mrs. Stan Hasiak, 6994 Centerville Road, appeared before Council to review their
submitted variance request to enlarge the exterior and enhance the interior of an existing pole barn
structure that exists on their property. The existing structure exceeds Ordinance #4's Accessory
Structure requirements and is a non-conforming structure. Mr. Hasiak began constructing a "lean-
to" addition to the north side of the structure and interior improvements. Paul Palzer, Building
Official, issued a stop work order on the project and has requested that interior improvements be
removed to allow proper inspection. Both construction improvements, interior and exterior, were
started without building permits.
The Planning and Zoning Commission motioned to recommend granting a variance for the interior
improvements, but indicated that the work would have to be inspected and the appropriate
building permits issued. The Planning and Zoning Commission denied the exterior improvements.
Mayor Wilharber opened the public hearing at 6: 10 p.m.
Page 2 of 14
Mrs. Hasiak stated their willingness to remove the "lean-to" exterior improvement and that their
primary request was to be allowed to make interior improvements similar to other garages located
within the City. Mrs. Hasiak explained that the house located on the property has a crawl space
unsuitable for storage due to water, sewer and foundation damage. Mrs. Hasiak also explained
that they intended on using the existing structure as a garage. Mrs. Hasiak stated that they
currently do not have a garage.
Council Member Nelson questioned whether the issue involved removing the non-conforming
structure. Mayor Wilharber explained the variance request was concerning the interior
improvements and the exterior "lean-to" addition to the non-conforming structure.
Mayor Wilharber stated that the non-conforming structure had been located on the parcel for many
years. Mr. March indicated the non-conforming structure has been grand fathered in and may stay
on the property; however, a variance is needed to improve the structure.
Council Member Nelson questioned if the variance was denied, would the interior improvements
and exterior construction need to be removed. Mr. March confirmed that it would.
Council Member Nelson questioned Mrs. Hasiak as to the status of the improvements. Mrs.
Hasiak indicated that the interior has had a cement floor poured, wiring run, insulated, and sheet
rocked. Mrs. Hasiak also stated these items needed to be done to convert the pole barn to a
garage.
Motion by Council Member Sweeney. seconded by Council Member Travis to close the
public hearing. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Wilharber closed the public hearing at 6: 17 p.m.
3. Salazar Variance Request
Mr. and Mrs. Pedro Salazar, 7336 Old Mill Road, appeared before Council to review their
submitted variance request allowing them to construct a six (6) foot, wooden, privacy fence in
their rear yard. Mr. And Mrs. Salazar explained that their property is on a comer lot and
according to Ordinance #4 they have two (2) front yards. Mr. Salazar has begun construction of
the privacy fence one (1) foot into the road right-of-way. The Salazars presented Council with
two (2) letters from neighboring residents indicting their approval of the placement of the fence.
The Planning and Zoning Commission is in the process of amending and defining the language
relating to comer lots and denied the variance.
Mr. Salazar stated that it would be cost prohibitive for him to relocate the fence and existing
sprinkler line. Mr. Salazar also stated that it was his intention to provide a safer environment for
his neighbors and his dogs. Mr. Salazar expressed the need to complete the fencing prior to
making the improvements to the kennel as required previously by Council.
Mayor Wilharber questioned whether allowing the fence to remain in the City' road right-of-way
would interfere with public utilities. Mr. Palzer, Building Official/Public Works Director,
indicated that utilities were run underneath the sidewalk within the Salazar's development so it
would not interfere with same.
Page 3 of 14
Council Member Sweeney questioned whether the old or new Ordinance #4 was in effect at the
time Mr. Salazar began construction of the fence. Mr. March stated that Mr. Salazar had begun
construction of the fence prior to the new ordinance.
Mayor Wilharber questioned whether there was any opposition to the fence from others in the
neighborhood. Mr. March stated that he was unaware of opposition to the fence and noted the two
(2) letters presented by the Salazars.
Council Member Nelson indicated she had received a complaint from the neighbor directly across
the street from the Salazars expressing concern that the fence is too close to the sidewalk.
Mr. Salazar indicated he is obligated to keeping the sidewalk clear and will continue to do so.
Mayor Wilharber questioned Mr. Salazar as to snow removal, fence obstruction of same and
indicated that disposing of snow into the street was not allowed. Mr. Salazar indicated his
snowblower would blow the snow up and over the fence into his backyard. Mr. Salazar stated his
willingness to sign any document the City would require of him to acknowledge his financial
responsibility for any repairs to the fence should it be damaged or need to be removed if the City
allowed it to remain in its current location.
Council Member Nelson questioned the purpose of completing the fence prior to fulfilling the
Council's previous requirement in regards to the kennel.
Mayor Wilharber made a point of order comment indicating questions regarding the kennel were
not relative to the Variance Public Hearing.
Council Member Nelson indicated her question was meantto clarify the comments Mr. Salazar
had previously made.
Mr. Salazar stated that in order to cement the floor of the kennel, it needs to be partially
disassembled and the cement would then need to dry prior to reassembly. Mr. Salazar estimated
the process to take approximately one week and during this time, the dogs would not have an
enclosure.
Motion by Council Member Sweeney. seconded by Mayor Wilharber to close the public
hearine:. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Wilharber closed the public hearing at 6:27 p.m.
4. Northern Forest Products - Five Year Tax Abatement
Mr. March indicated the official public hearing on the tax abatement was scheduled for November
8, 2000. He told Council he had been working with Ehlers and Associates and Mr. McDowell,
Northern Forest Products, to establish the proposed increase in taxable market valuation for the
proposed expansion. Accurate figures should be available for the October 25, 2000 Council
meeting.
No comments were heard from the audience.
Page 4 of 14
Motion by Council Member Nelson. seconded by Council Member Sweeney to close the
public hearing. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Wilharber closed the public hearing at 6:29 p.m.
IV. APPEARANCES/A WARDS
None.
V. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
Council Member Sweeney requested the following changes: On Page 7 of 12 the motion
concerning the final payment on the 20th A venue water/sewer utility improvements add the
sentence after the word "improvements". "The check should be made payable to whomever City
Attorney Hoeft deems appropriate." On Page 11 of 12 in the paragraph concerning cable change
from "anyone not receiving cable" to "anyone not receiving the government access channel
through their cable company".
Motion by Council Member Sweeney. seconded by Council Member Travis to approve the
September 27. 2000. City Council Meetine Minutes with the noted changes. All in favor.
Motion carried unanimously.
VI. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS
The City of Centerville September 28, through October 4, 2000
Motion by Council Member Travis. seconded by Council Member Nelson to approve the
expenditures for the City from September 28. 2000 through October 4. 2000. All in favor.
Motion carried unanimously.
Centennial Fire District Expenses
Motion by Council Member Sweeney. seconded by Council Member Travis to approve the
Centennial Fire District expenditures in the amount of $3.436.70. All in favor. Motion
carried unanimously.
Pay Estimate Number 2 - Hunter's Crossing
Motion bv Council Member Sweeney. seconded by Council Member Nelson to approve Pay
Estimate Number 2 on the Hunter's Crossing Development in the amount of $199.943.79.
All in favor. Motion carried unanimously.
VII. PETITIONS AND COMPLAINTS
Council Member Nelson stated she had received several complaints regarding a water testing fee
on residents 3rd quarter utility bills. Mr. March stated that the City is allowed, by State law, to
recoup this fee once per year. Mr. Palzer stated that the City is required to take daily samples and
test them internally. Additional monthly, quarterly and annually samples are tested at an off-site
lab to ensure safe drinking water requirements are met.
Page 5 of 14
Mayor Wilharber questioned whether residents had been informed of this charge. Mr. Palzer
stated he did not believe information had been provided to residents concerning this issue other
than the fee placement on individual utility bills.
Mayor Wilharber requested that staff place an article in the next LeJournal in regards to this item.
Mr. March stated that Mr. Wayne LeBlanc, Parks and Recreation Committee member, had
brought to his attention the fact that the trail in Hunter's Crossing would be connecting to the
Anoka County Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Regional Park and perhaps the City's trail should be
widened to ten (10) feet to coincide with same. Mr. March stated he visually inspected same and
believes the trail could be paved out to nine and one half (9 Y2) feet without any significant costs
incurred other than the cost of the extra bituminous. Mr. March clarified that Mr. LeBlanc was not
speaking on behalf of the Parks and Recreation Committee.
Mayor Wilharber questioned whether the City or the developer would incur the additional
expenditures relating to widening the trail. Mr. Peterson, City Engineer, indicated the additional
burden would be the developer's responsibility. Mr. Peterson estimated the additional cost to be
$1,400.
Mayor Wilharber questioned the Parks and Recreation Committee's decision on this matter.
Council Member Sweeney stated it was his understanding that the Committee wanted to set a
minimum width standard for parks in the new developments; however, the Committee was
unaware that the Hunter's Crossing trail would connect to the Anoka County Rice Creek Chain of
Lakes Regional Park. Council Member Sweeney stated that the Committee was more concerned
with the quality of the trail rather than the width of same.
Mayor Wilharber stated that there has been a considerable amount of time planning within the
City and other cities for consistent trail ways.
Council Member Sweeney stated if it was the intention of the City to create a trail that crosses the
City from east to west then he believed a wider trail would be more accessible and easier to use.
Mayor Wilharber questioned the additional cost for maintaining a larger than planned trail. Mr.
Palzer stated that there would be additional costs involved in maintaining the trail; however, they
would not exceed the benefit and felt that the costs would be minimal.
Mayor Wilharber mentioned the trail in Hunter's Crossing was being created over roots of trees
and questioned if the roots should have been removed in order to prevent them from growing back
through the trail. Mr. Peterson stated that typically roots grow downward and with the gravel and
bituminous over the top, there should be not problems.
Council Member Nelson stated her desire to have consistent trail ways within the community.
Consensus was to add Widening the Hunter's Crossing Development Trail as number 10 under
New Business on the agenda.
Mr. March stated that he had received a letter from residents residing at 1760 Center Street,
indicating that the drain tile underneath their driveway had settled and the driveway needed to be
Page 6 of 14
repaired. Mr. Palzer stated that the driveways in that area have been a reoccurring problem due to
frost and heaving. Mr. Palzer stated that the City has previously paid to repair same.
Mayor Wilharber requested that Mr. March research this issue and provide information to Council
and residents experiencing this problem.
Motion by Council Member Sweeney. seconded by Council Member Travis to add discussion
of the driveways on Center Street to the agenda for the next City Council Meeting. All in
favor. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Wilharber stated that he had received some complaints concerning animals running at large
and pet owners not removing fecal matter from their animals. Mayor Wilharber urged animal
owners to be responsible and clean up after their animal(s) and not allow their animals to run at
large.
Mayor Wilharber stated he attended the ten (10) year anniversary gathering for the Anoka County
Traveler. Mayor Wilharber also stated that he questioned how service to Centerville residents
could be improved and the Traveler indicated they have serviced several residents in Centerville
and suggested placing their number in a newsletter to heighten awareness.
Mayor Wilharber stated he received a complaint concerning the price of admission to Anoka
County and Washington County parks. Anoka County informed him that they do not offer a
discount rate for seniors; however, they do offer an annual pass which would allow unlimited
access to parks and provide discount admission to Hennepin County parks. Mayor Wilharber
requested that price information be placed in the next LeJournal.
Mayor Wilharber stated he had a meeting with John Olson, Anoka County Highway Department,
and discussed connecting the trail way on the east side of Centerville Lake to the Anoka County
Rice Creek Regional Park trail way system. Mr. Olson stated that a feasibility study would need
to be completed by the City. Mayor Wilharber also questioned the upgrading of Main Street and
anticipated widening of same. Mr. Olson stated that it would be approximately 15 years before
those improvements would be made.
Mayor Wilharber suggested that additional senior housing was needed and felt that this area
needed additional attention. Mr. March said there is a possibility of receiving property back from
the County and working with a private developer to bring senior housing to the City.
Mayor Wilharber stated he had spoken with the Anoka County Attorney, Robert Johnson,
concerning a rash of juvenile crimes within the City. In June, the elementary school was
vandalized in the amount of $25,000, a home under construction in the Deer Pass Development
was vandalized, juveniles are loitering and blocking traffic on Main Street and there were thirty-
one (31) tire slashings in August. Mayor Wilharber stated to Mr. Johnson that people who reside
in Centerville feel this behavior is unacceptable and are willing to work with the County Attorney
to deter criminal activity in the future.
Mayor Wilharber stated that the area surrounding the old Public Works site is an eyesore and
needs to be cleaned up. Mr. March stated that Mr. Palzer is working on the area and several things
were removed today.
Page 7 of 14
Mayor Wilharber stated that he had spoken with the Chief of Police regarding grant funds
available for lighting city parks that had been mentioned by the Public Works Department and the
Chief was unaware of funds being available for this purpose. The Chief also stated that two (2) to
three (3) police vehicles would be parked at the new Public Works site.
VIII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Alcohol and Gamblin~ Enforcement - Trio Inn (tabled from the September 27,2000 meeting)-
Legal Counsel Report
A letter from the Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division was discussed at the last meeting.
The letter referenced an alleged liquor violation stemming from the Trio Inn. At that meeting, the
item was tabled to allow the City Attorney to review the statutes in regards to enforcement
provisions by the State.
Consensus was not to fine the establishment for the alleged violation. However, since the
meeting, Mr. March has discussed this matter with Mr. Paul Montain, (Owner, Trio Inn) and
stated that even if the City did not elect to issue a civil penalty, the State could levy a penalty
against the Trio Inn. Mr. Montain indicated his willingness to donate $200 to $300 to the City of
Centerville or the Centennial Lakes Police Department in further support of the work that they are
doing to curtail underage liquor consumption.
City Attorney Hoeft stated that upon reviewing the statute governing this issue, it clearly states
that the State can impose a penalty, in addition to the City if they choose, provided the total
amount of the penalty does not exceed $2,000.
Mayor Wilharber questioned whether the City Attorney was aware of the State enforcing a penalty
as a matter of course, if the City has penalized the business. City Attorney Hoeft indicated most
cities have a guideline established for when an alleged liquor violation takes place. Thereby,
making it easy for the city to refer to the guidelines and apply the proper fine to the offense. Mr.
March stated that Mr. Montain made it clear that he does not condone this behavior at his
establishment and would provide proper education to his employees to ensure that a similar
violation would not happen in the future.
Council Member Sweeney suggested that Council discuss this matter at a work session and
prepare guidelines that would assist in this area for future reference. Mr. Hoeft stated that fining a
business $200 or $300 would be in keeping with guidelines of other cities for first time offenses.
Council Member Nelson stated that it was her understanding that Council voted previously not to
fine the business owner and feels even though she personally voted to fine the business, the
original vote of Council should stand.
Attorney Hoeft stated that there were no guarantees that the State would not fine a business in
addition to any fines the City may impose.
Mayor Wilharber indicated he would be in favor of fining the Trio Inn an amount not to exceed
$300 and the drafting of a letter, by the City, stating that they have imposed a fine. It is hopeful
that this letter would attempt to curtail the State from imposing additional fines.
Page 8 of 14
Motion by Mayor Wilharber. seconded by Council Member Travis to fine the Trio Inn in
the amount of $300 and to forward the $300 to the Centennial Lakes Police Department to
assist efforts in curtailing underage liquor consumption. All in favor. Motion carried
unanimously.
IX. NEW BUSINESS
1. County Bank Variance Request
Council Member Travis questioned whether Mr. Shannon, Color Sign, had researched
neighboring cities' ordinances to determine if their signs were in keeping with those ordinances.
Mr. Shannon indicated he had done so and submitted a report to Mr. March.
Motion by Council Member Travis. seconded by Council Member Nelson to approve the
County Bank sign variance. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously.
2. Hasiak Variance Request
Council Member Sweeney questioned whether the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning
Commission was to allow the interior improvements to the building but to deny the exterior
expansion. Mr. March indicated that was correct.
Motion by Council Member Sweeney. seconded by Council Member Nelson to approve the
Hasiak variance request allowing interior improvements to the non-conforming structure
and denying exterior expansion improvements. The Hasiaks are required to obtain the
required inspections and buildim~ permits. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously.
3. Salazar Variance Request
Motion by Council Member Sweeney. seconded by Mayor Wilharber to approve the Salazar
variance reQuest to allow for the six (6) foot. wood. privacy fence and for the fence to remain
in the City right-of-way provided Mr. Salazar sign a document accepting full financial
responsibility for any damages or removal of the fence from the City right-of-way.
City Attorney Hoeft noted a stipulation should be added to the motion to provide that Mr. Salazar
sign a document accepting full financial responsibility for any costs incurred for damage to or
removal of the fence. Mr. Sweeney requested a sentence concerning that matter be added to his
motion.
Council Member Travis indicated he had driven by the residence and feels the cost to move the
fence would be minimal due to the fact there were only two (2) corner posts installed. He
indicated the sprinkler issue is merely moving a few sprinkler heads, which is relatively easy.
Mayor Wilharber indicated he did not feel the resident should incur additional costs to move the
fence when he was originally given misinformation by a representative of the City. Mayor
Wilharber stated that he believed the fence is not far enough into the City's road right-of-way to
cause any real issue and he is in favor of the variance.
Council Member Nelson stated that she sympathizes with the Salazars as they are trying to do the
right thing, but does not feel that the variance requirements have been met.
Page 9 of 14
Mayor Wilharber called for a vote on the motion.
Ayes - 2 (Wilharber and Sweeney) Nays - 2 (Travis and Nelson). The motion failed for lack
of a maiority.
Council Member Travis indicated he is not opposed to the fence, but is concerned that the fence is
built in the City's road right-of-way.
Mayor Wilharber questioned the options the Salazars had due to Councils lack of majority. Mr.
Hoeft indicated the Council could grant the variance request for the six (6) foot, wood, privacy
fence provided it is not in the City's road right-of-way, allowing the Salazars to continue the
project.
Motion bv Council Member Travis. seconded by Council Member Nelson to grant the
variance request for the six (6) foot. wood, privacy fence provided it is not in the City's road
right-of-way.
Council Member Sweeney expressed his concern that the City may be imposing a hardship on the
residents by not granting the variance. Mr. Salazar has been required by the City to meet certain
specification in regards to keeping his dogs and has agreed to add fencing to make the neighbors
more comfortable and to keep children separated from his dogs. Council Member Sweeney stated
that requiring Mr. Salazar to move the fence would require additional monies to be expended by
Mr. Salazar, which he has indicated he does not have. Therefore, Council Member Sweeney
would like to see the variance approved.
Mayor Wilharber stated that there would be a Council Member absent at the next meeting also.
He then stated that he understood the opposition to the variance request concerning the City's road
right-of-way but noted Mr. Salazar had agreed to be financially responsible for any costs incurred
due to the fences location in the City's road right-of-way.
Mr. Salazar stated he should have been able to rely upon the information provided to him by the
City and if the information was not reliable, he should have been told to consult another agency to
determine the location of his property lines.
Mr. Salazar indicated twenty (20) postholes have been dug and he has gone through two (2) augers
due to soil conditions. Mr. Salazar stated that he feels the City has pushed him around and all he
is trying to do is provide a safer area for his dogs to exercise and play and to make his neighbors
feel more comfortable.
Mayor Wilharber questioned whom Mr. Salazar spoke with at City Hall. Mr. Palzer indicated he
had given Mr. Salazar the information. Mayor Wilharber questioned how far into the City's road
right-of-way the fence was encroaching. Mr. Palzer stated eight inches.
Mr. Hoeft stated that City officials can not be held accountable for information they give on the
location of property lines, it is ultimate responsibility of the property owner to determine exactly
where the property lines are.
Mayor Wilharber stated that the average property owner is not an attorney, engineer or surveyor
and that if information was obtained from the City he understands why Mr. Salazar would believe
Page 10 of 14
he could rely upon the information. Mayor Wilharber stated he felt the Salazars were attempting
to improve the situation with their dogs. Mayor Wilharber also stated he would like to approve
the variance to ensure that the fence is installed because he believes it would be for the greater
good of the community.
Mr. Salazar reiterated his willingness to sign a document accepting full, financial responsibility for
any damages or removal of the fence due to it location in the City's road right-of-way.
Mr. Salazar stated if the Stop Work Order had not been placed on the project he would have
completed the installation of the fence by this time.
Mayor Wilharber called for a vote on the motion.
Ayes 2 (Travis. Nelson) Nays - 2 (Wilharber. Sweeney). Motion failed for lack of a majority.
Motion by Mayor Wilharber. seconded by Council Member Sweeney to reconsider the
previous motion to grant the variance to allow the fence to remain in the right-of-way. Ayes
- 3 (Wilharber. Sweeney. Travis) Nays -1 (Nelson). Motion carried.
Council Member Travis stated he concurred with Mayor Wilharber and that was reasoning behind
modifying his vote, and believes strongly that the homeowner is responsible for location of their
own property lines prior to beginning projects.
4. Resolution 00-23, a Resolution approving an Abatement of Special Assessments (6973
Meadow Circle)
Mayor Wilharber read information submitted by Teresa Bender bringing to the attention of the
City special assessments for the Parkview Development that were not removed from PIN #R23-
31-22-31-0064 (6973 Meadow Circle) on Anoka County Property and Taxation records following
Burnett Title's payment in July of 1999 and continues to appear on the property owner's statement
of property tax payable in 2000. Resolution 00-23 would provide for an abatement of the special
assessments and the appropriate paperwork needed to rectify the error with Anoka County.
Motion by Council Member Sweeney, seconded by Council Member Travis to approve
Resolution 00-23. a Resolution approving an Abatement of Special Assessments at 6973
Meadow Circle. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously.
5. Resolution 00-24, a Resolution Authorizing City Participation in the "Minnesota Cities:
Building Quality Communities" Effort in Cooperation with the Fellow Members of the
League of Minnesota Cities.
Motion by Council Member Sweeney. seconded by Council Member Travis to approve
Resolution 00-24. a Resolution Authorizing City Participation in the "Minnesota Cities:
Building Quality Communities" Effort in Cooperation with the Fellow Members of the
League of Minnesota Cities. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously.
6. Trail Paving at Acorn Creek Park
Mr. March presented several quotes received for paving the trails in Acorn Creek Park. Two (2)
firms submitted quotes, Arcade Asphalt and Northdale Construction. The quote from Arcade
Page 11 of14
Asphalt was $10,000 lower than that presented by Northdale Construction. Mr. March
recommended accepting the presented bid from Arcade Asphalt.
Motion by Council Member Sweeney. seconded by Council Member Nelson to accept the
presented bid from Arcade Asphalt for the paving of the trails in Acorn Creek Park. All in
favor. Motion carried unanimously.
7. Centerville Redi-Mix - Interim Use Permit (Renewal Request)
Mr. March stated that Mr. Shudy, (Owner, Centerville Redi-Mix) has requested renewal of his
Interim Use Permit. Mr. March stated that the Interim Use Permits needs to be reviewed on an
annual basis for an extension not to exceed five years. Mr. March indicated that Mr. Shudy's
current Interim Use Permit is scheduled to expire on October 14, 2000.
Motion by Council Member Nelson. seconded by Council Member Sweeney to approve the
extension of the Interim Use Permit for Centerville Redi-Mix. All in favor. Motion carried
unanimously.
8. Ground Development
Mr. March presented information to Council regarding Ground Development's proposed plan
located south of the Center Oaks subdivisions.
Mr. Cooper, representing Ground Development, presented a revised sketch of the proposed plan
for the property reflecting the changes requested by the Planning and Zoning Committee.
Discussion ensued regarding the development and Council's request that several items be revisited
prior to resubmission. The following modifications were requested: location of trails; concern
for the drainage ditch through the southern portion of the property; the need for the Parks and
Recreation Committee to determine if a park is desired in the development or if other concession
may be made, saving trees, modifications to the Comprehensive Plan for MUSA, sidewalk
installation on Dupre Road, Anoka County's plans to widen Centerville Road, driveway concerns
for the two (2) residences to the north, and a draft monument entrance sign plan for the
development.
Council Member Nelson left the meeting at 8:30 p.m.
9. Resolution 00-25, a Resolution Approving a Public Hearing on the Tax Abatement for
Northern Forest Products
Motion by Council Member Sweeney. seconded by Council Member Travis to approve
Resolution 00-25. a Resolution Approving a Public Hearing on the Tax Abatement for
Northern Forest Products. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously.
10. The Widening of the Hunter's Crossing Development Trail
Council Member Sweeney stated that due to minimal costs involved with widening the trail way,
he was in favor of asking the developer to pay for same. Council Member Sweeney also stated
that if the developer is not willing to pay the amount required, he would approve of the City
paying for the widening.
Page 12 of 14
Council Member Travis stated he would like the developer to pay for the widening of the trail and
felt that connecting the trail with the Anoka County Park was a good idea.
Mayor Wilharber directed Mr. March to contact the developer to discuss this issue.
Motion by Council Member Sweeney. seconded by Council Member Travis to approve
widenine of the trail in Hunter's Crossing Development to a 9 ~ foot bituminous trail. All in
favor. Motion carried unanimously.
X. CONSENT AGENDA
XI. COMMITTEE REPORTS
Mayor Wilharber stated that there would be a Police Commission and Fire Steering meeting on
October 12,2000.
XII. ADMINISTRA TOR'S REPORT
Mr. March stated that the old, red, concession stand needed to be removed from the old Public
Works site and placed at the new Public Works site. Mr. March stated that he had received a
complaint in regards to the appearance of the old site and recommended that the City research the
possibility of having the fire department use the building for fire practice.
Motion by Council Member Sweeney. seconded by Council Member Travis to allow the old.
concession stand building to be relocated to the new Public Works site. All in favor. Motion
carried unanimously.
Mayor Wilharber requested that Council approve signage for the new Public Works site and the
Centennial Lakes Police substation. Signage will be similar in size, material, etc. to that of other
signage on City property.
Motion by Council Member Travis. seconded by Council Member Sweeney to authorize
Mayor Wilharber to contract for signs for both the new Public Works site and the
Centennial Lakes Police substation. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Wilharber stated he had spoken with Father Fitzgerald previously and Council had
authorized Mr. March to draft a letter in regards to the likelihood of a land swap or purchase of
land for the purpose of a Community Center. The Archdioceses has authorized the church to
proceed if deemed appropriate.
Mr. March suggested authorization by Council to obtain an appraisal of the church property and a
duplex located on the same block. Council Member Sweeney stated that he would like to have the
entire block appraised as he believes the City would need to purchase same in order to make the
Community Center a reality.
Motion by Council Member Sweeney. seconded by Council Member Travis to authorize
Staff to obtain an appraisal for the block containing the church property and the duplex. All
in favor. Motion carried unanimously.
Page 13 of 14 -
Mr. March stated that the proposed, decorative lighting for the Hunter's Crossing Development
would cost approximately $18,000 more than standard lighting.
Council Member Sweeney questioned the amount of light radiated by decorative versus standard
lighting and also questioned the amount of vertical light being emitted. Mr. March stated he was
unsure of the specifications of either lighting options.
Mayor Wilharber questioned whether or not there was lighting on City trails ways. Mr. Palzer
stated there was not.
Mr. March stated he had received a contract for lawn care services for the next year from Valley
Creek Lawn and Landscaping. Mr. March stated that the hourly rate had not increased in three
years and questioned Council as to their intentions in receiving additional bids prior to renewal of
same.
Mayor Wilharber stated that he preferred to receive an addition two (2) bids. A consensus was
reached to direct Staff to solicit two (2) additional bids.
XIII. ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Council Member Sweeney. seconded by Council Member Travis to adjourn the
October 11. 2000 City Council Meeting at 9:07 p.m. All in favor. Motion carried
unanimouslv.
Transcribed by:
Joan Lenzmeier, Recording Secretary
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
Page 14 of 14
Centennial Fire District
7741 Lake Drive
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
(651) 784-7472 - Office
(651) 784-2427 - Fax
October 17, 2000
TO:
City Council
City of Centerville
City Council
City of Circle Pines
City Council
City ofLino Lakes
FROM:
Milo Bennett
SUBJECT:
Ratification of expenditures and approval
for payment of expenses.
Your approval of expenses, as listed on the attached copy of
the check register, checks #12394 - 12408, in the amount of
$185,094.44 is hereby requested.
Centennial Fire District
Check Register
Page 1 of 1
DATE CHECK# NAME ACCOUNT AMOUNT
10/17/2000 12396 Lino Lakes State Bank 41100 - Payroll Taxes 3,370.12
10/17/2000 12395 Minnesota Department of Revenue 41100 - Payroll Taxes 1,429.00
10/17/2000 12394 Amaco Oil Company 42100 - Fuel and Lube 502.16
10/17/2000 12395 Arthur Mohler 42110 - Other Maintenance 10.03
10/17/2000 12396 Circle Pines Office Products 42180 - Office Supplies 68.63
10/17/2000 12397 Connexus Energy 42252 - Station 1 - Electric 694.22
10/17/2000 12398 Cy's Uniforms 42120 - Uniform Expense 94.95
10/17/2000 12399 Frattallone's Hardware 42110 - Other Maintenance 205.63
10/17/2000 12400 Janet Haapoja 41023 - Steering Committee Secret 50.00
10/17/2000 12401 Milo Bennett 42220 - Travel, Conference, School 50.98
10/17/2000 12402 Northern States Power 42254 - Station 2 - Electric 461.62
10/17/2000 12403 Oxygen Service Company, Inc. 42270 - Breathing Air 104.50
10/17/2000 12404 Pehl, Hinschberger Associates, LTD. 42160 - Accounting Services 205.00
10/17/2000 12405 Sentry Systems, Inc. 42110 - Other Maintenance 60.55
10/17/2000 12406 Sutherlund Plumbing & Heating, Inc. 42110 - Other Maintenance 128.82
10/17/2000 12407 U. S. West 42240 - Telephone 827.35
10/17/2000 12408 Toyne, Inc.* 11100 - Equipment 181630.00
Total $185,094.44
* Check #12408 in the amount of $181 ,630.00
(written to Toyne, Inc.) is the final payment on the
new Engine 21 that was received in October 2000.
~
\.
MEMO
DATE: October 20,2000
TO : Honorable Mayor and Council
FROM: Jim March
RE : Intihar Driveway Complaint
............................................................................
This item was tabled at the last meeting. I asked public works to take some pictures of
this driveway. I drove by the driveway and was shocked to see how much the end of the
driveway was heaved. I am not sure how a car could access this driveway without
risking damage. I will have the pictures available for distribution at the meeting. I will
ask Paul Palzer and Tom Peterson to come up with projected costs for repairing this
situation. I have included the original complaint in the packet again for your
convenience.
October 10) 2000
Mr. Jim March
City of Centerville
1880 Main Street
Centerville) MN 55038
Dear Mr. March
I am writing this letter to request the City of Centerville correct a problem which has
persisted since the Sanitary Sewer and Street Reconstruction in 1987. In 1991 the prior
owner at my residence(Rick Daschel) contacted the City of Centerville concerning the
settling of the driveway. At that time the City sent a letter to the project contractor and I
believe some reconstruction was completed. When I purchased the property in 1993 ) I
too contacted the city because the driveway apron was stili settling. Since that time the
city has been applying blacktop to the driveway apron. Due to the soils problem) the
driveway apron still moves up and down as the seasons change. The condition of the
apron prohibits entry straight into the driveway. In the summer of this year I filed a
complaint with the city office. I have not heard anything from this inquiry. We are
looking to upgrade our driveway with new asphalt in the early spring but fear the soils
problems at the apron. Since this residence was assessed for these improvements by the
city) we believe the City of Centerville should correct the apparent soils problem due to
the installation of the drain tile in front of our property. We look forward to hearing from
you.
6r:J~ffm~
Bob and Pat Intihar
1760 Center Street
Centerville) MN 55038
651-426-7794
MEMO
DATE: October 20,2000
TO : Honorable Mayor and Council
FROM: Jim March
RE : Northern Forest Products Tax Abatement
............................................................................
Included in your packet are the two financial projections that Sid Inman of Ehlers and
Associates prepared for the proposed tax abatement for Northern Forest Products. The
two projections show 25,000 square foot additions with different market valuations per
square foot. For the purpose of the public hearing and mailed notices we will be
assuming the highest potential valuation for the expansion. This would create an
additional $900,000 in taxable market value. The figures show a valuation of $36/square
foot.
The official public hearing is scheduled for November 8th. The official closing date
would be November 15th. Expected completion of the expansion would be by early next
summer. The tax abatement would begin when the current tax increment district expires.
The tax abatement would only be for the City's share of the taxes from the increase in
market value due to the expansion. Once the current tax increment district expires, the
City will be receiving full taxes on the existing building. The business subsidy
agreement will require that Northern Forest Products create a minimum increase of one
new job due to the building expansion. Grading on the site is already beginning to occur.
This expansion will create the largest building in our Industrial Park at approximately
40,000 total square feet.
OCT.1S.200010:34AM
~HLERS & ASSOC
NO, 4427
.
EHLERS
&0 ~SSOCIATES IHe
To;
C'~Vv\ ~~
G~ tlkc. ~W~L
FAX: ~~-I L{2,'- at, z'1
/
FAX:~s/l c.( 2.. f - rrr .3
I
To:
From:
C,I'..,1241 Lf AI
NOL~N
FAX:
<])~C:=-- Phone: 651.697.8500
~, ~,du.c..r.s
~
To:
Subject:
Pages: -3 (including cO'r'er)
Date: /o;;~ /00
I J
COMMENTS
r
I Here are the two runs Sid has done a8suming estimated market values of
5750,000 and $~OOtOOO for the ne~ addition, You will note they both
show total abat~ent funas in excess of $100.000. so it vill be necessary
to hold ~ Business SU~'Ldy hearl~g for Northern Forest Produc~s at the
I saoa time as the abatement hQ~rips. We will be furnishing a wTitten
I
I
!
i ex~.1&lat1on of the $17,255.72 ":Ba::k 'Ia.x:e~ Due" as WIia sta.ted yesterday.
~
cd
LEAOERS IN PUBLIC fINANCE
3060 Cen1re PoInt. Orive
P.osevIRe. MN 55113-11C!l
+
I
651.691.8500 tax 1551.697.6555
www.ehlers.lnc:.CQrTI
1 Q" ale, a
OCT.la.20GO 11:06AM
E~LERS & ASSOCIATES
Cil~ \:If CCftllMUI
IPERIOD eeGINNIN~
: Yrs. . M~. Yr.
ro:o-';~ lP95
os 02-01 1996
1.0 0s.01 HlQe
1.5 02-01 1gei
2.0 08.01 1997
H 02.01 1996
3.j ()8.(J1 ',996
3.~ 02-01 11m
4.0 :>&-01 1,99~
! 4.6 02.C' 2'000
U.O OB-Cl;!OOO
~ T"lall
Frnent VaJues..~~
,PERIOD 6E311~NING
Yrs. Mth. Yr.
a.o 11.01 1985
0,$ 02.01 1998
, .0 08001 \ 99$
1.5 ::l2.01 1991
2,0 06-01 1997
2.E O<!.O~ 19~a
S.I) 08.01 , a~a
3.! OZ.01 1999
,4.0 08-0' 1999
4.5 02.01 2000
5.0 OS.OI 200j
11.11 2000
5.5 ~j 2001
a.o 08-0; 2001
6.5 02.01 2002
7.0 OS.OI 2002
7.S 02-01 2003
5.0 08-01 2003
8.5 C.Hll 2001
9.0 08.01 2004
9.5 ON!! 2005
10.0 Oe.Ol ~
0.0 02-01 2000
0.6 08-01 2006
1.0 ea~i:2007
1.5 Oe-ol 2007
2.0 02.01 aoos
2.5 08.01 2C08
3.0 O;;:.Jl 2COO
3.6 ('8-01 ~CC9
i 4.0 ON' \ 2010
I 4.5 06-01;<0'0
~i.i$
C::-..:..E&e0lr.1 v~..._
C'/10C'OJ
~Mod
Cays
12.
BIiS.
6alanoe
. '32,250.00
33.201J.ae
:aU:Z0.24
SI!:.D91.80
37,625.49
39,2:24.57
4O,eg1.S1
<1.2,1829.50
044,44, .25
A6,330.00
1ll!.299.03
107
Poriod
. Clava
121
Beg.
B!lllJl1C'
114,O!11.19
117.309.72
122,2953&
'27.4~,93
132.9i1.38
13a ,56-::l.1 1
,u,44M~
150,.587,99
lse.987.9!
16MSS.97
170.615.62
130.709.4:
124,758.0&
11 e.5e4.42
112.965.39
106,SSlUO
100,764.66
77,797.34
S3.Sea.9()
23.327.35
3,758.42
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
C.OC
0.00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0.00
10?
'2
LIMITEr:> REVENUE NOTE - TO I.AND OWNER
Accrued
Inlereet
95e.e~
1,411.88
1.471.3&
1,533.a;
1,5eS.va
1.667.04
1737.39
1.91 \ .76
1,888.75
1.ge9.03
0.00
.J6,04g.03
Prlndp~1
Pa\ll'fler\l
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0,00
0.00
48.299.03
~8,m.().~
30,5~~7
1"!ereSl
r:II.Y!'I:!nt
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
1,21&.80
1,:lISl.80
771,71
"otBJ
PayMent
0.00
0.00
000
0.00
O.CO
0.00
MO
0.00
0.00
0.00
,-!.S18.83
49,51S.83
31,329.07
End
Balence
33,20S.SS
SA ,$20.24
36.091 .60
37,!Za.49
39,224.57
4O,8&l1.e1
42,eZ!l.50
4t.,44125
46330.CC
411,299.03
009
Inor1lm9fll1~
h'ocfCl'l'lenll9S6
!ni:lem;nt 1 see
irnremSlll 2000
Baalc T axeC
CaIltl On H m:l
Gras:; TQlal
11.15-2000
N4t' To'~1
LIMITED REVENUE NOTE. TO DEVELOPER
~~rutd
Il'Iltr$S1
3.256.53
4,\les.~
S,l Q7.55
5,418.45
5.548.73
5,88UO
6.13;,C'.s
a.aeB.SS
e,e71.9S
U!55,ee
0.00
0.04:'
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
000
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
C.OO
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
000
_.~Me~.33
P'inciPil'
_ ..~lIymenl
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Q.OO
0.00
3UQe.01
S,951 ,39
s,nus
6,01 ~.03
5,97;3.43
6.227,30
22.967.33
23,~3.44
204 526.55
0!5,566.e~
3,75842
1.9,P5664
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.O~
PAYMENT TO NORTHl!IIN FORIl8T;
GMS PfllIll'\aJ\\ Oue $44.21e.03
1v1il'lU8~
AAQunl r;aid e~ 2.1:>,'999
Amount ~aid 0'1 e-l'.' 999
6ac;k l'e~ Dve
Ne.. Pa,..,..iMl Ouo
$10.7eo.:<2.
S1S,374.87
S1725~,7Z
$2.i9F.2r
lntBr~SI
P8Y'1~1
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0.:>
0.00
0.00
0.00
4.309.ge
!\.509.!O
6.30222
&.0$$.134
".801.03
4.547.1 e
4,W.50
UO$.~
2,283.15
1.24&.41
'S~73
0,00
0.00
ClOO
0.00
000
000
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Tot!!
P.\lm~nl
0.00
0.00
0.00
(1,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
44,:&10.03
11,461.1 II
11,075.87
11.075.87
10,774.45
10,n04.46
27,249.~
27 .249.83
26,816.34
2Ml S.34
3.918.15
10,gSS.S4
10,~6.64
10,955,604
10.SM.M
10.955.84
10,955.154
10,&leU4
10,956.84
10,955.M
10.965.54
0.00
~O, 4285
18,J1S.es
24,-400,58
~',e'M'
12.066.00
17,a~.'12
0.00
93.7$ol.~
H.SI8.a3
4",2',~'~
End
Bala'lce
117,309,72
122,295,36
1 Z7 ,492. is
132,!:l1138
138.560,11
144,"'8.9~
150.587.99
'56987.98
153 ESQ,B7
"M15.52
1 3".709,4$
124.7Se,OG Payable Vear
118.984,42 SQIJ8'& Peet
112,965.39 M.VPerSq.F!.
1oa,QQ1.116
100,784.66 T<)I8I N~.. Vila. $780.000
T7.797,J4
53,e53.90
29,327.96
3,756.42
0.00 ,""W ~'lO or TIP Dime!
0.00 01" Erd Of TIF,DiSlriCl
~ lJoginrM1g e4 Abalametll
0.00
0.00
(l.oO
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NEW VALUi:
Currenl T~ C~ty
New Tall Capacity
Total Tax CllpllO!y
City Tax R6tG
Availeble City 'TeJl'l'o Itbllle
TOTAl. ABAii:MEIoIT
Preollled by Publ!corp I/\C.
19,050
25,500
~4 550
O.4~1 B4
21,011.28
10USG
2003
ZS,OOO
$30.00
P. 2
FlIOD ENDiNG
Yrs.
0.5
1.0
i.S
2.0
B
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
6,5
PERlO!:> t:NDING
Yr3.
O.!!
\0
1.5
2.0
25
3.0
3.5
4,0
4!\
5.0
6.6
6.0
0.'
7.0
7.5
B.O
8.S
9.0
Q.6
lD.O
OJ
1.0
1.5
~.O
2.5
3.0
3.5
(,.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
"'gel
Mlh.
02-01
oe-01
02-01
oB-01
02..01
08-Q1
02-01
08-01
02.01
OB.01
11-16
Yr.
1m
19l1f!
1Q97
1997
19913
Hl~
199;
m91
~
~
Mth.
02.01
:)S-Q'
Oi-01
08-01
02.01
OS-01
02.01
08-01
02-01
05-01
11-15
02-0'
oa-01
02..()1
oe-o,
02-01
09-01
C2..()1
Oe-Ol
02-01
OS-Oj
Q2.01
Oe-ol
02.0\
OS.OI
(\2-01
05..0\
D2.o1
08.Q1
02.01
08.01
02-01
Yr.
11196
199B
1997
1997
1\l9B
1998
1999
1m
2000
2000
2000
:l001
2001
200Z
=11
2004 ,
2004
2005
2005
200G I
200tl I
2007
2007
~
2008
2009
2009
2010
2010
201'
Fp2000.7.iNK-!
OCT. ~8. 2000 11: :)7M0 ~HLERS & ASSOCIATES NO. 4L~ P. 3
, Q,'BfJO e~v or 0In',1II\'I1O Po~ 2
LOOTED REVENUE NOTE. TO LAND OWNER
: PI:F110D B!::GiH~jiNG Pent><! 6'9' AeCI\KIO Prit.olj:al Interest TOlal Erid'" P~IOO ~NOJ
! Vrs. Mlh. ..:rr. tl:!MI _, .&Iance Inle'esl ".'t'l'l1Ont P8','rT1lnl P lvmElnt Bal;lr'loe Yrs. h/llh. Yt
0.0 1o.~S 1995 126 32.250.00 9S8 ee 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.ala.8S 0.5 02.01 lBElll
0.5 0:2.01 1:196 33.aJB.B6 1.411,36 0.00 0.00 0.00 34,82t.l.24 If1Cll'Cl\itnl1~7 1S.~1s.g5 1.0 00-01 1Se5 I
1.0 MoO' 1aee 34.~.24 1.471.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 35,091.50 Inc'YlT'lnl1999 2~.40o.e8 1.6 OMl1 1~7 ,
1.5 02-01 ';97 86CS1.60 t .533.89 1),(10 0.00 0.00 37.62!l.49 Il'Il:remenl 19'>> Z3.eg5.e1 2.0 01;1-01 1~1 I
2.0 08-01 1997 37.625.49 t .599.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 39,224.57 Il\Q'emlnt 2000 i 2.06e.OC 2.5 02-01 1998 ,
2.5 02-01 1998 39.:12,1.~7 1,667.04 ClOO 0.00 0.00 40,891.61 Back T 1!l<1! 17.z6.72 3.0 08-01 1998
3.0 08.01 1996 40,aS1,61 1,737.89 O,CO 000 0.00 42. 629.50 Cash On ~aoo 0.00 a.s 0:<.'1 1999
3.5 02-01 1~9 4H.:9.5C 1,B11.7S DOC Me 0.00 44,441.25 GrOSS To:al 9:;,734.80 01.0 08-01 1m
4.0 09.01 1Q~\l 4~,441.2S 1.888.75 O,OC 0.00 0.00 04633(1.00 4.5 02-01 2000
4,S 02.01 20<>) 46,330.00 1 ,969.03 0.00 0.00 MO 48,2S'3.ila 11.15-2QQQ ~S~!.~ 6.0 oe-ot 2000
. 5.0 oe-o, 2000 '01 4B,2;1l.03. 0.00 48299.03 · 213.80 4e.51 8.83 .~~OO Net To!eJ_ 014,21 e.03 $,6 11-15 :2000
;-' ';-o~iS 1 S,049.03 48,39ll.oo 1,21U<l dQ,518.S3
~. P~I Values 30,55~1.37 771 ,7f t!.!328.07
Ll~UTF..D REVEN1JE NOTE. TO DE~,LOPER
IpERIOO eEGiNNINO Period Beg. Accrued Prinoipal Inter..: roll! End P!::AIOD ENDING
ni~. Mt~. Yr. Days Balance l"t~.rJ'~ Payment PayrMl\l P.!Y"'.~t Sa! anee Yrs. Wlh. Yr.
0.0 < 1-01 ,SSS 111' 114.0S1.19 3,2!lE..53 0.00 0.00 0.00 117,ao9.72 05 02.01 1996
Q.5 02.C, 1596 117,30~,i2 4,ea!. S6 0.00 0.00 0,00 , 2Z,2Sr..:!.8 1.0 os.C 1 lB96
I LO oao01 19ge 122,296.se 5,197,55 0.00 0.00 000 12;.492.9'3 1.8 oa-<l1 1997
1,5 02-01 1697 127.492.93 5,418.45 C,O') 0.00 0.00 132,m.39 2.0 08.01 l1i197
I 2.0 00-01 l1i1li7 13..,;11.36 5.648.73 0,00 O.~ 0,00 138.560.11 2.5 02-01 1998
2.5 ON)1 1$5\3 13e,s~0.1 , S.IlllS.tlO 0.00 C.OO 0.00 144.448.91 3.0 09-01 1998
3.0 (XloOl 1998 144,44&.91 6,139.0& 0.00 0.00 0.00 150,587.99 3..5 02.(11 1999
3.5 02""1 1939 15(o~81 99 E.3S\U9 0.00 C,OO 0.00 16a.~7.98 4.0 08001 1989
4.:> 08-01 1~9li ~ 56.981.98 ~.~:U9 0.00 ~,OO 0.00 163,5S9,li17 4.5 02.01 2000
4.5 02-01 2000 16:;;,559.97 6.93~,55 0.00 0.00 O.Oil 170,$1 ;',52 1),0 0..01 2000
...0 08.CJl 2000 107 170.615.52 o.::m 39,906.01 lI,3OS.&!I 44.21e.o3 130.709,45 11.16 2000
11.15 2000 7~ 130.700,4; 0.00 5,951.39 5.509.80 11,4el.\(I 1204.T5S,0fl P~lIbie YB&/' 21).'3 65 :>2-01 200'
!).~ ()H1 2001 '~4,7S&.OO 0,00 S.77G.66 6,302,22 H.C7S.B7 \ 18 ,984.42 Sq~ Fe&\ a5.t<<l so 08.0' 2001
6.0 08-Cl 2001 ~ , e,~84.42 0.00 6,019.03 5.OSe.e4 , 1.075.87 112.985.39 M..... Pllr S~ Ft, 336.00 IS.! 02.01 2002
S.; 02.01 2002 , 12,~e.39 0.00 '3,973.43 4,eol.03 10,71H6 106.991&5 7.0 Oe.01 2002
7.0 oa-ol 2002 ~ Oe.lI~1 .!i! 0.00 6,227.30 4.547,16 10,774.46 100764.66 T~I NIM "I Mus $900,QO\l i'.! 02-01 2003
7.5 OZOO1 2IlOO l00.764,ea 0.00 28,334.78 4.:ze:1.50 30,617.28 74.42g,se !.O 011-01 2003
8.0 Oa.01 2003 74,4ag,ee 0.00 ~,4S".OI 3.183.27 30.617,28 46,1l7S.!l7 8,5 02.01 20llt ,
8.5 02"'l1 2OQ.lI 46,976,e7 0.00 213:06.31 1.996.47 30.1~.78 1 Ua9.5€ DC. 08.01 2004 ,
9.0 08.01 200-' 18.799.56 0,00 18.7B9.55 79S.50 19,!lM.12 O.OC New!rd Of TI~ Cbl~(1 95 02-01 ~OS
9--' 1)2.01 2005 O,Cil 0,00 12,200.S3 0,00 12~09.83 0.00 :1.15 08-01 200$
10.0 OH1 ZOO? ?&9... 0.00 12,209.a~ tl.:lO 1~,20G.&~ ... 0.00 1.0 02.01 ~
I 0.0 :l2.01 2006 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.:>0 12,20$,e:, -'-.0<00 Ilegl~ 01 At>001~M<1i -;,5 08.01 2000
O.E DS-01 2006 0.00 0.00 0.00 Cl.y.) 12.209,83 O.~ 2,0 Ci2.()1 2007
1,0 02.01 aOO7 0,00 0.00 0.0-:: 0.00 12.2C9.e3 O.DC' U 08-01 2007
t.5 /)!l.01 2001 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.209.83 0.00 3.0 02-01 2008
~O 02.01 2008 000 0.00 0,00 0.00 12,20U3 0.00 3.5 08.01 ~
, ~5 :>6.01 2008 0.00 0,00 0.00 Q.oo 12,20e.83 O.OCl 4.0 02-01 2009
3Q 02.01 2001l 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12,2011.113 C,OO 4.6 06-01 2009
3S 08-01 2009 :l,OO 0.00 000 0.00 12.209,83 0,00 5.0 02-01 2010
Q.O 02-01 20':0 0.00 0,00 O.(Xl 0.,)0 0.00 0.00 0,0 08-0i 2010 I
4.5 06.0' 2010 0.00 000 0.00 0.00 (1,00 0.00 --. 0.0 02-o~~~
:--TOi'ai; _.. .~ 56.554 33
Presll/Il Vlllv~t _
Ph YHIEHT TO NORTHERN FORE$T: NEW VALUI!:
GtOfA ~ti"\erL 0I.IlI $44.21 e.o3 :urrenr Tell( CapaCl~ 19.050
M;nIJll; New Tax Caoaciiy 3O,eoo
Arnow.,: paid on a.1C.1;;99 $10,19022 To/a1 TM (APllQi;y 41iJ.S50
Amoun: ::uid on 8.1 1 .1 ~901 $13.3:'4.87 City T B~ Aillt~ J40184
!ilck TII'~ OLE $17,255.72 AIr,ilablo en)' Tax To Ab.\!! 24,4'0.66
.~ ~lIrn;1\l PIA !i2.7IlS22 TOTAl. AMiEMENT 112,098
e'J 100-0'3
~l'Ipared IlY PUllIloClfD I~c.
,"p2CoOO.e.WK4
\~
lV1L1VIO... .
TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Teresa Bender, Clerk/Treasurer
SUBJECT: Resolution 00-26
DATE: October 17,2000
It has been brought to the City's attention that Special Assessments for the Parkview
Development were not removed from PIN #R23-31-22-31-0053 (6992 Meadow Circle)
on Anoka County's records following Burnett Title's payment in March of 1999 and are
showing on the property owner's statement of property tax payable in 2000.
Attached, please find Resolution 00-25 (Abatement of Special Assessments) and the
appropriate paperwork needed to rectify this error with Anoka County Property Tax
Division.
The current property owners have paid 2000 Special Assessments in the amount of
$1.846.4 7 and request to be reimbursed same.
Thank you for your consideration.
tervi{{e
'Estab{islied 1857
1880 %ain Street . Centervi{{e, %:A.[ 55038
(651) 429-3232 . :Fal( (651) 429-8629
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF ANOKA
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
RESOLUTION 00 - 26
RESOLUTION FOR ABATEMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS (P ARKVIEW
ADDITION)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Centerville authorized the Parkview
Addition Improvements; and
WHEREAS, property/development petitioned for the stated improvement be financed in
accordance with Minnesota Statue 429; and
WHEREAS, the City of Centerville gave proper notification of such; and
WHEREAS, $615,000 was assessed to benefited properties based upon square foot; and
WHEREAS, Burnett Title paid to the City $11,524.72 on March 23,1999; and
WHEREAS, Anoka County Property Tax Division has acknowledged and certified
$1,846.47 for the 2000 tax year; and
WHEREAS, the Council has directed the Clerk/Treasurer to make a request of Anoka
County to abate Parkview Addition assessment improvements from the property legally
known as R23-31-22-31-0053 for the years 2000 through 2008; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that on October 25, 2000 the Centerville
City Council authorized Anoka County to abate Parkview Addition Assessment
Improvements from property legally known as R23-31-22-3l-0053.
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted this 25th day of
October, 2000.
Mayor
ATTEST:
Jim March, City Administrator
OCT-16-00 MaN 10: 08 FIRST SECURITY TITLE
FAX NO. 612
P. 01
!.tr"
-....-
Date:
fD If ((i /00
, I
}11Qvw~
RE:
To:
. Fax:
~~q- g(o(}Oj
Company:
From: MONIQUE WIERZBINSKI
CLOSER
Phone # 651-488-5609
Fax # 651-490-0793
E-Mail Addressmwierzbinski@cbburnet.com
This transmission consists of ~ pages, Including this cover sheet. If there
are any pages missing or other problems with this transmission, please contact
me as soon as possible.
~ C~ of
j1e Y 'f!l{ y"
(' tll1CR (led (l1M ct
N02.fAf3sf-.
EXCELLENCE IN TITLE SERVICES
I)&1.A~ .
qvY K-/
OCT-16-00 MaN 10:03 FIRST SECURITY T1TLE
09/26/00 TUB 13:03 F~l 812S44a24o
4'
FAX NO, 612
BURNET TITLE MCOUNTING
-+)... SBOREVIEW
P. 02
IilIOOl
0912e1200a 12:048 PM
,CMJII
lICIllM ACCCUIfl'
W~tpTPPll
_IHDIIlS... alu
..--
........._ 1M ,..................u.
---- ..- .............
65
87316
..ta N/1S/"
tlUf
-..-
-
fllV UIINC T14OU$NlO 'EIIE ~Ia llllAn" FOUR 1I0L.L.MS NfO IlVlln"Y .
1\m C[NTI ......11 5"..~
~~~~a~ ~~OJ~~.~ ~4-a~-9~ L~ 030~~b~~e ..
TO
THE
I CP,gfA
g,:
'ITY Of CIl:"TlIlVlL~1
U" lAIN ST '
ClmRV1~~I."M AIR
11CIl_~
n '1 U as een
u ~tSB'!"P ~Cq~qC5~7a~
.lit 81 Ii!
?~ ... I'li' =l
~~p",~~ ".r~" -' 'I Ii.
. ~
~~. t1t;ht1tO "' *iPi ' 1'01 (~. . ~
ii! .'.-1. ..flIt; Ell:
a303~~~~ ~o~~ ... . t-
o 'SJ 5 .;~ O"l!n"",.." '..
F ..~
~.J"lJi!. 0"-0.-"" . p..
. ~~. .. III'-
~t3e }:JJ~i f,.j) OZ" \ n;7~ ...
I
~ ~tI ~ ... """'!.. .:..
VIDllXIiIt Q
" .4
"' , "' . I. " ".. I . .. "..
II' .:. W( la. 1,( -\ '\.. ,iii . ,
I, II'. 1 '4 .. to I. &, I.. . ..... ,
" !! :rr J.I B: 0 "' 1~'0'
...
CDVoUD
1DOOO430132001
lank'
0Cl09290527
Aoc. . SoIfaJN~
DOOO41901oeOZ4 0ooeae731S
~
$11 ,!l34. 72
PaklOatiI
~~l_
IfClUtllIll
DS04!l15121
Locetlon
CD
Prialld .u1.u-sA~
1'~' {If{)J~~ --
W (rlA
rile 1 01 1
MEMO
DATE: October 20,2000
TO : Honorable Mayor and Council
FROM: Jim March
RE : Livable Communities Act Resolution
............................................................................
Included in your packet is a resolution that extends the City's participation in the livable
communities program. The financial cost of this Met Council program is met by our
levy that is collected by the Anoka County HRA. Communities that do not support the
livable communities act are not eligible for grant funds from the Met Council.
Centerville has been a supporter of the livable communities act since the program was
adopted.
ervi{{e
1880 :Jv(ain Street . Centervi[[e,:Jv('J{ 55038
(651) 429-3232 . 'Fat( (651) 429-8629
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF ANOKA
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
RESOLUTION 00 - 28
RESOLUTION ELECTING TO CONTINUE P ARTICIP A TION IN THE LOCAL
HOUSING INCENTIVES ACCOUNT PROGRAM UNDER THE
METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT
WHEREAS, the metropolitan livable Communities Act (Minnesota Statues Section
473.25 to 473.254) establishes a Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund which is
intended to address housing and other development issues facing the metropolitan area
defined by Minnesota Statues Section 473.121; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund, comprising the Tax Base
Revitalization Account, the Livable Communities Demonstration Account and the Local
Housing Incentive Account, is intended to provide certain funding and other assistance to
metropolitan area municipalities; and
WHEREAS, a metropolitan area municipality is not eligible to receive grants or loans
under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund or eligible to receive certain polluted
sites cleanup funding from the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic
Development unless the municipality is participating in the Local Housing Incentives
Account Program under the Minnesota Statutes Section 473.254; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act required the Metropolitan
Council to negotiate with each municipality to establish affordable and life-cycle housing
goals for that municipality that are consistent with and promote the policies of the
Metropolitan Council as provided in the adopted Metropolitan Development Guide; and
WHEREAS, each municipality must identify to the Metropolitan Council the actions the
municipality plans to take to meet the established housing goals through preparation of
the Housing Action Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council adopted, by resolution after a public hearing,
negotiated affordable and life-cycle housing goals for each participating municipality;
and
WHEREAS, a metropolitan area municipality which elects to participate in the Local
Housing Incentives Account Program must do so by November 15 of each year; and
WHEREAS, for calendar year 2001, a metropolitan area municipality that participated in
the Local Housing Incentive Account Program during the calendar year 2000, can
continue to participate under Minnesota Statutes Section 473.254 if (a) the municipality
elects to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program by November 15,
2000; and (b) the Metropolitan Council and the municipality have successfully negotiated
affordable and life-cycle housing goals for the municipality;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Centerville hereby elects to
participate in the Local Housing Incentives Program under the Metropolitan Livable
Communities Act during the calendar year 2001.
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted this 25th day of
October, 2000.
Mayor
ATTEST:
Jim March, City Administrator
:tervi{{e
uta6(isfied 1857
1880 %ain Street . Centervi[[e, %'JI[ 55038
(651) 429-3232 . :Fa'\. (651) 429-8629
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF ANOKA
CITY OF CENTER VILLE
RESOLUTION 00 - 29
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT SEWER AND WATER
ACCOUNTS AND OTHER OUTSTANDING BALANCES OWED TO THE CITY
BY INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNER(S)
WHEREAS, the city has determined that there are properties with delinquent sewer and
water accounts and/or outstanding balances owed to the City; and
WHEREAS, the clerk has notified the council that such proposed assessment has been
completed and filed in the City office for public inspection; and
WHEREAS, notification to affected property owners has already taken place; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL VED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA:
1. A hearing shall be held on the 22nd day of November in the city hall council
chambers at 6:00 p.m. or as soon as possible thereafter, to pass upon such
proposed assessment and at such time and place all persons owning property
affected by such improvement will be given an opportunity to be hear with
reference to such assessment.
2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the
proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper and shall
state in the notice the total cost of the proposed assessments.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification
of the assessment to the County, pay the whole of the assessment on such
property and that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid
prior to November 9,2000.
Adopted by Council this 25th day of October, 2000.
Mayor
ATTEST:
Jim March, City Administrator
CITY OF SHOREVIEW
CITY COUNCIL
Sandy Martin, Mayor
Blake Huffman
Tom Landwehr
Mady Reiter
Ady Wickstrom
4600 North Victoria Street, Shoreview, MN 55126
(651) 490-4600 (651) 490-4699 Fax
(651) 490-4750 VoiceJTTY
October 10, 2000
1 , , 1~~~
~C'
City of Centerville
City Clerk
1880 Main Street
Centerville, MN 55308
Dear City Clerk,
Currently, the City of Centerville is a part of our Good Neighbor program here at the
Shoreview Community Center. As a Good Neighbor, residents of the City ofCenterville
get a 15 % discount off the regular fee for an annual or a seasonal membership here at the
Shoreview Community Center. To receive this special offer, we would request that you
place a notice of this offer in your city's official newsletter or recreation catalog each
time it is published, for a period of one year. We would provide you with the camera-
ready artwork to minimize your effort in creating the notice.
If the City of Centerville is interested in continuing their participation in our Good
Neighbor program please sign the enclosed form before publication of the first offer.
If you have any questions, feel free to call me here at the Shoreview Community Center.
Sincerely,
C1~~ b~Jt
Andrew Specht
Assistant Community Center Manager
Good Neighbor Rate
(Participating cities are required to place ads in
their city-wide publications for a period of 1 year)
Current rates.
. The . :.' .~~
~ Shoreview :..>.'0:.;
. 0 0 0 ~ Ob
~ Community Center t7 (7 ()
~ is making a splash with their friendly
j Good Neighbor Rate!
: The City of Shoreview is offering residents .
: of CITY of CENTERVlLLE 15% off of the regular:
: rates for annual and seasonal memberships .
: to the Shoreview Community Center. Please
: present your MN driver's license when
: purchasing your membership at the
: Community Center. For more information call
: (651) 490-4700.
Discounted Good Neighbor Rate
: Annual Member5hip Seasonal Membership
: Adult $260.00 Adult $88.00
: Youth/Senior $192.00 Youth/Senior $64.00
: . f~r:n!I:t . . . . . .$:4:49.l?9. . . . . . . . . . ~~":1i!~ . . . . . . .$~~..o.o. . :
Rates effective January 1,2001
. ..
: The Shoreview Tr./~nics :
I\~ :
~ Community Center ~ t! ~-..:. :
-.-A-_~. .
_'_-_ l1li L........ :
: & Tropics Indoor Water Park .~~~.:
~ is making a splash with their friendly
~Good Neighbor Rate! ~
The City of Shoreview is offering residents
of Centerville 15% off of the regular rates
forannual and seasonal memberships to the :
Shoreview Community Center. Please present'
your MN driver's license when purchasing
your membership at the Community Center.
For more information call (651) 490-4700.
Discounted Good Neighbor Rate
Annual Member5hip
Adult $284.75
Youth/Senior $212.00
Family $480.25
Seasonal Membership
Adult $97.75
Youth/Senior $72.25
Family $161.50
Residents of the following cities qualify for the Good
Neighbor Rate as it applies to Seasonal and Annual
Community Center Memberships:
5 Cities as of 9/01/00
1. Circle Pines
2. Centerville
3, Vadnais Heights
4. North Oaks
5. Arden Hills
Please check the purchaser's MN drivers license for their
qualifying home address.
The Good Neighbor offer will last for one year. The City
reviews the offer after one year and then decides whether to
continue the project.
CITY OF SHOREVIEW
CITY COUNCIL
Sandy Martin, Mayor
Blake Huffman
Tom Landwehr
Mady Reiter
Ady Wickstrom
4600 North Victoria Street, Shoreview, MN 55126
(651) 490-4600 (651) 490-4699 Fax
(651) 490-4750 Voicemy
October 10, 2000
City of Centerville
City Clerk
1880 Main Street
Centerville, MN 55308
Dear City Clerk,
This letter is to clarify our current agreement regarding the Good Neighbor rate offered to
residents of Centerville.
The City of Shoreview will:
o Supply camera-ready artwork, which may only be altered by the City of
Shoreview.
o Offer you a discount of 15% offthe regular fee for seasonal and annual
memberships for one year. We will evaluate the offer after one year.
o Sell the membership directly to your residents at the Community Center
with proof of residency in the form of a Minnesota driver's license.
The City of Centerville will:
o Provide us a list of publication deadlines and distribution dates for the
next year.
o Publish the exact notice that we provide in a 4" x 4" size in each of your
publications for a period of one year.
o Fax a copy of the notice as it appears on the page before you print and a
copy of the entire document after it is printed.
Weare happy to offer the residents of Centerville a discount on memberships to the
ShorC'''iew Community Center. Please sign and return the enclosed form by December 1,
2000. This agreement would be good for one calendar year (January 1,2001- December
31,2001).
Sincerely,
~^{J~~,: Jp'ctt
Name
Title
Date
Andrew Specht
Assistant Community Center Manager
/ff itervi{{e
,'1,,:;j.:fS:~r{I
- ,:, Tsta6{islied 1857
Extract of Minutes of Meeting
of the City Council of the City
of Centerville, Anoka County, Minnesota
1880 Main Street . Centervi{{e, M'J\[ 55038
(651) 429-3232 . :Ja{. (651) 429-8629
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Centerville, Anoka County, Minnesota, was held at the City Hall in the City on Wednesday,
October 25, 2000, commencing at 6:00 o'clock P.M.
The following members of the Council were present:
and the following were absent:
* * *
* * *
* * *
The following resolution was presented by Councilmember
its adoption:
, who moved
RESOLUTION NO. 00-27
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF
$650,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION
IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 2000
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Centerville, Anoka County,
Minnesota (City) as follows:
1. It is hereby determined that:
(a) the following assessable public improvements (the Improvements) have
been made, duly ordered or contracts let for the construction thereof, by the City pursuant
to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 (Act);
SJB-187824vl
CE155-16
Proiect Designation & Description:
Hunters Crossing Improvements
Construction Costs
Contingencies and Engineering
Subtotal
Costs of Issuance
Less: Est. Const. Fund Inv. Income
Subtotal
Rounding Factor
Total Issue
Total Proiect Cost
$502,780.00
120,667.20
$623,447.20
23,929.38
0,108.35)
$649,568.23
431. 78
$650,000.00
(b) it is necessary and expedient to the sound financial management of the
affairs of the City to issue $650,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 2000
(Bonds) pursuant to the Act to provide financing for the Improvements.
2. To provide financing for the Improvements, the City will issue and sell Bonds in
the amount of $640,250. To provide in part the additional interest required to market the Bonds
at this time, additional Bonds will be issued in the amount of$9,750. The excess of the purchase
price of the Bonds over the sum of $640,250 will be credited to the debt service fund for the
Bonds for the purpose of paying interest first coming due on the additional Bonds. The Bonds
will be issued, sold and delivered in accordance with the terms of the following Terms of
Proposal:
SJB-187824vl
CE155-16
TERMS OF PROPOSAL
$650,000
General Obligation Improvement
Bonds of 2000
City of Centerville
Anoka County, Minnesota
(BOOK ENTRY ONLY)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN sealed proposals for the purchase of the above bonds will
be received until 11 :00 o'clock A.M., c.T. on Wednesday, November 8, 2000, in the offices of
Juran & Moody, a Division of Miller, Johnson & Kuehn, Inc., St. Paul, Minnesota, at which time
the proposals will be opened and tabulated for consideration by the City Council at a meeting at
6:00 o'clock P.M. on the same day. The bonds are offered on the following terms.
Purpose and Security
The purpose of the bonds is to provide funds for the financing of assessable public
improvements in the City. The bonds will be general obligations of the City, for which its full
faith, credit and taxing powers are pledged together with special assessments against benefited
properties.
Details of the Bonds
The bonds will be issued in fully registered form, will be dated November 1, 2000, will
be in denominations of integral multiples of $5,000 each and will mature on February 1, in the
years and amounts as follows:
Year Amount Year Amount
2002 $175,000 2007 $10,000
2003 175,000 2008 15,000
2004 200,000 2009 15,000
2005 10,000 2010 20,000
2006 10,000 2011 20,000
Proposals for the Bonds may contain a maturity schedule providing for any combination of serial
bonds and term bonds, subject to mandatory redemption, so long as the amounts of principal
maturing or subject to mandatory redemption in each year conforms to the maturity schedule set
forth above.
Book Entry System
The Bonds will be issued by means of a book entry system with no physical distribution
of Bonds made to the public. The Bonds will be issued in fully registered form and one Bond,
representing the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds maturing in each year, will be
registered in the name of Cede & Co. as nominee of The Depository Trust Company ("DTC"),
New York, New York, which will act as securities depository of the Bonds. Individual
purchases of the Bonds may be made in the principal amount of $5,000 or any multiple thereof
SJB-187824vl
CE155-16
of a single maturity through book entries made on the books and records of DTC and its
participants. Principal and interest are payable by the registrar to DTC or its nominee as
registered owner of the Bonds. Transfer of principal and interest payments to participants of
DTC will be the responsibility of DTC; transfer of principal and interest payments to beneficial
owners by participants will be the responsibility of such participants and other nominees of
beneficial owners. The purchaser, as a condition of delivery of the Bonds, will be required to
deposit the Bonds with DTC.
Optional Redemption
The City may elect on February 1, 2006, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds.
Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part at the option of the City and in such manner
as the City will determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City
will notify DTC of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by
lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant
will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed.
Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
Mandatory Redemption
Any term bonds issued will be subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption in part prior
to their scheduled maturity dates on February 1 of certain years, as more fully described in the
Details of the Bonds section herein, at a price of par plus accrued interest to the date of
redemption.
Interest
Interest on the bonds will be payable on February 1,2001, and semiannually thereafter on
each February 1 and August 1. Bonds maturing on the same date must bear interest from date of
issue until paid at a single, uniform rate, not exceeding the rate specified for bonds of any
subsequent maturity. Each rate must be in an integral multiple of 1120 or 1/8 of 1 %. Interest
will be computed on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months.
Registrar
The City will name the Registrar which will be subject to applicable SEC regulations.
Principal will be payable at the principal office of the Registrar and interest will be payable by
check or draft of the Registrar mailed to the registered holder of a bond. The City will pay the
reasonable and customary charges for the services of the Registrar.
CUSIP Numbers
The City assumes no obligation for the assignment or printing of CUSIP numbers on the
bonds or for the correctness of any numbers printed thereon, but will permit such numbers to be
assigned and printed at the expense of the purchaser, if the purchaser waives any extension of the
time of delivery caused thereby.
SJB-187824vl
CE155-16
A ward
The Bonds will be awarded on the basis of the lowest interest rate to be determined on a
true interest cost (TIC) basis. The City's computation of the interest rate of each proposal, in
accordance with customary practice, will be controlling.
The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non-substantive informalities of any proposal
or of matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all proposals
without cause, and, (iii) reject any proposal which the City determines to have failed to comply
with the terms herein.
Delivery
Within 40 days after sale, the City will furnish and deliver to the office of the purchaser
or, at its option, will deposit with a bank in the United States selected by it and approved by the
City as its agent to permit examination by and to deliver to the purchaser, the printed and
executed bonds, the unqualified opinion thereon of bond counsel, and a certificate stating that no
litigation in any manner questioning their validity is then threatened or pending. The charge of
the delivery agent must be paid by the purchaser but all other costs will be paid by the City. The
purchase price must be paid upon delivery of the bonds in funds available for expenditure by the
City on the day of payment.
Legal Opinion
An unqualified legal opinion on the bonds will be furnished by Kennedy & Graven,
Chartered, Minneapolis, Minnesota. The legal opinion will be printed on the bonds at the request
of the purchaser. The legal opinion will state that the bonds are valid and binding general
obligations of the City payable primarily from special assessments against benefited properties
and that the City is required by law to levy taxes for the principal and interest thereon as the
same become due without limit as to rate or amount.
Bond Insurance at Purchaser's Option
If the Bonds qualify for issuance of any policy of municipal bond insurance or
commitment therefor at the option of the bidder, the purchase of any such insurance policy or the
issuance of any such commitment will be at the sole option and expense of the purchaser of the
Bonds. Any increased costs of issuance of the Bonds resulting from such purchase of insurance
will be paid by the purchaser, except that, if the City has requested and received a rating on the
Bonds from a rating agency, the City will pay the rating fee. Any other rating agency fees will
be the responsibility of the purchaser.
Failure of the municipal bond insurer to issue the policy after Bonds have been awarded to the
purchaser will not constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery on
the Bonds.
SJB-187824v 1
CE155-16
Official Statement
The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing pertinent
information relative to the Bonds, and said Official Statement will serve as a nearly-final Official
Statement as required by Rule 15c2-12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The
Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the
interest rates of the Bonds, together with any other information required by law, will constitute a
Final Official Statement of the City with respect to the Bonds, as that term is defined in Rule
15c2-12. By awarding the Bonds to any underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting an
official Proposal Form therefor, the City agrees that, no more than seven business days after the
date of such award, it will provide without cost to the senior managing underwriter of the
syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 25 copies of the Official Statement and the addenda
described above. The City designates the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which
the Bonds are awarded as its agent for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official
Statement to each Participating Underwriter. Any underwriter executing and delivering an
Official Proposal Form with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby that if its proposal is accepted
by the City (i) it will accept such designation and (ii) it will enter into a contractual relationship
with all Participating Underwriters of the Bonds for purposes of assuring the receipt by each
such Participating Underwriter of the Final Official Statement.
Continuing Disclosure
Participating underwriters need not comply with the continuing disclosure requirements
of Rule 15c2-12 promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Rule"), because the offering is in a principal amount less than
$1,000,000. Consequently, the City will not enter into any undertaking to provide continuing
disclosure of any kind with respect to the Bonds.
Type of Proposal - Amount
A sealed proposal will be for not less than $640,250 and accrued interest on the total
principal amount of the Bonds. Proposals will be accompanied by a good Faith Deposit
("Deposit") in the form of a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount
of $13,000, payable to the order of the City. If a check is used, it must accompany each
proposal. If a Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to
issue such a bond in the State of Minnesota, and preapproved by the City. Such bond must be
submitted to Juran & Moody, a Division of Miller, Johnson & Kuehn, Inc., prior to the opening
of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must identify each underwriter whose Deposit is
guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the Bonds are awarded to an underwriter using a
Financial Surety Bond, then that purchaser is required to submit its Deposit to Juran & Moody, a
Division of Miller, Johnson & Kuehn, Inc., in the form of a certified or cashier's check or wire
transfer as instructed by Juran & Moody, a Division of Miller, Johnson & Kuehn, Inc., not later
than 3:30 P.M., Central Time, on the next business day following the award. If such Deposit is
not received by that time, the Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the City to satisfy the
Deposit requirement. The City will deposit the check of the purchaser, the amount of which will
be deducted at settlement and no interest will accrue to the purchaser. In the event the purchaser
SlB-187824v 1
CE155-J6
fails to comply with the accepted proposal, said amount will be retained by the City. No
proposal can be withdrawn or amended after the time set for receiving proposals unless the
meeting of the City scheduled for award of the Bonds is adjourned, recessed, or continued to
another date without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates will be in integral multiples
of 5/1 00 or 1/8 of 1 %. Bonds of the same maturity will bear a single rate from the date of the
Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional proposals will be accepted.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
/s/ Jim March
City Administrator
Dated: October 25,2000.
SJB-187824vl
CE155-16
3. Juran & Moody, a Division of Miller, Johnson & Kuehn, Inc. is authorized and
directed to negotiate the Bonds in accordance with the foregoing Terms of Proposal. The City
Council will meet at 6:00 o'clock P.M. on Wednesday, November 8, 2000, to consider proposals
on the Bonds and take any other appropriate action with respect to the Bonds.
4. This resolution amends and supersedes Resolution No. 00-17 approved by the
City Council on September 13,2000.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
Councilmember
, and upon vote being taken thereon the following members
voted in favor of the motion:
and the following voted against:
whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
SJB-187824v 1
CE155-16
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)
COUNTY OF ANOKA )
)
CITY OF CENTERVILLE )
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting City Administrator of the City of
Centerville, Minnesota, hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing
extract of minutes of a regular meeting of the City Council of the City held on Wednesday,
October 25, 2000, with the original minutes on file in my office and the extract is a full, true and
correct copy of the minutes, insofar as they relate to the issuance and sale of $650,000 General
Obligation Improvement Bonds of2000 of the City.
WITNESS My hand as City Administrator and the corporate seal of the City this _
day of
,2000.
City Administrator
City of Centerville, Minnesota
(SEAL)
SJB-187824vl
CE155-16
tervi[[e
'Estab{isfietf 1B57
1880 Main Street . Centervi{{e) M'J{ 55038
(651) 429-3232 . ~a?( (651) 429-8629
October 19,2000
Ms. Marlene Kjelsberg
Director
MN Department of Public Safety
Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division
444 Cedar Street, Suite 133
St. Paul, MN 55101-5133
Dear Ms. Kjelsberg,
The Centerville City Council has decided not to issue a civil penalty against the Trio Inn
in conjunction with the alleged underage sale of alcohol to a minor. However, the City
Council has accepted a $300 donation from the owner of the Trio Inn that has been turned
over to the Centennial Lakes Police Department to further their efforts towards
conducting underage alcohol compliance checks. Uyou have any questions in regards to
this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.
5f~
City Administrator
cc. City Council
tervi{{e
Tstaflisfid 1857
1880 9vfain Street . Centervi{{e, 9vf'Jl[ 55038
(651) 429-3232 . :Fa/( (651) 429-8629
October 19, 2000
Mr. Rich DeFoe
C/o Sharks Nightclub
3720 East River Road
Fridley, MN 55421
Dear Rich,
On behalf of the Centerville City Council and the Centerville Parks and Recreation
Committee, we would like to sincerely thank you for your generous contribution of the
ballfield lights and scoreboard that formerly occupied the Waterworks ball diamond.
This is the most generous gift to the City that I have witnessed in the last five years. If
you need any papers signed for accounting purposes please let me know. I hope this
letter reaches you. This is the only mailing address that I have at this time. Once again,
thank you for your generosity. The City looks forward to your family moving into the
community.
. cere~
. March
City Administrator
cc. City Council
Park and Recreation Committee
~ .i . tervi[[e
1'2,:;'""..
TstaElisnea 1857
1880 %ain Street . Centervi{{e, %'J{ 55038
(651) 429.3232 . :Fa;"( (651) 429-8629
October 9, 2000
Mr. Bill Bisek
7098 Centerville Road
Centerville, MN 55038
Dear Mr. Bisek,
The Park and Recreation Committee discussed the concept of winter sports leagues at
their October regular meeting. The committee is supportive of your desire to see adult
sports leagues in the community however, the Park and Recreation Committee will not be
sponsoring any City or privately organized leagues for this season.
The Park and Recreation Committee plans to further research this issue for future
consideration. The Committee believes that at some point in time it will be necessary to
have a hired staff person coordinate sporting activities. Until that occurs the Committee
is not willing to accept any financial or legal liabilities with privately organized events or
leagues.
This information is being communicated to you now so that you may decide if you want
to privately sponsor any winter leagues or activities. If you have any questions please do
not hesitate to contact myself or the Park and Recreation Committee.
On behalf of the Park and Recreation Committee,
Jim March
City Administrator
.
LIBRARY
FAX 7173297
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IaI 01
10/16/00 17:44
Anoka COunty Libraries
Centennial Branch
100 Civic Heights Circle
Circle Pines, MN 55014
763.717.3294
Jim March i
City Administrator
Centerville Cit}j Hall
Centerville, M}J 55038
,
I
I
I
Mr. March, i
I
My name is Chad Lubbers and I am the new supervisor of the Centennial branch of the Anoka
County Library isYs1em. Ijust wanted. to thank you for the excellent article published recently in the
Centerville Le Jou,naJ on our community library. We've bad numerous registrations from
Centerville residents for our storytimes and have even bad a few calls from residents asking about
DVDs, audiobopks, and other materials mentioned in the August newsletter.
Also, please ex~nd my compliments to Patricia..she did a fine job assembling the material from the
intcrv1cw she s~t up with me. And, if possible, please let the editor of Le Journal know that I
would be intereSted in publishing a monthly or bi-monthly article on happenings and events taking
place at the Centennial library. We have a similar arrangement with the Circle Pines newsletter
staff, and we have had a very positive public response to articles we've submitted.
I
Thanks for yowj time, and I look forward to our continued interaction.
Yours, I
Chad Lubbers i
Ccnten..rtial Branch Librarian
cmlubbers@anaka.lib.mn.us
I
I
I
Chief of Police Joel D. Heckman
Centennial Lakes Police Department
200 Civic Heights Circle
Circle Pines MN 55014
763-784-2501 iheckman@centennialIakespd.com
September 25, 2000
To: Honorable Mayors and Councils: Centerville, Circle Pines and Lexington
Re: Centennial Lakes Joint Police Commission 2001 Budget
cc: Commissioners
Attached please find the Centennial Lakes Joint Police Commission's 2001 budget. You
will note that the budget has been reduced $20,000.00 from the recommended budget
distributed to you on July 27,2000.
As both the cities of Centerville and Lexington had approved the Commission's
recommended budget of July 27, 2000, I have attached a letter addressed to the Joint
Police Commission from the City of Circle Pines explaining their reasons for the reduction
request.
At their regularly scheduled joint police commission meeting held on September 14, 2000,
the Centennial Lakes Joint Police Commission voted to accept the reductions suggested
by the City of Circle Pines.
The attached budget and Tri-city formula reflect the above noted changes. Please contact
me should you have any questions regarding this budget.
Thank you.
~
~~
CITY
OF
CIRCLE
PINES
200 Civic Heights Circle
Circle Pines, Minnesota 55014-1795
Telephone (612) 784-5898
FAX (612) 785-2859
TDD (612) 784-9724
Lee Ann Osbun, Mayor
Daniel E. Stoltz, Councilmember Susan Nelson, Councilmember '
Philip Korst, Council member Andrew Gibas, Councilmerilber
James W. Keinath, City Administrator
September 13, 2000
Mady Reiter
Chairperson
Centennial Lakes Police Commission
Centennial Lakes Police Department
200 Civic Heights Circle
Circle Pines, MN 55014
Dear Chair Reiter and Members of the Commission,
The Circle Pines City Council has taken action to set its 2001 levy. As part of that
process, the Council has determined it is unwilling to fund the City share of the police
department operation beyond the $1,320,000 level. That level is $20,000 below the
amount requested by the Commission.
Circle Pines' suggestion as to how the budget is to be reduced is to eliminate the $15,000
from the future building fund, as it is our Council's belief that any building construction
of that size would have to be bonded. Therefore, it is unnecessary to amass funds
beforehand. If individual cities wish to set aside funds to meet those future needs, they
have that ability on an individual city basis.
Second, with the Commission finishing the operating year 1999 with $80,000 in reserves,
and their success with operating within the 2000 Budget, we do not believe that the
contingency funds needed to be increased from $5,000 to $10,000.
The Circle Pines Council also wishes to clearly communicate its future expectations as to
budget levels that it would expect to approve for 2002 to 2004. Circle Pines realizes that
there will be an increase in the amount funded by the cities as the 16th officer will not be
supplemented by grant funds, and those dollars will have to be replaced with City dollars.
However, Circle Pines will not approve budgets in the future that contemplate additional
officers beyond the 16th officer, for the time period indicated. Further, the Council's
expectation is that, with the leadership of the Chief and Assistant Chief, those 16 sworn
officers will be utilized in a fashion that maximizes their effectiveness. \Vhile the
Council realizes that at some point additional officers may be justified, it will take a trend
of a number of years, rather than a single year, to provide appropriate documentation.
Printed on Recycled Paper
In summary, the Commission should plan that there will be little additional resources
available from the City of Circle Pines as they move forward.
The City Council appreciates the work that the Department did in providing additional
information related to budget alternatives. The actual expenditures in years that are
available, plus the current budget and the proposed budget, were helpful in looking at
trends. We request that in future years' budgets we be provided with an additional
colUmn that would show the amount of change over the previous years' budget. In
addition, since budgets are plans of what the City, or in this case the Department, hopes
to accomplish for the coming year, it would be helpful if additional details discussing
those plans would be available. An example of that would be the Training Budget, which
has shown an increase from $10,000 to $15,000. A discussion 0 f new or required
training, or its cost as well as existing training would be helpful for councils to
understand what the Department plans and why the change is necessary.
Thank you for your consideration.
On behalf of the City Council,
JWK/mh
Cc/City Council Members -
CENTENNIAL LAKES POLICE DEPARTMENT
2001 BUDGET
1999 II Thru 2000 2001
, ACTUAL I June-OO I BUDGET BUDGET
REVENUE II II
Circle Pines Contract 538,15311 263, 17~ I 526,341\1 569,023
--
Lexington Contract I 285,551 i I 164,192 328,384 377,642
Centerville Contract I 274,56811 156,7331 31 3,4661 373,335
I
AMOUNT TO BE PROVIDED BY CITIES II 1,098,27211 584,09511 1,168,19111 1,320,000
Grants-Small Communitites Grant 7,500 I 01
Grants-State Snowmobile I 011 I I
Grants-Federal COP II 117,542 r 28,12511 75,000 II 37,500
Grants-New COP II 011 28,12511 37,500[ i 25,000
State Reimbursement-Vests 3,445' I 011 0'1
State Reimbursements 9,598 I 2,203 I 5,000 5,500
Dare Funds-Centennial School/Donations II 4,57411 5,240 4,500 5,000
Copies/Report Records/Notary 1,403 I 7011 1,500 2,000
Interest on Investments I, 741 I 760, I 20011 1,000
Commission Salary Reimb I 2,400 I 1,680 4,800 7,200
Special Event Reimb 7,25311 461 i 2,000, I 2,000
Miscellaneous ie: Ins refunds 7,433 I 19,7161 ' 1,5001 2,000
Vehicle & Equipment Sales I 1,093 I 6551 0 10,000
Forfeitures I 4,424 i 6,223 I 2,000' : 3,600
,nations-Fire Relief 2,000 I 011 200 I 200
I
...,onations-Lions I 2,700 i 01 2,000 I 2,000
Donations-Crime Prevention , I! 0: I II
, i n II
TOTAL REVENUE M 1,270,378 677,984\ 1,304,3911 I 1,423,000
I I
I I
[
1 I I I
! I I
...
REr'if."'~'~te-D
, " ,- '~; ~.~. ~: t~t !: ~
OCT (I 2 7000
CENTENk!.,.'\r:i';, ,'::lUCE DEPT.
2001 BUDGET
9/28/2000
I 1999 Thru I 2000 I 2001
ACTUAL June-OO BUDGET BUDGET
~XPENDITURES
Sa la ries-F u II-Time 788,7241 389,777 826,798 872,000
Salaries-Overtime II 29,748 13,975 35,000 37,000
Salaries-Part- Time II 28,608 15,4101 32,2031 33,850
Commission Salaries I 2,400 2,20011 4,800 7,200
I
I II
PERA I 81 ,682 36,026i I 78,759 83,250
FICA 6,171 3,281 6,597 7,250
Medicare II 8,369 4,22911 10,195 11,000
Health/Life/Disability/Dentallnsurance I I 70,583 37,3761 77,352 80,000
Re-employment Insurance 1 ,455 I 0 I
Worker's Compensation Insurance 16,454 16,002 15,500 19,500
Workers Compensation Premium II
i i II
I i
I i
I
Office/Coping/Computer Supplies i 4,448 3,0401 5,000 5,000
Photo Copier supplies, paper, drums, toner I
Consumables I
II
Computer Supplies, Hardware upgrade I I I
I 340~ 82~ 500~
Cleaning-Supplies i i 500
I I
Cleaning supplies !
Cleaning equipment I I I I
I
I
Printed Forms 2,587 439 2,000 2,000
Checks, Envelopes, Letterhead, Ii I
Ii I I II
state/county forms, business cards I
i I
i 1 II Ii I
i; I I
Printed Forms Ii 01 o I 01 0
I
Forms, Letterhead, Envelopes, Business i I I I II
I i
Cards for Tri-City start up i I I
11
II II I II
Intoxilyzer Supplies i! 591 , 75 I 60011 600
Intoxilyzer Supplies i I I I
Ii
I I I I
! II I
Fuel I 16,0031 6,52311 18,000 I 22,000
I
Vehicle Fuel I I II . II
I it-
I II I!
I I I
2001 BUDGET
9/28/2000
2
I 1999 Thru 2000 I 2001
ACTUAL i June-OO I BUDGET BUDGET
"' & Lubricants I 0 0 200j 200
, I ' I I
Oil & lubs I!
I I I
Anti-freeze & fluids
II I I
I I I
A TV & Snowmobile Supplies 8361 0 300 I 300
ATV & snowmobile gas, oil II
I I I
Amunition & Fire Arm Supplies 4,057 271 3,000 3,000
I 'I I
Ammunition I
I
Cleaning supplies, targets I I
Muffs, glasses, lock I
I
I
I
Medical/Fire Supplies 1,20311 108 1,50011 1,500
Medical supplies I
I I I I
Fire extinguishers II
, I II I II
Vaccinations etc II
I Ii II ' I
i
Investigation Supplies i 805 I 681 1,200 I 1,200
, I
Investigative supplies
Photographic supplies/processing I [I
I I 'i
I
Uniforms I 13,144 I 747 11,000 I 15,000
I 1 II
Officer uniforms ,
I
, I II
PT Uniforms I I
Civilian Uniforms !
I
New Employee I I
Reserves/Explorers i I I
I I I
Protective Vests I
II I
Uniforms I 0" 0 011 0
'I
New Badges & Patches for Start-up of I I I
i I
Tri-City I I I : I
, i I,
i I II
Crime Prevention Supplies I 529! i 811 1,000 I 1,000
Supplies I r II II
I i i Ii
School Safety i I i!
[ I I i I
, ! [ i I 8,000 It-
I i I
I I I
Auditing & Accounting Services I 7,69611 4,812 12,000
I
Accounting Service I II i i ! I
I Ii II
Auditing I Ii II i I
I _~ , I I;
-- I I, --- , I II
II II
9/28/2000
3
2001 BUDGET
1999 Thru 2000 2001
ACTUAL June-OO BUDGET I BUDGET
qalFees I 626 0 5,000 5,000
Commission legal counsel I
I
I
I
Personnel Testing I 1,030 75811 2,000! I 2,500
Pre-employment testing
I 1 l I
Drug Screening I
I
Psychological testing
Medical/Physicals I I I
I
i
Labor Relations II ~ 0 1,5001 1,500
I,
Labor Consultant II I I
I,
I I I'
II
Contract Typing 4001 I 48011 960! I 960
Commission Minutes I
, I
I
Telephone I 6,294 2,359 6,000, 6,000
US WesUATT I I ' I
Airtouch Celular I I ' I
Minn Comm Paging I !
I .-
I
t-'ostage 1,377 438 1,500 1,500
Postage/UPS I
I I I
Travel/Training I 1 0,441 I i 2,692 10,000 I 16,000
Training & Conference Tuition I I
Meals, Lodging & Mileage i I TI ~ =-JJ
Computer Training Ii Ii
Other Reimbursements (Petty Cash) -. i I Ii II II
i I II I I
I
Printing & Publishing Ii 18211 2521 2501 300
: I II I
Notices, Auctions, Personnel i I
I
I I I
I I
1 I II
Property/Liability Insurance I 21,6351 i 21,5571 ! 25,000 i 28,000
! I
I' I II
Professional Liability, Property, Vehicles II Ii
I; I I, i I
I I
Building i I ! i 1 ! I'
II ' I I I I!
Vehicle Insurance (Donated Vehicles) i I lL II
------- . i I II I I --r--~'--
Ii i I
2001 BUDGET
9/28/2000
4
II 1999 I Thru ! 2000 i I 2001
ACTUAL June-OO BUDGET I BUDGET
- -i1ities 1,445 563 2,200 2,400
CP Utilities [ I I
Anoka Electric I Ii
Lexington Office Area II I ] I
I
I II T
I 1
CJ RS Access 1,560 3901 1,6001 1,800
I
MDT Access I 2,070 540' 2,520 I 2,800
I
Building/Grounds Maintenance I 1,931 613 I 2,050 2,200
I
1 I
Grounds Maintenance I
Building Maintenance I
Snow Removal I II
Floor Care I I
I
Office/software Maintenance i I 1,864TI 370 5001 2,000
I
Office Equipment Repairs i I I I I
i I i
Network support I
Anoka County Connection I II i I \ \
I
II II
I,
ffice Equip Maintenance Contracts I 4,075 9661 I 5,000 i 5,000
Computer, printers, typewriters Ii !
I I
Copier I I I I
I
LOR I [I
EDP-Network I I I
I
MDT
I I
Vehicle Repair & Maintenance 8,477 3.3741 ! 10,000 I 12,000
Vehicle Repairs & Parts i I II i I i
Repair Labor I I I I
Car Wash ! I I I
I' I I Ii
Tires & Tire Repair I
Keys & Misc Repairs I i I
i I i I
1
Equipment Repair & Maintenance II 3431 i 77i: 55011 900
i I
Police Equipment Repair Ii i I I II
i I
11 ! 1 , , i i
Weapons Repair & Maintenance I, i I I I II
~ l 1 I
I I Ii II ' I
Radar Repairs I, II
- I
i I II LL------- ' I
Radar Recertificaion/Calibrartion II
--+t-------- ! I I I II
1 : II
I' ! '
2001 BUDGET
9/28/2000
5
I 1999 I Thru I 2000 2001
ACTUAL I June-OO BUDGET BUDGET
i1ding Lease I 9,723 5,164 10,500 11,000
Building Rent-CP
Building Rent-Lex I
II
Vehicle Lease I 35,616 22,007 35,616 48,000
Vehicle Lease I
I
Telephone Lease I 106! 916 2,400 j 0
Telephone Lease II
I 1 1
Equipment Lease/Purchase 01 2,683 22,000 22,000
Anoka County Records System I II I
I
I I :
I I
Dues ' I 300 5851 6001 790
MN/Anoka ChiefsllACP I I I
I I
Dare/MALEFI
I
Subscriptions & Books I 292 472 500 ' 500
Subscriptions & Legal Publications I I
I T I
iscellaneous 4881 410 500 1,000
Commission Expenses IE. Plaques I
Flowers I I
I' I
i
Dare Expenses 5,534 4,0871 5,000 I 5,000
I
I
Vehicle Setup & Trim 7,338 I 011 01 7,000
New Vehicle Set-up & Trim II i Ii 1 I
I
I I I
Equipment 3,448! i 14,59611 8,000 3,000
i Ii
I I
i
CONTINGENCY FUNDS II II II 3,141 5,000
ADDITIONS: ii-- I' ' I LI
II II
I I
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUILDING FUND i Ii II 0 0
Anoka Co Radio Upgrades ! I 1 i ! I I Ir-... 5,000
II It-
Contingency (Additional) i I ; I II D \ k,eooh
i I
Centerville Sub-Station I Ii II 1'---" 5: (J() 0
Furniture I II
-H- I I 3,500
I i I
I
I
I TOTAL EXPENDITURES I 1,213,0281 620,8711 1,304,391 ! i 1,423,000
9/28/2000
6
2001 BUDGET
...- co ...-
<.oN ..-
C coco C")
ro NN v
Q) 00 0
:;) U
u ID
<( 0...
0 ...-0')
c.. <.0 (") 0
ro ...- l{) M
u vC") N
"3 <.0 (") 0
ro I'-- C") oj
1'--1'-- <.0
:;) C")C") l{)
U
<(
0 <.0 ...- I'--
0 0 C") C")
ID 0') 0') cri
C") <.0 0')
> v CO '<T
0 N 0') 0
.!E Q) ...- l{) N
:;) OJ ...- ~ ~
E c ~ I
ro
o.c
u... 0
0 <.0 ...- C") 0
..- 0 0 C") <.0 0
0 0 C") l{) 0
0 ...-
N 0 N C") V 0
0 CO C") CO 0
W 0- 0 C") l{) 0
0 N V I'-- 0 N
:::i C") '<T C") l{) C")
0 ...- ~ ~ ~ ...-
0... ~ ~
0 CO N
W I- ..- V N C")
W C'Il C C") CO CO
0 (') :;) OJ C") N C")
...J 0 E 0 0 0 0
...
0 ::J 0 OJ
0... ro u.. c..
0') CO V 0
<.0 0') C") 0
l{) N ...- 0
0') CO N 0
C") N C") ...-
C") CO CO
C") N C")
V 0 l{)
I'-- C") 0')
C C") <.0 0')
Q) V N N
U
ID
0...
:;) l{) v I'-- <.0
E l{) l{) ...- N
I'-- V l{) I'--
0 ...-
u...
0...
0
::;
...- v l{)
0') 00
C N cricO
Q) N NV
U
c:( ID
-l 0...
::::l
>-:2: l{) v N ..-
I'--CO I'-- C")
1-0::: c NCO I'-- 0')
-0 NN '<T 0')
ttu. 0
[2w ~ \
1-0 :;)
:J c..
0
0 0...
c.. ...- NI'--
I'-- l{) I'--
C cO CON
Q) C") NC")
U
ID
0...
I.... eo 0 I 0 CO O'<T N
'<T '<T N I 0 '- 0') '<TN <.0
.c ...- >'0') C") NI'-- C")
OJ C")O') V C")C") ..-
'Qj .!!11 ..-
3: rol'--
00')
ro WCf)
...JW
:;) Z =:!Z
c E 0 >ii
o '- I- O::w
,- 0 (')
... ]iu... Z W...J
0 1-0
..- rJ) :;)0... ro >- X
0 c..O 0 I- Zo::
Cll ro 0<( W W_
u.. 0 0..._ I- 0 ...J 00
o
o
N
N
en
~
0...
<.0
'<T
N
ro
::l
E
'-
o
u...
Q)
u
-0
0...
Page 1 0[2
Jim March
To: Wayne LeBlanc; Theresa Brenner; Tom Peterson; Tim Rehbine; Ray Devine; Michelle Moser; Lori
Dam; John McLean; Jim Hoeft; Hanna Tilsen; Brian Hanson; Patricia Scott; Elizabeth Scheller;
Doug Porter; Dave Kilian; Mary Capra; Aimee Fairbrother; City Council
Subject: Week in Review
Week in Review
October 13. 2000
Building Permits this Period = 7
Building Permits YTD = 149
New Homes Year to Date = 40
*************************************************************************************************************
* I had a meeting with Alicia Vap from the Ramsey County Regional Raif Authority. They
are conducting a study of the Rush Line Corridor that extends along 1-35 from St. Paul to
Hinckley. This corridor study is examining transportation issues such as dial-a-rides,
carpooling, park and rides and commuter rail. This study has been initiated through the
allocation of federal funds. They are in a fact finding mode right now. They will be
forwarding a draft study once it is completed. There are no funds currently available to
implement any of the potential suggestions or recommendations that will be presented in
the study.
* I have a meeting scheduled with Larry Neilson who is the legal representative for Sheehy
Construction. This meeting is scheduled for October 23rd. We will be discussing the
details of the proposed fifteen acre donation of Industrial land to the City.
* As directed by Council, I have ordered an appraisal for all of the properties on the block
which contains the old public works building. The appraiser will also be establishing a
value for the vacant agricultural property owned by the Church of St. Genevieve. It
appears that the local parish needs to internally decide whether to expand the current
church or build a new church on the property that ;s already owned by the church. If the
parish decides to expand the church, then we will have the appraisals ready and we will be
able to begin negotiations for a potential land swap or purchase.
* I attended the Fire Steering Committee yesterday afternoon. Fire Chief Bennett was
authorized to purchase a hand-held thermal imaging unit. This unit was demonstrated to
the Committee. The product is used to locate individuals trapped in smoke filled buildings.
The unit was very sensitive and could pick up small variations in temperature. The unit is
also useful for identifying hotspots in a burning structure and has been credited for saving
several lives. The unit costs approximately $18,000 and was paid for entirely by charitable
gambling proceeds. The Committee also was able to view the newly delivered ladder truck
that was purchased. The ladder extends sixty-five feet and has a remote control nozzle on
10/13/00
ri1gt:: ~ VI ~
the top of the ladder. This vehicle will be useful for conducting on-roof rescues within the
district. I will ask Milo if the fire department would be willing to use the nozzle on the
extended ladder to extinguish our community-wide bonfire on October 28th. I would think
that this would be a great way to display the capabilities of this new vehicle.
* The lift station at the intersection of Mill Road and Peltier Lake Drive is under
construction. The lift station is currently being bypassed with auxiliary pumps.
* The Met Council's sewer interceptor project is continuing to make progress. Construction
is underway on the lift station building near the entrance to LaMotte Park. The
interceptor is currently being jacked underneath 20th Avenue.
* Tomorrow evening the Rockin' Hollywoods will be playing outside at Kelly's Korner. The
Centerville Lion's will be selling benefit raffle tickets for John Rodewald. If you not show up
and I will sell you some raffle tickets.
* I have been contacted by the Uno Lakes Area Chamber of Commerce. They have come
forward to host a candidate forum for Centerville. I was informed this morning that the
event will conducted in the same manner and format as the Uno forum last year. The
Chamber will be contacting all candidates over the weekend. They have selected October
23rd, 6:30 at Centerville City Hall. If anyone has any questions they can contact Paul
Montain, Tim Rehbine or Julie Schwartz. The Chamber will be contacting the news media
to attend this event.
* Enjoy your weekend!
10/13/00
~ -0- ~ ~~ -
Jim March
To: WIR Subscribers
Subject: Week In Review
Week in Review
October 19, 2000
Building Permits this Period = 6
Building Permits YTD = 156
New Homes Year to Date = 44
******************************************************************************************************
* 11m trying to get a jump on tomorrow's work, hence a late thursday edition of the Week in
Review.
* We had a sanitary sewer forcemain break near the intersection of Mill Road and Peltier
Lake Drive. This line is going to be replaced. It is currently a heavily pitted cast iron pipe.
The new forcemain will be pvc and will be more resistant to corrosion. The leak was
contained and repaired and no sewage escaped downstream into Clearwater Creek.
* New park equipment components have arrived to replace the sections of the climber that
were vandalized with graffiti from juveniles earlier this summer.
* The petition in regards to the dangerous off-ramps at 1-35E and Main Street was
forwarded to Anoka County.
* We have received building plans for the proposed County Bank facility. Craig Bode
indicates that electrical was installed to the portable facility today and they hope to be open
by the middle of next week.
* Sketch plans were received for proposed expansions of the Automotive Driveline building
and the Media Junction building on 20th Avenue. ADL is considering an approximate 4000
square foot expansion. Media Junction would like to add a second story to the office
portion of the building that they occupy.
* Northern Forest Products has begun grading behind their existing building in advance of
their proposed 25,000 square foot expansion.
* Terry Hannah (Ground Development) stopped in this afternoon to pick up an application
for a preliminary plat for the development they are considering south of Center Oaks.
* The trail is supposed to be paved tomorrow or Monday in the Hunter's Crossing
subdivision.
10/19/00
* The base work on the trail proposed for Acorn Creek Park is supposed to happen over
the weekend or on Monday. The dry weather has been cooperating with a lot of our
construction projects.
* There is a candidate forum scheduled for next Monday night at City Hall at 6:30. This
question and answer forum is being sponsored and coordinated by the Lino Lakes Area
Chamber of Commerce. This will be broadcast live on the cable access channel. We
received the tape of the candidates from the North Metro Media Center last night. We have
intentions to broadcast this tape around the clock all weekend over our local access
channel.
* The last I heard there were only two openings left for teams for Lion's Night Golf. This is
scheduled for tomorrow night at 6:30. If you want to golf, contact Bill at Kelly's.
* Enjoy your weekend!
10/19/00
(
J..
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 3, 2000
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning Comm'
meeting on October 3, 2000, at 6:30 p. m.
eduled
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
II.
a' - Variance Request
~~;
erson Hanson opened the public hearing at 6:33 p.m.
Mr. and Mrs. Stan Hasiak, 6994 Centerville Road, appeared before the committee and requested a
variance to enlarge the pole barn that currently exists on their property. Two percent (2%) of the
existing lot is 621 square feet. The existing shed greatly exceeds this amount. The existing building is
36' x 45', Mr. Hasiak began constructing a "lean-to" addition to the north side of the pole barn of
approximately 8' x 24'. Mr. Hasiak would like to use the addition for more storage. Paul Palzer,
Building Official, issued a stop work order on the project and has also issued an order to remove the
interior improvements to the pole barn without proper permits being issued.
Commission Member McLean felt that he should remove himself from discussion in regards to this
matter due to the fact he is a neighbor of the Hasiaks.
Mrs. Hasiak stated several reasons for requesting a variance, they own eight (8) vehicles and would like
to enclose them in an attempt to enhance the appearance of their yard and give her husband space to
repair same. Mrs, Hasiak stated that they have little to no space available for storage and the existing
crawl space underneath the residential building can not be utilized due to foundation erosion and
Page 1 of 13
sewage/water backups. Mrs. Hasiak referred to a videotape in her possession that she wished to play for
the committee and stated that Mr. March had previously viewed same. Mr. March told the Committe
he had viewed the tape earlier in the day and noted that the condition of the home is a civil issue to be
handled with the previous property owner.
Council Liaison Broussard Vickers questioned Mrs. Hasiak as to why her situation was a special
circumstance that would warrant the granting of a variance. Ms. Hasiak stated that the building is
considered a non-conforming structure; however, they would like the opportunity to enjoy a garage and
have storage similar to a basement.
Mr. March stated he felt the criteria for granting a variance had been met in regards to the repairs on the
interior of the building; however, exterior adjustments or improvements should not be included. Mr.
March stated that other residents in the community have the opportunity to sheetrock, cement the floor
and insulate their garage space if so desired. Mr. March stated that the Hasiak's non-conforming
structure is much larger than most garages, which benefits the Hasiaks. Mr. March also noted that the
Hasiak's property is large enough to be split, hence two assessments for service stubs on their property.
Mr. March stated that the second special assessment placed on the Hasiak's property had been
previously deferred by Council for 10 years excluding interest.
Commission Member Brainard inquired if Mr. March believed the hardship requirement could be met.
Mr. March indicated the basement is not suitable for storage. The Planning and Zoning Commission
and the Council knew the building was there. The neighbors knew the building was there when they
moved in. He explained he feels allowing the improvements to the interior provided proper permits are
obtained would be agreeable to everyone. However, he expressed concern for allowing an enlargemen
to the building.
Commission Member McLean commented in the capacity of a neighbor rather than a Commission
Member. Mr. McLean indicated he did not have concerns with the interior improvements to the
building; however, he was concerned with the exterior improvements. Mr. McLean indicated that the
Hasiaks would benefit differently than any other resident of the community due to the fact that their
accessory structure currently is larger than allowable and others are exempt to building accessory
structures of similar size.
Mrs. Hasiak stated that their priority is to be allowed to complete the interior improvements.
Commission Member LaMotte questioned the location of the accessory structure versus the property
line. Mrs. Hasiak stated that the structure is approximately fourteen (14) feet from the property line.
Commission Member LaMotte stated that storage of automobiles is the responsibility of the owner not
the City. Mrs. Hasiak indicated she has three (3) antique cars and would like to store them inside the
structure.
Commission Member LaMotte questioned the Hasiaks whether they were capable of adding an attached
garage to the house. Mrs. Hasiak stated that the lot size did not allow for an attached garage.
Motion by Commission Member DeVine, seconded by Commission Member LaMotte, to continu
the public hearing to the October 11, 2000, City Council Meeting at 6:00 p.m. All in favOl
Motion carried unanimously.
Chairperson Hanson closed the public hearing at 7:00 p.m.
Page 2 of 13
2. Salazar Fence
Chairperson Hanson opened the public hearing at 7:00 p.m.
Mr. and Mrs. Pedro Salazar appeared before the committee and requested a variance to be allowed to
construct a six (6) foot wooden privacy fence in their rear yard. The property is a comer lot located at
7336 Old Mill Road. According to Ordinance #4, the Salazars have two (2) front yards. The Salazars
would like a variance to leave the north side of the fence facing Old Mill Road located where they have
already dug the fence post-holes. These holes are approximately one (1) foot into the road right-of-way.
Construction was begun without a variance and a Stop Work Order was issued on the project.
Mr. Salazar stated that he had contacted Paul Palzer, Building Official and questioned the positioning of
the fence and was told twelve (12) to fourteen (14) feet from the curb. He then split the difference and
installed the fence post-holes 13 feet from the curb. He stated the project was a three-step process
involving grading the lot, sprinkler system and the fence. He has the comer holes in and if he were
required to move them they would interfere with where the sprinkler system has been installed.
Commission Member LaMotte questioned the distance from the fence to the sidewalk. Mr. Salazar
stated approximately one (1) foot.
Commission Member Brainard questioned if Mr. Salazar was told he would not need a permit. Mr.
Salazar stated he was told if the fence was kept under six (6) feet he would not need a permit.
Commission Member Kilian questioned the distance between the curb and the fence. Mr. Salazar stated
approximately thirteen (13) feet.
Mr. Salazar explained that he has waited over a month to continue work on the fence and would like to
complete the project prior to the ground freezing.
Commission Member McLean questioned if the six (6) foot fence would cause visual obstruction. Mr.
March stated that the fence would not extend beyond the comer of the garage so visibility is not an
Issue.
Commission Member DeVine questioned Mr. Paul Palzer whether he remembered speaking to Mr.
Salazar. Mr. Palzer stated he did recall speaking to Mr. Salazar; however, the project was started three
months prior to the conversation. Mr. Palzer indicated he had stated, "twelve (12) to fourteen (14) feet
is typical". However, in this case the City right-of-way ends at thirteen (13) feet, eight (8) inches due to
the fact the street is not centered. Mr. Palzer stated his opposition to leaving the fence in the City right-
of-way.
Commission Member Brainerd questioned Mr. Palzer as to what his opposition was. Mr. Palzer stated
that there could be problems with snow plowing or if in the future the City needed to enter the right-of-
way. If entering the right-of-way necessitates the removal of any or part of the fence it would be done at
the property owners expense.
Commission Member Brainard questioned whether Council had informed Mr. Salazar he needed a six
(6) foot fence. Mr. Salazar stated he wished to go beyond City requirement to ensure the safety and
comfort of the neighbors and to provide a proper exercise area for the dogs. Mr. Salazar stated he felt it
Page 3 of 13
was the responsibility of the City to tell him he was placing the fence in the wrong place prior to him
getting this far along in the process because the City knew he was building the fence.
Chairperson Hanson questioned as to how he arrived at starting the fence at thirteen (13) feet from the
curb. Mr. Salazar indicated he used thirteen (13) feet because it is between twelve (12) and fourteen
(14) feet.
Commission Member DeVine spoke as a neighbor of the Salazars and indicated he is in favor of the
fence. Mr. De Vine stated he had spoken to another neighbor who voiced her support of the fence. Mr.
De Vine also stated he does not believe one (1) foot either way will make very much difference.
Commission Member Kilian agreed one (1) foot is not a big difference. Mr. Kilian stated he would like
it to be made clear, however, if the fence stays in the City right-of-way and the City needs to remove it
for any reason it would be the responsibility of the Salazars to repair and replace it at their expense. Mr.
Salazar expressed his willingness to agree to repair and replace the fence, at his cost, should the need
arise if the City needs access to the right-of-way or if the fence is hit by the snowplow.
Commission Member Brainard noted it is not the responsibility of the City to survey a property or
determine for the property owner where the lot lines exist. He indicated the City can give guidance, but
it is ultimately the responsibility of the property owner. Mr. Salazar said he believed he should be able
to rely upon information received from the City.
Commission Member De Vine stated he does not think it is right to call City Hall and get information as
to where the fence should be placed and then have the City place a stop order on work because th
information given out was incorrect and the fence is now in the City right-of-way. Mr. Palzer note_
there was a three month time period between the telephone call and the start of the project. Mr. Salazar
indicated he was waiting for an available contractor to begin the project.
Mr. March explained to the Commission he had sent out a certified letter as follow-up to Mr. Salazar's
appearance before the Council on the dog issue. In that letter it informed the Salazars that a variance
may be required to build a fence. The certified letter was refused by the Salazars and returned by the
post office as undeliverable. The letter was then delivered by the Centennial Lakes Police Department.
At that time period, construction of the fence had already begun. Mr. March indicated that the City had
tried to preempt the current situation by sending the letter and that by not accepting the letter; the
Salazars have created the current situation.
Mr. March stated he believed the fence would be an amenity to the property and would not detract from
it. Mr. March stated that the current Ordinance #4 needs to more clearly define front yards pertaining to
comer lots. Mr. March also stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission would be discussing this
issue in the near future and at present the concern is the placement of the fence in the right-of-way.
Motion by Commission Member DeVine. seconded by Commission Member Brainard to continue
the public hearing to the October 11. 2000 City Council Meeting at 6:00 p.m. All in favor. Motion
carried unanimously.
Mr. Salazar presented to Mr. March letters of support for the fence from two (2) of his neighbors.
Chairperson Hanson closed the public hearing at 7:20 p.m.
3. County Bank
Page 4 of 13
Chairperson Hanson opened the public hearing at 7:20 p.m.
County Bank is requesting a variance for their proposed sign to be located at the northwest comer of the
intersection of Main Street and 21st Avenue. Craig Bode, Branch Manager, and Dave Shannon of eo lor
Sign were in attendance. The variance request is for a larger and taller sign than Ordinance #4 permits.
A new schematic for the sign was presented and the revised schematic showed a two (2) foot taller sign
than originally proposed, along with an instant cash sign below the main sign. The proposed sign would
be approximately 26.58 feet tall and 211 square feet in size. Ordinance #4 requires a maximum height
of twenty (20) feet and eighty (80) square feet in size for a free standing sign in a commercial district.
The variance request includes a time and temperature reader board, which is currently not allowed by
Ordinance #4.
Commission Member De Vine indicated there are proposed amendments to Ordinance #4 allowing
message reader signs and to increase the size of the signs based on the frontage of the property in order
for Centerville to compete with Lino Lakes.
Mr. March questioned if there was a way the bank could provide a frame of reference as to how the sign
would look with the building. Mr. Shannon indicated the Amoco sign was approximately two hundred
fifty (250) square feet and thirty-five (35) feet high. County Bank is proposing a sign that would be nine
(9) feet shorter and fifty (50) square feet smaller. Mr. Shannon stated that it would be very difficult to
incorporate the copy and logo on a smaller sign.
Commission Member Kilian stated that based on the location of the sign to the building, he believed it
would look proportionate.
Commission Member LaMotte inquired as to why the bank is applying for a variance at this point when
Ordinance #4 is to be revised. Mr. Shannon indicated the need to place the footings in the ground prior
to the ground freezing. Mr. Shannon stated that the permanent bank building would be open February 1,
2001 and that they desired to have the sign up by then.
Commission Member Brainard questioned whether Ordinance #4 could be modified rather than granting
a variance. Mr. March stated that County Bank did not want to apply for a variance after the ordinance
was revised if their sign ended up being larger than the requirements subsequent to amendments. Mr.
March stated that the sign ordinance is rather lengthy and would require ample consideration from the
Commission. Mr. March also stated that the sign proposed by County Bank is similar in size to signs
that are located in other communities such as Center City and Forest Lake.
Commission Member Kilian stated his unwillingness to allow a reader board sign similar to that of a car
dealership located in Forest Lake due to the fact that it distracts peoples driving attention and is
unsightly. Mr. Shannon stated that the sign the bank is proposing is much smaller than the one in Forest
Lake and could be programmed to allow the printing to be stable. Mr. Shannon felt that the sign could
be an asset to the community by announcing community events.
Commission Member Brainard questioned the materials that would be used for the temporary sign and if
footings would be needed to support same. Mr. Shannon indicated footings were not needed for a
temporary sign; however, the bank would like to place the footings for the permanent sign prior to the
ground freezing and have the sign in place prior to the anticipated February 2001 opening.
Page 5 of 13
Commission Member Brainard expressed a desire to amend Ordinance #4 rather than granting a
vanance.
Commission Member Kilian questioned why the footings and steel posts could not be placed this fall
prior to the ground freezing and modifying at a future date subsequent to the amended Ordinance. Mr.
Shannon stated he has not built signs that way but indicated it was possible.
Mr. March stated he concurred with Commission Member Brainard and stated that if the sign ordinance
is not amended that the bank should apply for a Special Use Permit rather than a variance.
Commission Member LaMotte expressed his desire to revise the sign ordinance rather than granting a
vanance.
Council Liaison Broussard Vickers stated that she would prefer revisiting the sign portion of Ordinance
#4 rather than granting the variance.
Motion by Commission Member DeVine. seconded by Commission Member Sheppard to continue
the public hearing to the October 11. 2000 City Council Meeting at 6:00 p.m. All in favor. Motion
carried unanimously.
Chairperson Hanson closed the public hearing at 7:50 p.m.
III. APPEARANCES
1. Mr. Roger Shimon - Zoning/Electrical Fencing
Mr. March indicated Mr. Shimon was unable to attend the meeting and had requested that the
Commission table the matter to the November 14,2000 meeting.
Motion by Commission Member Brainard. seconded by Commission Member McLean to table
Mr. Shimon's appearance before the Planning and Zoning Commission to the November 14. 2000
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting at 6:30 p.m. All in favor. Motion carried
unanimously.
2. Ground Development
Mr. Terry Hannah, Ground Development, appeared before the Commission to present a proposed
development plan for the former Gor-em Property. The property is located south of the Center Oaks
Development.
Mr. March noted some initial concerns based on the plans presented. Those include double frontage
lots, access to the two (2) homes that are already located off of Short Street, rear yards that have useable
property on the other side of wetlands, proposed trail location and dead-end roads not ending in
temporary cul-de-sacs.
Mr. Sterm, Ground Development's engineer, addressed the concerns of Mr. March by indicating thei
willingness to work within City requirements. Mr. Sterm stated that there are several ways to modii
and improve the plan and they are open to suggestions.
Page 6 of 13
Mr. March questioned whether Ground Development had considered other plans prior to presenting the
plans to the City. Mr. Sterm stated that they usually have one (1) plan they feel strongly about and not
several plans.
Commission Member Kilian questioned whether the residents to the north had been consulted as to
whether they wanted a trail running behind their property. Mr. Sterm said that they had not contacted
these residents, however, they would be willing to do so.
Chairperson Hanson questioned whether the developer anticipated a traffic problem on Centerville Road
being the only access to the development. Mr. Sterm indicated a traffic study has not been completed,
but one could be done. Mr. Sterm also indicated he will be working with Anoka County with regards to
Centerville Road being the only access and additional road requirements needed.
Commission Member LaMotte questioned whether the development was contained in the MUSA. Mr.
Hannah indicated two thirds (2/3) of the development is contained in MUSA for 2001 and the final one
third (1/3) is contained in MUSA for 2005. Mr. LaMotte also questioned if the development would be
built in phases based on the MUSA line. Mr. Hannah stated it would be built in phases beginning with
those lots closest to Centerville Road.
Commission Member LaMotte questioned how Ground Development intended to handle the
development where the drainage ditches are concerned. Mr. Hannah indicated they were just made
aware of the ditches and would work with the City Engineer to comply with requirements and
recommendations of the City.
Mr. March stated that it would be the City's preference for temporary cul-de-sacs rather than pads for
turn-arounds based on the fact the turn-arounds in the past have been used for extra storage of boats and
vehicles rather than turn-arounds.
Council Liaison Broussard Vickers stated, as a property owner to the south of the proposed
development, she would prefer to have the cul-de-sac so that it would look like the road had ended. She
noted if the street appears to go through; off road vehicles, including snowmobiles, will go straight
through onto her property and she would prefer not to have that type of problem.
Commission Member De Vine questioned whether the City would require a park in the development.
Mr. March indicated the Parks and Recreation Commission had not meet on the issue but he thought
they would prefer a park dedication fee.
Commission Member LaMotte questioned the type of homes Ground Development anticipates building
in the development. Mr. Hannah stated they would use a diverse group of builders so there would be a
diverse type of homes. Mr. Hannah stated that it is their preference to have as many ramblers and
walkout ramblers as possible rather than split entry homes. He believes having ramblers rather than split
entry homes will enhance the value and appearance of the property.
Mr. Hannah provided a copy of the covenants and restrictions required in Ground Development's
development in the City of Independence.
Mr. March questioned how the developer intended to enforce the outside storage covenants and
restrictions. Mr. Hannah stated that the covenants are given to builders who in turn give them to the
property owners. Mr. Hannah stated he works in conjunction with the builder, the City and the property
owner to make sure outside storage complies with the developer's covenants and City ordinance.
Page 7 of 13
Mr. March questioned if Ground Development was open to the City requiring a minimum size fo
garages within the development. Mr. Hannah stated that Ground Development was open to all
suggestions from the City.
Commission Member De Vine stated an interest in reviewing the elevations for the lots to determine
what type of buildings the lots would accommodate.
Mr. March stated the City is looking for higher valued homes to balance out the housing stock in the
community, as there are currently a high number of entry-level homes. Mr. Hannah agreed and stated it
is the preference of Ground Development to build as many full basement homes as possible to increase
home values.
Commission Member Brainard state he would like to see the development come to Centerville.
Mr. March stated he preferred Ground Development's design concept to the design previously submitted
by Gor-Em.
Commission Member DeVine questioned whether Mr. Palzer had any questions or concerns. Mr. Palzer
stated that he had concerns regarding the cul-de-sac to the northwest of the development not meeting the
lots to the north. Mr. Palzer also stated that the same lots may be large enough to be divided in the
future and there is a potential that they may be assessed double sewer and water assessments. Mr. Sterm
noted he would check to see if they were large enough to be subdivided.
Mr. March expressed a concern for Lots 1 through 7 of Block 3 due to the fact that Dupre Road runs
behind the lots and there would be no privacy in the back of those lots. Mr. Sterm stated that something
different could be done if it is the desire of the City with those lots such as leaving it a natural wetland.
IV. OLD BUSINESS
1. Hasaik Variance Request
Commission Member DeVine questioned if the Hasaiks would need a variance to do the interior work if
the building were not non-conforming. Mr. March said there would not be a requirement for a variance,
but a building permit would still need to be obtained.
Commission Member De Vine stated he would recommend partially approving the variance to allow for
the interior modifications provided the proper permits and inspections were obtained.
Council Liaison Broussard Vickers questioned Mr. Palzer whether sheet rocking the interior of the pole
barn would fall under the definition of "expanding the use" of the building. Mr. Palzer stated it was his
interpretation that sheet rocking the interior of the building intensified the use of a pole building and that
is the reason a stop order was placed on the improvements.
Commission Member Kilian questioned whether all the interior improvements would need to be
removed for the inspection. Mr. Palzer stated he would visually inspect the improvements prior to th
official building inspection to ascertain which items needed to be removed prior to the officia
inspection.
Page 8 of 13
Chairperson Hanson questioned the status of the interior work. Mrs. Hasiak stated that the sheet rock
and insulation has been installed, but the finishing drywall has not been applied.
Mr. March stated that he feels the interior finish work meets the criteria required for a variance but that
enlarging the building does not.
Chairperson Hanson stated his opposition to granting a variance for expanding the building due to
setting a precedent for others to request variances for larger accessory buildings than allowed by
ordinance.
Dave Radeck, 6960 Meadow Circle, appeared before the Commission and stated that he drives past the
property every day on the way to and from work and the pole building is an eyesore.
Mrs. Hasiak stated the pole barn is in better shape than the house is due to the crawlspace's foundation
collapsing.
Chairperson Hanson made a point of order comment indicating issues relating to the civil dispute
between Mrs. Hasiak and the former property owner should be kept out of the discussion regarding the
variance request.
Mrs. Hasiak stated the house would not have been sold without the pole barn being there is no garage.
Mr. Palzer indicated the Hasiaks have the right to add an attached garage to the house.
Council Liasion Broussard Vickers questioned how long the building would be allowed to remain on the
property as a non-conforming structure. Mr. Palzer indicated under the old Ordinance #4 it was thirty
(30) years and under the new ordinance there is no timeframe.
Motion by Commission Member DeVine. seconded by Commission Member Sheppard to
recommend to Council approval of the variance to allow for the interior changes provided the
proper building permits and inspections are obtained and to deny the variance request for
expansion of the non-conforming structure. Ayes - 5 Nays - 1 (Brainard) Abstain - 1 (McLean).
Motion carried.
2. County Bank Variance Request
Chairperson Hanson stated he would prefer not to grant the variance and that the sign ordinance needs to
be reviewed and amended.
Council Liasion Broussard Vickers stated she would prefer to revisit the sign ordinance in depth rather
than grant the variance. She also indicated she believed it was the general consensus of the Council that
County Bank's sign would fit within the parameters discussed, however, no final agreement on changes
to the sign ordinance were made. Therefore, there is no guarantee the sign proposed by County Bank
would conform to ordinance requirements.
Commission Member DeVine stated he would like to amend the sign ordinance to designate a special
district east of 20th A venue on either side of Main Street to allow for signs such as the one proposed by
County Bank.
Page 9 of 13
Commission Member Kilian stated it was his preference that County Bank put in the footings and leave
the pipes long enough for a larger sign should the sign be approved and if the sign is not approved th
pipes may be cut to the proper length for a sign to conform to City ordinance.
Motion by Commission Member Brainard. seconded by Commission Member Kilian to
recommend to Council denial of County Bank's request for a sign variance. Ayes - 4 Nays - 3
(DeVine. Sheppard. McLean). Motion carried.
3. Salazar Variance Request
Commission Member Kilian questioned whether Mr. Palzer had told Mr. Salazar the property line began
twelve (12) to fourteen (14) feet from the curb. Mr. Palzer indicated he had told him his property line
began twelve (12) to fourteen (14) feet from the curb as that is an approximate for a normal setback. He
also indicated it is the responsibility of the homeowner to locate the property line and that the
. information received from the City should only be a guideline to assist him in determining the location
of the property line.
Council Liaison Broussard Vickers noted it is the responsibility of the property owner not the City to
determine where the property line is before commencing work. She stated she does not support leaving
the fence in the right-of-way as the City did take steps via a certified letter to inform the Salazars a
variance may be required.
Commission Member Kilian stated his approval for the variance to allow a six (6) foot fence provided it
did not go beyond the back comer of the garage and is not in the City's right-of-way.
Commission Member McLean questioned Mr. Palzer's preference on the matter. Mr. Palzer stated it is
his preference to keep the fence out of the right-of-way to avoid problems in the future.
Commission Member DeVine questioned whether Mr. Salazar would be required to move the sprinkler
system if the City requests he move the fence out of the right-of-way.
It was the consensus of the Commission that any costs associated with the relocation of fence outside of
the right-of-way was the Salazar's responsibility.
Mr. March state that Mr. Salazar had indicated if the City does not grant the variance he will not put the
fence up "because the City won't let him."
Mr. Palzer stated that previously other residents have requested variances for the exact same thing and
were denied, as the old ordinance was in effect then which defined comer lots to have two front yards.
Mr. March questioned whether the intent of the Planning and Zoning Commission was to modify the
ordinance to indicate comer lots did not have two (2) front yards. If so, the six (6) foot fence would be
allowed because it would be in the side yard.
Council Liasion Broussard Vickers indicated she believed it was the intent of Council to modify the
ordinance as it relates to comer lots and indicate that a comer lot would only have one (1) front yard.
Motion by Commission Member Kilian. seconded by Commission Member McLean to
recommend to Council to grant the variance for the 6-foot fence provided the fence is on or inside
Page 10 of 13
the property line. Ayes - 3 Nays - 3 (DeVine. Sheppard. LaMotte) Abstain - 1 (Brainard).
Motion failed.
Council Liaison Broussard Vickers stated she was unsure the variance request met the requirements, as
she does not believe the situation is unique and believes the situation was created by their own actions.
Ms. Vickers also stated that a minor revision to the ordinance to change the language to define comer
lots as not having two front yards would solve the problem.
Chairperson Hanson called a five-minute recess at 9:30 p.m.
Chairperson Hanson called the meeting back to order at 9:35 p.m.
4. Ordinance #4 - Building Official's Recommendation for Modification
Mr. Palzer raised an issue in regards to the newly adopted Ordinance #4. A resident recently questioned
how small of a garage could be built in Royal Meadows. Upon reviewing the new ordinance, Mr. Palzer
discovered garages that are attached to the dwelling unit have no minimum size and those detached from
the dwelling unit are limited by the "2% of yard" rule.
By definition, an accessory structure is allowed only to be detached as noted on page 2. On page 19, an
accessory building cannot be attached, so the entire first sentence of the second paragraph should be
deleted. Also the second sentence requires deletion of "unless attached to and made a part of the main
building: and the five (5) foot requirement should be changed to six (6) feet to be consistent with the
building code. Detached accessory structures used, as a garage should be allowed to be larger than 2%
of the yard area in the M-l and R-4 zones due to the very narrow and small lot sizes in these districts.
Most of the homes in these districts occupy most of the width of the lot.
The "District Regulations" should be modified with the addition of a minimum garage size. The
existing regulations require four hundred forty (440) square feet in the R-2 and R-2A zones and six
hundred (600) square feet in the R-5 zone. Mr. Palzer recommended a minimum of two hundred twenty
(220) square feet in the R-4 and M -1 zones. The Commission may choose to add a maximum size for an
attached garage. Currently, the building code allows up to three thousand (3,000) square feet as a
maximum, which is extremely large in most of the residential districts in Centerville.
Mr. March stated he would like the City to require a minimum of six hundred (600) square feet of
garage space for all new construction in R2, R-2A and R-5.
Mrs. Richard Haug, 1965 South Robin Lane, stated she was the homeowner Mr. Palzer was referring to
and that she currently has no garage. Mrs. Haug stated she would like to build a garage, as it is her
desire to store some of her lawn and garden equipment, as well as to have a place to park some of her
vehicles.
Mr. Palzer indicated it may be possible for the property owner to attach the garage to the house with a
breezeway and then there would be no maximum square footage limitation.
Mr. March inquired as to the size of garage the property owner would like to construct. Mr. Palzer
stated it was approximately twenty-four (24) by twenty (26) feet or the equivalent of a two and a half car
garage.
Page 11 of 13
Council Liaison Broussard Vickers noted the ordinance needs to be revised defining minimums and
maximums for attached and detached garages.
Mr. Palzer stated it would be his preference to have the garage attached to the house rather than
detached because in his opinion the garage would be better maintained if it were part of the house.
Mrs. Haug inquired as to the height limitation for the structure. Mr. Palzer stated the maximum height is
fourteen (14) feet.
Council Liasion Broussard Vickers suggested Staff draft some suggested wording changes to Ordinance
#4 and present them for a public hearing at the next Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
Motion by Commission Member DeVine. seconded by Commission Member Brainard to table
discussion on Ordinance #4 to the November 14. 2000 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
at 6:30 p.m. to allow Staff to draft a revision to the ordinance. All in favor. Motion carried
unanimously.
5. Sample Sign Ordinances
Chairperson Hanson recommended that the Planning and Zoning Commission schedule workshop dates
to discuss proposed modifications to the sign section of Ordinance #4.
A consensus was that the Planning and Zoning Commission schedule workshops to discuss the proposed
modifications to the sign section of Ordinance #4 on October 17, October 24, November 21, an
November 28,2000 at 6:30 p.m. at the Public Works Building.
Motion by Commission Member DeVine to recommend to Council to amend the sign section of
Ordinance #4 to establish a special district from 20th Avenue east to the City limits on both sides of
the street to allow for signs two hundred (200) square feet and forty (40) feet high. The motion
died for lack of a second.
Motion by Commission Member Brainard. seconded by Commission Member DeVine to schedule
workshop dates to discuss proposed modifications to the sign section of Ordinance #4 on October
17. October 24. November 21. and November 28. 2000 at 6:30 p.m. at the Public Works Building.
All in favor. Motion carried unanimously.
V. NEW BUSINESS
1. 2001 Budget
Mr. March discussed with the Commission the 2000 budget with funds being $1,540 and questioned
whether or not the consensus of the Planning and Zoning Commission was to retain the same level for
2001.
It was the consensus of the Planning and Zoning Commission for the budget to remain at $1,540 for
2001.
2. Reschedule November Meeting Due to Elections
Page 12 of 13
It was the consensus of the Planning and Zoning Commission to reschedule the November meeting to
November 14,2000 due to the elections.
VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS
There were no discussion items.
VII. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
1. July 19,2000 Joint Workshop Meeting Minutes
Motion by Commission Member DeVine. seconded by Chairperson Hanson to approve the July
19. 2000 Joint Workshop Meeting Minutes. All in favor. Abstain - 4 (Hanson. Kilian. Sheppard.
McLean). Motion carried.
2. August 1, 2000 Meeting Minutes
Motion by Commission Member Kilian. seconded by Commission Member DeVine to approve the
August 1. 2000 Meeting Minutes. All in favor. Abstain - 1 (Sheppard). Motion carried.
Council Liaison Broussard Vickers noted she was in attendance at the August 1, 2000 meeting and
requested that it be included in the minutes.
3. September 5,2000 Meeting Minutes
Commission Member McLean requested the minutes be changed to reflect his attendance at the
September 5, 2000 meeting.
Motion by Commission Member McLean. seconded by Commission Member Devine to approve
the September 5. 2000 meeting minutes with the reQuested change. All in favor. Abstain - 4
(LaMotte. Kilian. Hanson. Brainard).
VII. ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Commission Member DeVine. seconded by Commission Member Sheppard to adjourn
the October 3.2000 Planning and Zoning Commission Meetine at 10:00 p.m. All in favor. Motion
carried unanimously.
Transcribed by:
Joan Lenzmeier, Recording Secretary
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
Page 13 of 13
t Jj~~ ~~
n"\tt. i'\
. ~. L"l
f, ~ fA ~a., I Jf\.. '..1 ?t~ I ~
11 . '! '. 31 U. .~. ~.
i~\ I \If.J' ~i' ~~. t ~"'t" i 1< L" ~i
=\ ~ ..rP ,-" w '
~ ~;~ ~ " 1;' i ~ \" ' ~v y
ri~ . ."
CENTERVILLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
MEETING MINUTES
OCTOBER 17, 2000
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Centerville Economic Development
Committee held their regularly scheduled meeting on October 17,2000 at City Hall,
1880 Main Street.
Present:
Chairperson Tim Rehbine
Committee Member Lori Dorn
Committee Member Paul Montain
Committee Member Michelle Moser
Committee Member Betsy Scheller
Absent:
Committee Member John Magill
Committee Member Mary Capra
Committee Member Dick Travis (Council liaison)
Staff:
Kris Sweeney
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Tim Rehbine called the meeting to order at approximately 7: 1 0 p.rn.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
October 17, 2000, Economic Development Committee Meeting Minutes
Motion by Ms. Moser, seconded bv Ms. Dorn to approve the October 17, 2000,
Economic Development Committee Meetin2 Minutes. All in favor. Mr. Montain
abstained. Motion carried.
APPEARANCES
Mayor Wilharber appeared at approximately 8:20 p.m. He commented on the next phase
of Center Oaks and how more expensive the homes will be. This will also help in
creating new businesses in town.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Design T earn - "Ideas in Action"
Historical Markers - No report was given.
Downtown Revitalization
t.d^...'). T A Dn~O~t~
! ~0 I d r
Mr. Rehbine mentioned that he hadn't heard anything new on the downtown
revitalization grants. Ms. Scheller stated that this grant was put into the planning stages
not the development stages.
Ms. Dom mentioned that we did receive a $500.00 grant from State Farm Insurance as
originally thought. They only issue them twice a year. Ms. Dom explained she had spoke
with Mr. March regarding the grant.
Mr. Montain remarked on the LaMotte Building and how nice it was. He also commented
on the downtown area and how it has improved in the past 10 years.
Ms. Dom asked Mr. Montain about his building. He mentioned that he is going to do
some improvement, but currently he had to put in a new heating and cooling system. He
is planning on installing new awnings, a clock, and new driveway.
Ms. Scheller stated that she visited R & K Cafe and Catering. They have repainted it
inside; and that the french toast was excellent! She did mention that she talked to Kathy,
on of the owners, and Kathy stated they were looking into remodeling the Cafe into an
arcade. They would sell hamburgers and fries and make it more teen oriented.
Mr. Montain answered Ms. Moser's questions regarding the Dairy Queen. Apparently
Gerald Rehbine is having trouble with the City ofLino Lakes and the flood plain issue.
They are still interested. There was discussion about the proposed grocery store/strip
mal1 going in behind the new County Bank. It was thought that it is still in the
demographic study stage.
Ms. Capra submitted a memo regarding the grand opening ofthe LaMotte Building to
providing refreshments. The committee thought is was a good idea, but there were
concerns with some of the members about playing favoritism. They agreed to the
exception of$80.00 to $100.00 for the LaMotte Building due to the fact that there will be
four businesses located there. In all other cases the cost should be between $20.00 to
$30.00 per business.
A motion was made to have the refreshments catered by R & K Cafe and Catering
for the grand opening of the LaMotte Building. Motion by Mr. Montain, seconded
by Ms. Scheller. Motion carried unanimously.
The committee discussed setting a standard on giving out welcome packets, cards, gifts
and staying within a certain dollar value of approximately $20 to $30.
A motion was made by Ms. Scheller to set a standard monetary value on the
welcome pacts, cards, and gifts for new business. Mr. Montain seconded. All in
favor. Motion carried unanimously.
,.<~}
~ a.fr:i1 l~~'
~n~., I
, , . ~ A" f' W ~ I .~ ~
~I"'. I......f....".. ',' ~ i1. O~~,li I \L I,
~ Ij ~ i ~ r \,'ii 11 ~~ fti.
% ~J ./ I . I ,'!II '
~~~ ii. I,
~~
Ms. Scheller contacted the Wargo Nature Center and was told someone would get back to
her and they did not. She was she will be calling them regarding winter activities.
Star City Goals
The committee discussed several different possibilities (example: snow sculptures and
light contest). Mr. Montain suggested that this would be more in the line of the Fete de
Lacs Committee or the Park and Recreation Committee than business related. The
committee decided that they were not going to do any winter activities for this year.
They would start planning for next year.
Ms. Scheller stated that Ms. Capra suggested that EDC have a winter Business
Appreciation night with hot chocolate and treats, because there are businesses that we
missed in the spring.
Mr. Montain stated that the EDC goal was to maintain our current businesses and reach
out to the new businesses in town.
Welcome Neighbor Packets
Ms. Scheller asked if anyone brought a welcome packet over to Embers. It was
mentioned that Ms. Capra picked up mugs, but it was unknown whether they were
delivered to the new businesses. Mr. Rehbine suggested that they touch base with Ms.
Capra.
City Merchandise
Mr. Rehbine was interested in the amount of inventory that was left and if they needed to
order any more.
NEW BUSINESS
Mr. Rehbine suggested that the EDC invite new or current business owners once a month
to an EDC meeting to discuss their needs, or offer their suggestions. It was agreed that
they would allow approximately 15 minutes for the business owner to speak at the
beginning of the meeting. It was also agreed that each committee member would rotate
inviting new or current businesses. Ms. Dorn offered to set up a business for November.
Mr. Rehbine mentioned that this week was Minnesota Manufacturer's Week and that a
certificate was being set out to the manufacturers in Centerville. Governor Jesse Ventura
signed this Certificate. A short letter was sent with the Certificates and the Proclamation
that was signed by the Governor.
Lino Lakes Area Chamber of Commerce was mentioned. Ms. Capra had questions but
was not able to attend this meeting. Mr. Rehbine stated that he received a call regarding
the Lino Lakes Area Chamber and wanted more infonnation on the Chamber. He also
stated that EDC and the Chamber are similar groups and that is why the City of
Centerville joined.
. NOT Arr~O~t~
The 2001 Budget was discussed. The committee needed more information for the
November meeting.
Other New Business:
Mr. Montain questioned when the Citizen and Business Persons of the Year Certificates
were given out. This year, they were handed out at the Fete de Lacs. The committee was
unsure ofthe policy in the past, and requested more information at the next meeting so
they can recommend when they would like to see the awards presented.
The committee questioned when the to vote for chairperson would take place and also
requested copies of the by-laws in the next packet.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Ms. Dorn. seconded by Mr. Montain to adiourn the October 17. 2000.
EDC Meetio2. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously,
Meeting adjourned at approximately 8:45 p.rn.
Respectfully submitted:
Kris Sweeney
City Staff