HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-08-23 Proposed Right of Way Ordinance Memo
- - - 1
. ,
. .'
TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Teresa Bender
SUBJECT: Proposed Right of Way OrdinanceIPlanning and Zoning Comments
DATE: August 23, 2002
At Planning and Zoning's last meeting they discussed the attached proposed ordinance
and fee schedule, They requested the strikethrough and underline modifications along
with review of Legal CounseL They also requested a listing of other cities that had
approved same and they are as follows:
. Ham Lake adopted a shorter version of this ordinance and modified the fee
structure.
. Blaine previously adopted a similar ordinance.
. Spring Lake Park adopted same ordinance.
Please review and forward your comments to staff and then we will forward same to
Legal CounseL
q~ C.' -Il 11"" k.~ . ~ } /IALA.Nl./V~
~t Uf Wl'r&~ ~l.U' VV Vl.^/V~-~- (}
- ----~
~
Model Ordinance
LMC/CEAM Right-of-Way Ordinance
(Short Form)
City of
County, Minnesota
,'\n ordinance to enact a Fte's Chapter of Code of OrdillilFlCe to palJlic right
of way iFt the public interest, and to provide for the issuaFlcO aRd regulation of right of way
p eBl1its.
THE COUNCIL OF
ORDAINS!:
Chapter _ of Code of Ordinance (hereafter "this Code"/ is hereby
repealed in its entirety, and is replaoed BY the f{)llowing flOW Chapter 1 (hereafter "this Chapter"),
to read as fa !lows:
Sec. 1.01.
Election to Manager the Public Right-of-Way
To provide for the health, safety and welfare of its citizens, and to ensure the integrity of its streets
and the appropriate use of the rights-of-way, the city strives to keep its rights-of-way in a state of
good repair and fee from unnecessary encumbrances.
Pursuant to the authority granted to the city under state and federal statutory, administrative and
common law, the city hereby elects pursuant Minn. Stat. 237.163 Subd. 2(b), to manage right-of-
way within its jurisdictions.
Sec. 1.02.
Definitions.
The following definitions apply in this chapter of this code. References hereafter to "sections" are
unless otlJelwise specified references to sections in this chapter. Defined terms remain defined terms
whether or not capitalized.
"Abandoned Facility" means a facility no longer in service of physically disconnected from a portion
! Enacting clauses are different in various charter. The statutory city-enacting clause is
used here.
2m most cases, there will be ordinances or legislative codes that wi!l need to be amended
or repealed because of inconsistency with the new regulations. One method is to repeal all those
provisions and replace them with this ordinance.
Page 1 of 12
,
of the operating facility, or from any other facility, that is in use or still carries service. A facility is
not abandoned unless declared so by the right-of-way user.
"Applicant" means any person requesting permission to excavate or obstruct a right-of-way.
"City" means the City of , Minnesota. For purposes of section 1.28,
city means its elected officials, officers, employees and agents.
"Commission" means the State Public Utilities Commission.
,Ctongested Right-of-Way" means a crowded condition in the subsurface ofthe pubic right-of-way
that occurs when the maximum lateral spacing between existing underground facilities does not
allow for construction new underground facilities without using hand digging to expose the existing
lateral facilities in conformance with Minn. Statutes, section 216D.04 subdivision 3, over a
continuous length in excess of 500 feet.
"Degradation" means a decrease in the useful life of the right-of-way caused by excavation in or
disturbance ofthe right-of -way, resulting in the need to reconstruct such right-of-way earlier than
would be required if the excavation or disturbance did not occur.
"Degradation Cost" subject to Minn. Rules 7819.1 100 means the cost to achieve a level of rest oration
as determined by the city at the time the permit is issued, not to exceed the maximum restoration
shown in plates I to 13, setforth in Minn. Rules parts 7819.9900 to 7819.9950.
"Degradation Fee" means to estimated fee established at the time of permitting by the city to recover
costs associated with the decrease in the useful life ofthe right-of-way caused by the excavation, and
which equals the degradation costs.
"City Inspector" means any person authorized by the city to carry out inspections related to the
provisions of this chapter.
"Delay Penalty" is the penalty imposed as a result of unreasonable delays in right-of-way excavation,
obstruction, patching, or restoration a established by permit.
"Emergency" means a condition that (1) poses a danger to life of health, or of a significant loss of
property; or (2) requires immediate repair or replacement of facilities in order to restore service to a
customer.
"Equipment" means any tangible asset used to install, repair, or maintain facilities in any right-of-
way.
"Excavate" means to dig into or in any way remove or physically disturb or penetrate any part of a
Page 2 of 12
~
right-of-way.
"Excavation permit" means the permit which, pursuant to this chapter, must be obtained before a
person may excavate in a right-of-way described in such permit.
"Facility or Facilities" means any tangible asset in the right-of-way required to provide Utility
Service.
"Hole" means an excavation in the right-of-way, with the excavation having length less than the
width of the pavement.
"Management Costs" means the actual costs the city incurs in managing its right-of-way, including
such cost, if incurred, as those associated with registering applicants; issuing processing, and
verifYing right-of-way permit applications, inspectingjob sites and restoration projects; maintaining,
supporting, protecting, or moving user facilities during right-of-way work; determining the adequacy
of right-of-way restoration; restoring work inadequately performed after providing notice and the
opportunity to correct the work; and revoking right-of-way permits. Management costs do not
include payment by a telecommunications right-of-way user for the use of the right-of-way, the fees
and cost oflitigation relating to the interpretation of Minnesota Session Laws 1997, Chapter 123;
Minn. Statutes Sections 237.162 or 237.163 or any ordinance enacted under those sections, or city
fees and costs related to appeals taken pursuant to Section ofthis chapter.
"Obstruct" means to place any tangible object in a right-of-way so as to hinder free and open passage
over that or any part of the right-of-way.
"Obstruction Permit" means the permit which, pursuant to this chapter, must be obtained before a
person may obstruct a right-ot-way, allowing the holder to hinder free and open passage over the
specified portion ofthat right-of-way, for the duration specified therein.
"Obstruction Permit Fee" means money paid to the city by a permittee to cover the costs as provided
in Section 1.06.
"Patch or Patching" means a method of pavement replacement that is temporary in nature. A patch
consists of (1) the compaction ofthe sub-base and aggregate base, and (2) the replacement, in kind of
the existing pavement for a minimum of two feet beyond the edges ofthe excavation in pavement is
included in the city's five-year project plan.
"Pavement" means any type of improved surface that is within the public right-of-way and that is
paved or otherwise constructed with bituminous, concrete, aggregate, or gravel.
"Permit" has the meaning given "right-of-way permit" in Minn. Statutes, section 237.162.
"Permittee" means any person to who a permit to excavate or obstruct a right-of-way has bee granted
by the city under this chapter.
Page 3 of 12
,
"Person" means an individual or entity subject to the laws and rules ofthis state, however organized,
whether public or private, whether domestic or foreign, whether for profit or nonprofit, and whether
natural, corporate, or political.
"Registrant" means any person (1) has or seeks to have its equipment or facilities located in any
right-of-way, or (2) in any way occupies or uses, or seeks to occupy or use, the right-of-way or place
its facilities or equipment in the right-of-way.
"Restore or Restoration" means the process by which an excavated right-of-way and surrounding
area, including pavement and foundation, is returned to the same condition and life expectancy that
existed before excavating.
"Restoration Costs" means the amount of money paid to the city by a permittee to achieve the level
of restoration according to plates 1 to 13 of Minnesota Public Utilities Commission Rules.
"Public Right-of-Way" means the area on, below, or above a public roadway, highway, street, cart-
way, bicycle lane and public side walk in which the city has an interest, including other dedicated
rights-of-way for travel purposes and utility easements of the city. A right-of-way does not include
the airwaves above a right-of-way with regard to cellular or other non-wire telecommunications or
broadcast service.
"Right -of-Way" means either the excavation permit or the obstruction permit, or both, depending on
the context, required by this chapter.
"Right-of-Way User" means (1) a telecommunications right-of-way user as defined by Minn.
Statutes, Sec. 237.162, Subd. 4; or (2) a person owning or controlling a facility in the right-of-way
.that is used or intended to be used for providing utility service, and who has a right under law,
franchise, or ordinance to use the public right-of-way.
"Service of Utility Service" included (1) those services provided by a public utility as defined in
Minn. Stat. 216B.02, Subd. 4 and 6; (2) services of a telecommunications right-of-way user,
including transporting of voice or date information; (3) services of a cable communications systems
as defined in Minn. Stat. Chapter 238; (4) natural gas or electric energy or telecommunications
services provided by the city; (5) service provided by a cooperative electric association organized
under Minn. Stat., Chapter 308A; and (6) water, sewer, steam, cooling or heating services.
"Supplementary Application" means an application made to excavate or obstruct more ofthe right-
of-way than allowed in, or to extend, a permit that had already been issued.
"Temporary Surface" means the compaction of sub-base and aggregate base and replacement, in
kind, of the existing pavement only to the edges of the excavation. It is temporary in nature except
when the replacement is of pavement including in the city's capital improvement plan, and is
scheduled for completion within 2 years, in which case it is considered full restoration.
Page 4 of 12
,
"Trench" means an excavation in the pavement, with the excavation having a length equal to or
greater that the width of the pavement.
"Telecommunication Right-of-Way User" means a person owning or controlling a facility in the
right-of-way, or seeking to own or control a facility in the right-of-way, that is used or is intended to
be used for transporting telecommunication or other voice or date information. For purposes ofthis
chapter, cable communication system defined and regulated under Minn. Stat. Chapter 238, and
telecommunication activities related to providing natural gas or electric energy services whether
provided by a public utility as defined in Minn. Stat. Sec. 216B.02, a municipality, an municipal gas
or power agency organized under Minn. Stat. Chapters 453 and 453A, or a cooperative electric
association organized under Minn. Stat. Chap. 308A, are not telecommunications right-of-way users
for purposes of this chapter.
Sec. 1.03.
Permit Requirement.
Subd. 1. Permit Required. Except as otherwise provided in this code, no person may obstruct or
excavate any right-of-way without first having obtained the appropriate permit from the city.
(a) Excavation Permit. An excavation permit is required to excavate that the part of the
right-of-way described in such permit and to hinder free and open passage over the specified
portion of the right-of-way, to the extent and for the duration specified therein. An
obstruction permit is not required if a person already possess a valid excavation permit for
the same proj ect.
(b) Obstruction Permit. An obstruction permit is required to hinder free and open passage
over the specified portion of right-of-way by placing equipment described therein on the
right-of-way, to the extent and for the duration specified therein. An obstruction permit is
not required if a person already possesses a valid excavation permit for the same proj eel.
Subd. 2. Permit Extensions. No person may excavate or obstruct the right-of-way beyond the date
or dates specified in the permit unless such person (i) makes a supplementary application for another
right-of-way permit before the expiration of the initial permit, and (ii) a new permit or permit
extension is granted.
Subd. 3. Delay Penalty. In accordance with Minn. Rule 7819.1000 Subd. 3 and notwithstanding
Subd. 2 of this section, the city shall establish and impose a delay penalty for unreasonable delays in
right-of-way excavation, obstruction, patching, or restoration. The delay penalty shall be established
from time to time by city council resolution. The delay ]3ellalty shall Be established from time to
time by city cOlHleil resollltioll.
Subd. 4. Permit Display. Permits issued under this chapter shall be conspicuously displayed or
otherwise available at all times at the indicated work site and shall be available for inspection by city.
Page 5 of 12
"
Sec. 1.04. Permit Applications.
Application for permit shall contain, and will be considered complete only upon compliance with the
requirements of the following provisions:
(a) Submission ofa completed permit application form, including all required attachments,
scaled drawings showing the location and area of the proposed project and the location of all
known existing and proposed facilities, and the following information:
(1) Each applicant's name, Gopher One-Call registration certificate number, address
and e-mail address if applicable, and telephone and facsimile numbers.
(2) The name, address and e-mail address, if applicable, and telephone and facsimile
numbers of a local representative. The local representative or designee shall be
available at all times. Current information regarding how to contact the local
representative in an emergency shall be provided at the time of registration,
(3) A certificate of insurance or self-insurance:
(I) Verifying that an insurance policy has been issued to the permittee by an
insurance company licensed to do business in the State of Minnesota, or a
form of self insurance acceptable to the City;
(2) Verifying that the permittee is insured against claims for personal injury,
including death, as well as claims for property damage arising out of the (i)
use and occupancy ofthe right-of-way by the permittee, its officers, agents,
employees and permittees, and (ii) placement and use of facilities and
equipment in the right-of-way by the permittee, its officers, agents,
employees and permittees, including, but not limited to, protection against
liability arising from completed operations, damage of underground facilities
and collapse of property;
(3) Naming the city as an additional insured as to whom the coverages
required herein are in force and applicable and for whom defense will be
provided as to all such coverages;
(4) Requiring that the City be notified thirty (30) days in advance of
cancellation of the policy or material modification of coverage term;
(5) Indicating comprehensive liability coverage, automobile liability
coverage, workers compensation and umbrella coverage established by the
city in amounts sufficient to protect the city and the public and to carry out
the purposes and policies ofthis chapter.
Page 6 of 12
(4) The city may require a copy of the actual insurance policies.
(5) lfthe person is a corporation, a copy of the certifica,te required to be filed under
Minn. Stat. 300.06 as recorded and certified to by the Secretary of State.
(6) A copy ofthe person's order granting a certificate of authority from the Minnesota
Public Utilities Commission or other applicable state or federal agency, where the
person is lawfully required to have such certificate from said commission or other
state or federal agency.
(b) Payment of money due the city for
(1) permit fees, estimated restoration costs and other management costs,
(2) prior obstructions or excavations;
(3) any undisputed loss, damage, or expense suffered by the city because of
applicant's prior excavations or obstructions of the right-of way or any emergency
actions taken by the city;
(4) franchise fees or other charges, if applicable.
Sec. 1.05. Issuance of permit; conditions.
Subd. 1. Permit Issuance. lfthe applicant has satisfied the requirements of this chapter, the city
shall issue a permit.
Subd. 2. Conditions. The city may impose reasonable conditions upon the issuance ofthe permit
and the performance of the applicant thereunder to protect the health, safety and welfare ofthe public
or when necessary to protect the right-of-way and its current use.
Sec. 1.06. Permit Fees. (Note: Sample fee schedules included in the appendix)
Subd. 1. Excavation Permit Fee. The city shall establish an excavation permit fee in the amount
sufficient to recover the following costs:
(a) the city management costs.
(b) degradation costs, if applicable.
Subd. 2. Obstruction Permit Fee. The city shall establish the obstruction permit fee and shall be in
an amount sufficient to recover the city management costs.
Subd 3. Payment of Permit Fees. No excavation permit or obstruction permit shall be issued
without payment of excavation or obstruction permit fees. The city may allow applicant to pay such
Page 7 of 12
fees within thirty (30) days of billing.
Subd.4. Non Refundable. Permit fee that were paid for a pemlit that the city has revoked for a
breach as stated in Sec. 1.14 are not refundable.
Subd. 5. Application to Franchises. Unless otherwise agreed to in franchise, management costs
maybe charged separately from and in addition to the franchise fees imposed on a right-of-way user
in the franchise.
Subd. 6. All permit fees shall be established consistent with the provisions of Minn. Rule 7819.100.
Sec. 1.07. Right-of-Way Patching and Restoration.
Subd. 1. Timing. The work to be done under the excavation permit, and the patching and
restoration of the right-of-way as required herein, must be completed within the dates specified in the
permit, increased by as many days as work could not de done because of circumstances beyond the
control ofthe permittee or when work was prohibited as lillseasonal or mrreasonable lUlder Sec. 1.08.
Subd. 2. Patch and Restoration. Permittee shall patch its own work. The city may choose either to
have the permittee restore the right-of-way or to restore the right-of-way itself.
(a) City Restoration. If the city restores the right-of-way, permittee shall pay the costs
thereof within thirty (30) days of billing. If following such restoration, the pavement settles
due to permittee's improper backfilling, the permittee shall pay to the city, within thirty (30)
days of billing, all costs associated with having to correct the defective work.
(b) Permittee Restoration. If the permittee restores the right-of-way itself, it shall at the
time of application for an excavation permit post a construction performance bond in
accordance with the provisions of Minn. Rules 7819.3000.
(c) Degradation Fee in Lieu of Restoration. In lieu of right-of-way itself, it shall at the
time of application for an excavation permit post a construction performance bond in
accordance with the provisions of Minn. Rules 7819.3000.
Subd. 3. Standards. The permittee shall perform patching and restoration according to the
standards and with the materials specified by the city and shall comply with Minn. Rules 7819.1100.
Subd. 4. Duty to Correct Defects. The permittee shall correct defects in patching, or restoration
performed by permittee or its agents. Permittee upon notification from the city, correct all
restoration work to the extent necessary, using the method required by the city. Said work shall be
completed within five (5) calendar days of the receipt ofthe notice from the city, not including days
during which work cannot be done because of circumstances constituting force majeure or days when
work is prohibited as unseasonal or mrreasonable under Sec. 1.08.
Subd. 5. Failure to Restore. If the permittee fails to restore the right-of-way in the manner and to
Page 8 of 12
the condition required by the city, or fails to satisfactorily and timely complete all restoration
required by the city, the city at its option may do such work. In that even the permittee shall pay t the
city, within thirty (30) days ofbilling, the cost of restoring the right-of-way. Ifpermittee fails to pay
as required, the city may exercise its rights under the construction performance bond.
Sec. 1.08 Supplementary Applications.
Subd. 1. Limitation on Area. A right-of-way is valid only for the area of the right-of-way specified
in the permit. No permittee may do any work outside the area specified in the permit, except as
provided herein. Any permittee which determines that an area greater than that specified in the
permit must be obstructed or excavated must before working in that greater area (i) make application
for a permit extension and pay any additional fees required thereby, and (ii) be granted a new permit
or permit extension.
Subd. 2. Limitation on Dates. A right-of-way permit is valid only for the dates specified in the
permit. No permittee may begin its work before the permit start date or, except as provided herein,
continue working after the end date. If a permittee does not finish the work by the permit end date, it
must apply for a new permit for the additional time it needs, and receive the new permit or an
extension of the old permit before working after the end date of the previous permit. This
supplementary application must be submitted before the permit end date.
Sec. 1.09. Denial of Permit.
The city may deny a permit for failure to meet the requirements and conditions ofthis chapter of if
the city determines that the denial is necessary to protect the health, safety of the public, and welfare
or when necessary to protect the right-of-way and its current use.
Sec. 1.10. Installation Requirements.
The excavation, backfilling, patching and restoration, and all other work performed in the right-of-
way shall be done in conformance with Minn. Rules 7819.1100 and other applicable local
requirements, in so far as they are not inconsistent with the Minn. Stat. Sec. 237.162 and 237.163.
Sec. 1.11. Inspection.
Subd.1. Notice of Completion. When the work under any permit hereunder is completed, the
permittee shall furnish a completion certificate in accordance Minn. Rules 7819.1300.
Subd. 2. Site Inspection. Permittee shall make the work-site available to city personnel and to all
others as authorized by law for inspection at all reasonable times during the execution of and upon
completion of the work.
Subd. 3. Authority of City.
Page 9 of 12
(a) At the time of inspection the city may order the immediate cessation of any work which
poses a serious threat to the life, health, safety or well being of the public.
(b) The city may issue an order to the permittee for any work which does note conform to the
terms of the permit or other applicable standards, conditions, or codes. The order shall state
the failure to correct the violation will be cause forrevocation of the permit. Within ten (10)
days after issuance of the order, the permittee shall present proof to the city that the violation
has been corrected. If such proofhas not been presented with the required time, the city may
revoke the permit pursuant to Sec. 1.14.
If the city becomes aware of an emergency regarding facilities, the city will attempt to
contact the local representative of each facility owner affected, or potentially affected, by the
emergency. In any event, the city may take whatever action it deems necessary to respond to
the emergency, the cost of which shall be borne by the person whose facilities occasioned the
emergency.
Subd. 2. Non-Emergency Situations. Except in an emergency, any person who, without first
having obtained the necessary permit, obstructs or excavates a right-of-way must subsequently obtain
a permit, and as a penalty pay double the normal fee for said permit, pay double all the other fees
required by this code, deposit with the city the fees necessary to correct any damage to the right-of-
way and comply with all of the requirements of this chapter.
Sec. 1.13. Supplementary Notification.
If the obstruction or excavation of the right-of-way begins later or ends sooner that the date given on
the permit, permittee shall notif'y the city ofthe accurate information as soon as this information is
known.
Sec. 1.14. Revocation of Permits.
Subd. 1. Substantial Breach. The city reserves its right, as provided herein, to revoke anyright-of-
way permit, without a fee refund, if there is a substantial breach ofthe terms and conditions of any
statute, ordinance, rule or regulation, or any material condition of the permit. A substantial breach
by permittee shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following:
(a) The violation of any material provision of the right-of-way permit;
(b) An evasion or attempt to evade any material provision of the right -of-way permit, or the
perpetration or attempt to perpetrate any fraud or deceit upon the city or its citizens;
(c) Any material misrepresentation offact in the application for a right-of-way permit;
(d) The failure to complete the work in a timely manner; unless a permit extension is
obtained or URless the faihire to cOlllfJlete worl: is due to reasons beyond the permittees
Page 10 of 12
control; or
(e) The failure to correct, in a timely manner, work that does not conform to a condition
indicated on an order issued pursuant to Sec. 1.07.
Subd. 2. Written Notice of Breach. If the city determines that the permittee has committed a
substantial breach of a term or condition of any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation or any condition
ofthe permit the city shall make a written demand upon the permittee to remedy such violation. The
demand shall state that continued violations may be caused for revocation of the permit. A
substantial breach, as stated above, will allow the city, at its discretion, to place additional orrevised
conditions on the permit to mitigate and remedy the breach.
Subd. 3. Response to Notice of Breach. Within twenty-four (24) hours of receiving notification of
the breach, permittee shall provide the city with a plan, acceptable to the city, that will cure the
breach. Permittee's failure to so contact the city, or the permittee's failure to submit an acceptable
plan, or permittee's failure to reasonable implement the approved plan, shall be cause for immediate
revocation ofthe permit.
Subd.4. Reimbursement of City Costs. If a permit is revoked, the permittee shall also reimburse
the city for the city's reasonable costs, including restoration costs and the costs of collection and
reasonable attorneys' fees incurred in connection with such revocation.
Sec. 1.15. Mapping Data.
Subd. 1. Information Required. Each permittee shall provide mapping information required by the
city in accordance with Minn. Rules 7819.4000 and 7819.4100.
Sec. 1.16. Location of Facilities.
Subd. 1. Placement, locations, and relocation of facilities must comply with the act, with other
applicable law, and with Minn. Rules 7819.3100, 7819.5000 and 7819.5100, to the extent the rules
do not limit authority otherwise available to cities. (Note: Cities wishing to require the under
grounding of utilities should adopt the separate under grounding ordinance included with
appendix).
Subd. 2. Corridors. The city may assign specific corridors within the right-of-way, or any particular
segment thereof as may be necessary, for each type of facilities that is or, pursuant to current
technology, the city expects wills someday be located within the right-of-way. All excavation,
obstruction, or other permits issued by the city involving the installation or replacement of facilities
shall designate the proper corridor for the facilities at issue.
Subd. 3. Limitation of Space. To protect health, safety, and welfare or when necessary to protect
the right-of-way and its current use, the city shall have the power to prohibit or city shall strive to the
extent possible to accommodate all existing and potential users of the right-of-way, but shall be
Page 11 of12
.
guided primarily by considerations of the public interest, the public's needs for the particular Utility
Service, the condition of the right-of-way, the time of year with respect to essential utilities, the
protection of existing facilities in the rigllt-of-way, and future city plans for public improvements and
development projects which have been determined to be in the public interest.
Sec. 1.17. Damage to Other Facilities.
When the city does work in the right-of-way and finds it necessary to maintain, support, or move
facilities to protect it, the city shall notify the local representative as early as is reasonably possible
and placed as required. The costs associated therewith will be billed to that facility owner and must
be paid within thirty (30) days from the date of billing. Each facility owner shall be responsible for
the cost of repairing any facilities in the right-of-way which it or its facilities damages. Each facility
owner shall be responsible for the cost of repairing any damage to the facilities of another caused
during the city's response to an emergency occasioned by that owner's facilities.
Sec. LIS. Right-of-Way Vacation.
Subd. 1. Reservation of Right. If the city vacates a right-of-way which contains facilities, the
owner's rights in the vacated right-of-way are governed by Minn. Rules 7819.3200.
Sec. 1.19. Indemnification and Liability.
By applying for an accepting a permit under this chapter, a permittee agrees to defend and indemnify
the city in accordance with the provisions of Minn. Rules 7819.1250.
Sec. 1.20 Abandoned Facilities.
Snbd.3. Removal of Abandoned Facilities. Any person who has abandoned facilities in any right-
of-way shall remove them from that right-ot~way if required in conjunction with other right-of-way
repair, excavation, or construction, unless this requirement is waived by the city.
Sec. 1.21. Appeal.
a) A rigllt-of-way user that: (1) has been denied registration; (2) has been denied a pennit; (3)
has had permit revoked; or (4) believes that the fees imposed are invalid, may have the
denial, revocation, or fee imposition reviewed, upon written request, by the city council. The
city council shall act on a timely written request at its next regularly scheduled meeting. A
decision by the city council affirming the denial, revocation, or fee imposition will be writing
and supported by written findings establishing the reasonableness of the decision.
Sec. 1.22. Reservation of Regnlatory and Police Powers.
A permittee's rights are subject to the regulatory and police powers ofthe city to adopt and enforce
general ordinances necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public.
Page 12 of 12
I'
RIGHT-OF-WAY FEES & CHARGES
Cost Estimates for Fees
L Excavation Permit Fees
a) Hole
Administration 0.25 x 40 = $10.00
Verification
1) Plan Review 0.50 x 45 = 22.50
2) Inspection
a) Location before work 0.50 x 30 15.00
b) Compliance during work 0.50 x 30 15.00
c) Completion after work 0.50 x 30 15.00
d) Re-inspection 0.25 x 40 = 10.00
3) Testing Result Review
a) Compaction 0.083 x 40 = 3.33
b) Material 0.083 x 40 3.33
4) Mapping
a) Review data 0.25 x 45 = 11.25
b) Transfer to AutoCAD 0.25 x 45 = 11.25
c) Insert to overlay to tie in 0.25 x 45 = 11.25
Total Cost $127.91
Proposed Fee $125.00
B) Emergency Hole
Administration 0.25 x 40 $10.00
Inspection after completion 1.50 x 30 = 45.00
Total Cost $55.00
Proposed Fee $55.00
C) Trench
Administration 0.25 x 40 $10.00
Verification
1) Plan Review 1.50 x 45 67.50
2) Inspection
'\
a) Location before work 0,50 x 30 = 15.00
b) Compliance during work LSO x 30 45,00
c) Completion after work LSO x 30 45.00
d) Re-inspection 0.75 x 40 = 30.00
3) Testing Result Review
a) Compaction 0.083 x 40 3.33
b) Material 0.083 x 40 = 3.33
4) Mapping
a) Review data 0.50 x 45 = 22.25
b) Transfer to city mapping 0.25 x 45 11.25
(AutoCAD)
Total Cost $275.40
The average trench is 330 lin, ft past the width of a hole. Therefore,
the number of 100 lin. ft. (or portion thereof) units is 4. The cost per
100 lin. ft. unit is 275.40/4 = $68.85/100' unit.
Proposed Fees
= $70.00/100 lin, ft.
(plus Hole Fee)
2. Obstruction Permit Fee
A) Administration 0.25 x 40 = $10.00
B) Recording 0.25 x 40 $10.00
C) Review 0.75 x 45 $33.75
Minimum Base Coat $53.75
Proposed Base Fee
Plus additional fee based on length
Inspection
I) Compliance during work
2) Completion after
1.50 x
0.25 x
Additional fee on assumed 1000 !in. ft permit
Additional cost per lineal foot - $52.50/1000
Proposed fee = $50.00 plus 0.05 lin. ft.
3. Permit Extension Fee
A) Administration
$10.00
B) Recording
$ 3.33
C) Review
$40.00
0.25 x
0.083 x
1.0 x
Total Cost
$53.33
Proposed Fee
$55.00
4. Delav Penalty
A) Administration
$60.00
1.50 x
30
30
=
=
=
40
40
40
40
For up to 3 days of non-completion and non-prior notice before
specified completion date.
After 3 days, an additional charge of $1 O.OO/day will be levied.
Total Penalty Charge
$60.00
(Up to 3 days late)
Each day late over 3 days
$60.00
Plus 10.00/day
1- __ _
$50.00
$45.00
$ 7.50
$52.50
0.0525
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
5. Dee:radation Fee Formula
This formula covers degradation for depreciation caused by intrusion into
the right-of-way. The depreciation applies to the original surface of the
right-of-way and to the overlays and seal-coats applied to the surface. The
formula includes life expectancy schedules for each and has estimated cost
per square yard based on the right-of-way surface required for different
levels of traffic. This formula creates a degradation fee which is
determined by the cost per square yard for street, overlay, and seal-coat,
multiplied by the depreciation schedule, multiplied by the area of the street
patch.
Degradation Fee: (Cost per Square Yard for Street, Overlay, and Seal-coat
x Depreciation Schedule Rates) x Area of Street Patch = Degradation Fee.
"
COUNCIL MEETING
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2002
6:30 P.M.
L CALL TO ORDER
1. Roll Call
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
m. A W ARDS/PRESENTATIONS/APPEARANCES
1. Mr. Doug Fischer, P.E., (Anoka County Engineer) - County Road 14
2. Mr. John Thill, Parade & Fireworks - (Fete des Lacs) Update
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Proposed Ordinance #13 - Possession, Sale and Consumption of
Intoxicating Liquor, Wine and 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor Within the City of
Centerville
V. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. Pheasant Marsh Phase IT Bond Sale - Mr. George Eilertson, (Juran &
Moody) Resolution #02-033, Resolution #02-034, Resolution #02-035 &
Financial Advisory Service Agreement
2. Rescheduling of December 25,2002 Council Meeting
3. 2003 Tax Levy - Resolution #02-036
VL CONSENT AGENDA
1. City of Centerville August 15, 2002 through August 28, 2002 Claims
2. Centennial Fire District August 21, 2002 Oaims
3. Pay Estimate #1- Earth Burners (County Road 14 Water Main Extension)
VIL APPROVAL OF COUNCIL l\'IlNUTES
1. August 14,2002 Council Minutes
2. August 12, 2002 Council Work Session Minutes
3. August 19,2002 Council Work Session Minutes
VIII. ANNOUNCEMENTS/UPDATES
1. 1540 Peltier Lake Drive (Moore-SykesIHoeft)
IX. ADJOURNMENT
.
.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF ANOKA
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
ORDINANCE #13
AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE POSSESSION, SALE, AND CONSUMPTION OF
INTOXICATING LIQUOR, WINE, AND 3.2 PERCENT MALT LIQUOR WITHIN THE
CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA DOES HEREBY
REPEAL ORDINANCE #'S 11, 12 & 21 AND AMENDS ORDINANCE #13:
Section 1. Adoption of State Law by Reference.
The provisions of M.S. Chapter 340A, as they may be amended from time to time, with
reference to the definitions, terms, conditions of operation, restrictions on consumption,
provisions relating to sales, hours of sale, and all other matters pertaining to the retail
sale, distribution, and consumption of intoxicating liquor and 3.2 percent malt liquor are
hereby adopted by reference and are made a part of this ordinance as if set out in full.
It is the intention of the City Council that all future amendments to M.S. Chapter 340A
are hereby adopted by reference or referenced as if they had been in existence at the
time this ordinance is adopted.
Section 2. City may be more Restrictive than State Law.
The Council is authorized by the provisions of M.S. 340A.509, as it may be amended
from time to time, to impose, and has imposed in this ordinance, additional restrictions
on the sale and possession of alcoholic beverages within its limits beyond those
contained in M.S. Chapter 340A, as it may be amended from time to time.
Section 3. Definitions.
In addition to the definitions contained in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 340A.1 01, as it
may be amended from time to time, the following terms are defined for purposes of this
ordinance:
Display - The term "Display" means the keeping, storing, or permitting to be kept or
stored of an alcoholic beverage which has been poured, dispensed or has had its
package seal broken on, in, or at any table, booth, bar or other area of a licensed
premises accessible to the general public, except when the alcoholic beverage is stored
in a normal storage area during non-sale hours.
Interest - The term "Interest" as used in this ordinance includes any pecuniary interest
in the ownership, operation, management or profits of a liquor establishment, but does
not include: bona fide loans; bona fide fixed sum rental agreements; bona fide open
accounts or other obligations held with or without security arising out of the ordinary and
Page 1 of 18
.
regular course of business or selling or leasing merchandise, fixtures or supplies to
such establishment; or any interest of 5 percent or less in any corporation holding a City
liquor license. A person who receives monies, from time to time, directly or indirectly
from a licensee in the absence of a bona fide consideration therefor and excluding bona
fide gifts or donations, shall be deemed to have a pecuniary interest in such retail
license. In determining "bona fide," the reasonable value of the goods or things received
as consideration for the payment of the licensee and all other facts reasonably tending
to prove or disprove the existence of any purposeful scheme or arrangement to evade
any prohibitions under this ordinance shall be considered.
Licensed Premises. The term "Licensed Premises" is the premises described in the
approved license application. In the case of a restaurant, club, or exclusive liquor store
licensed for on-sales of alcoholic beverages and located on a golf course, "licensed
premises" means the entire golf course except for areas where motor vehicles are
regularly parked or operated.
Operating Manager. The term "Operating Manager" as used in this ordinance means
a person designated by the license holder who works at the licensed premises and is in
charge of day-to-day liquor sales.
Properly Designated Officer . The term "Properly Designated Officer" means and
includes (i) the City Fire Inspector or Fire Chief; (ii) the City Building Official, Building
Inspector, or Administrator; and (iii) the Health Inspectors employed by Anoka County or
the State of Minnesota acting in the course of the scope of their employment.
Underage Person . The term "Underage Person" means a person who is under the
legal drinking age as provided by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 340A.
Liquor - As used in this ordinance, without modification by the words "intoxicating" or
3.2 percent malt" includes both intoxicating liquor and 3.2 percent malt liquor.
Restaurant - Restaurant means an eating facility, other than a hotel, under the control
of a single proprietor or manager, where meals are regularly prepared on the premises,
where full waitress/waiter table service is provided, where a customer orders food from
printed menus and where the main food course is served and consumed while seated at
a single location. An establishment which serves prepackaged food that receives heat
treatment and is served in the package or frozen pizza that is heated and served, shall
be considered to be a restaurant for the purposes of this chapter as long as it is
currently licensed as such by Anoka County.
Section 4. Nuditv on the Premises of Licensed Establishments is Prohibited.
A. The City Council finds that it is in the best interests of both public
health, safety and general welfare of the people of the city that
nudity is prohibited as provided in this section on the premises of
any establishment licensed under this ordinance. This is to protect
and assist the owner, operators, and employees of the
establishment, as well as patrons and the public in general, from
harm stemming from the physical immediacy and combination of
Page 2 of 18
alcohol, nudity, and sex. The Council especially intends to prevent
any subliminal endorsement of sexual harassment or activities
likely to lead to the possibility of various criminal conduct, including
prostitution, sexual assault, and disorderly conduct. The Council
also finds that the prohibition of nudity on the premises of any
establishment licensed under this ordinance, as set forth in this
section, reflects the prevailing community standards of the city.
B. It is unlawful for any licensee to permit or allow any person or
persons on the licensed premises when the person does not have
their buttocks, anus, genitals and female breasts covered with a
non-transparent material. It is unlawful for any person to be on the
licensed premises when the person does not have their buttocks,
anus, genitals and female breasts covered with a non-transparent
material. This paragraph shall also apply to non-alcohol under age
events on the licensed premises.
C. It is unlawful for any licensee to permit or allow any male and/or
female swim suit competition on the licensed premises during any
non alcohol under age event.
D. A violation of this section is a misdemeanor punishable as provided
by law, and is justification for revocation or suspension of any
liquor, wine, or 3.2 percent malt liquor license or the imposition of a
civil penalty under the provisions of this ordinance.
Section 5. Consumption in Public Places.
Except as otherwise provided for herein, no person shall consume intoxicating liquor or
3.2 percent malt liquor in a public park, on any public street, sidewalk, trail, parking lot
or alley, or in any public place other than on the premises of an establishment licensed
under this ordinance, in a municipal liquor dispensary if one exists in the city, or where
the consumption and display of liquor is lawfully permitted.
Section 6.
This Section has been left blank for future use.
Section 7. Term and Expiration of Licenses.
No person, except as otherwise provided in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 340A shall
directly or indirectly deal in, sell, keep for sale or deliver any intoxicating liquor, 3.2
percent malt liquor, or wine as part of a commercial transaction without first having
received a license to do so as provided in this ordinance; nor shall any private club or
public place, directly or indirectly, or upon any pretense or by any device, allow the
consumption or display of intoxicating liquor or serve any liquid for the purpose of
mixing with intoxicating liquor without first obtaining a license from the City as provided
in this ordinance.
Page 3 of 18
Each license shall be issued for a maximum period of one year. All licenses except
temporary licenses, shall expire on December 31 of each year unless another date is
provided by ordinance. All licenses shall expire on the same date. Temporary licenses
expire according to their terms.
Section 8. Kinds of Liauor License.
The following types of licenses may be issued up to the number specified in this
ordinance:
A. On-Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License
On-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses which may be issued only
to restaurants, hotels, clubs, bowling centers and establishments
used exclusively for the sale of 3.2 percent malt liquor with the
incidental sale of tobacco and soft drinks.
B. Off-Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License
C. Temporary 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License
Temporary 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses which may be issued
only to a club, charitable, religious, or nonprofit organization.
D. Off-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License
Off-sale intoxicating liquor licenses, which may be issued only to
exclusive liquor stores or drug stores that have an off-sale license
which was first issued on or before May 1, 1994. The fee for an off-
sale intoxicating liquor license established by the Council under
Section 9 shall be set by annual Fee Schedule adopted by Council
which may be permitted by M.S. 340A.408, subd. 3, as it may be
amended from time to time.
E. On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License
On-sale intoxicating liquor licenses, which may be issued to the
following establishments as defined in M.S. 340A.1 01, as it may be
amended from time to time, and this ordinance: hotels, restaurants,
bowling centers, clubs, or congressionally chartered veterans
organizations and exclusive liquor stores. Club licenses may be
issued only with the approval of the Commissioner of Public Safety.
The fee for club licenses established by the Council under Section
9 of this ordinance, shall not exceed the amounts provided for in
M.S. 340A.408, subd. 2(b), as it may be amended from time to
time.
The Council may in its sound discretion authorize a retail on-sale
licensee to dispense intoxicating liquor off the licensed premises at
Page 4 of 18
a community festival held within the city under the provisions of
M.S.340.404, subd. 4b, as it may be amended from time to time.
The Council may in its sound discretion authorize a retail on-sale
licensee to dispense intoxicating liquor off the licensed premises at
any convention, banquet, conference, meeting, or social affair
conducted on the premises of a sports, convention or cultural
. facility owned by the city, under the provisions of M.S.340A04,
subd. 4a, as it may be amended from time to time.
F. On-Sale Sunday Liquor License
On-sale Sunday liquor licenses which may be issued only after
authorization to do so by voter approval at a general or special
election as provided by M.S. 340A.504, subd. 3, as it may be
amended from time to time. Sale of alcoholic beverages in
conjunction with the sale of food on Sunday begins at 10:00 a.m. if
the applicant is in conformance with the Minnesota Clean Air Act.
G. Combination On-Sale I Off-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License
This license may be issued if the City has a population less than
10,000.
H. On-Sale Temporary Intoxicating Liquor License
Temporary on-sale intoxicating liquor licenses, with the approval of
the City Council, which may be issued only in connection with a
social event sponsored by a club, charitable, religious, or other
nonprofit corporation that has existed for at least three years. No
license shall be for longer than four consecutive days, and the City
shall issue no more than 24 days worth of temporary licenses to
anyone organization in one calendar year.
I. On-Sale Wine License
On-sale wine licenses which may be issued with the approval of the
Commissioner of Public Safety to: restaurants having facilities for
seating at least 25 people at one time and meet the criteria of M.S.
340A.404, subd. 5, as it may be amended from time to time, and
which meet the definition of a restaurant in Section 3 of this
ordinance; and to licensed bed and breakfast facilities which meet
the criteria in M.S.340A.401, subd. 1 as it may be amended from
time to time. The fee for an on-sale wine license established by the
Council under the provisions of Section 9 of this ordinance shall not
exceed one-half of the license fee charged for an on-sale
intoxicating liquor license. The holder of an on-sale wine license
who also holds an on-sale 32 percent malt liquor license is
Page 5 of 18
authorized to sell malt liquor with a content over 3.2 percent (strong
beer) without an additional license.
Section 9. License Fees: Pro Rata; Payment: Refunds Refail License Fees.
Annual Fees. The annual fees for all licenses and temporary licenses are set forth by
Council Resolution.
A. No license or other fee established by the city shall exceed any limit
established by M.S.340A, as it may be amended from time to time,
for a liquor license.
B. The Council may establish from time to time by ordinance or
resolution the fee for any of the liquor licenses it is authorized to
issue. The license fee may not exceed the cost of issuing the
license and other costs directly related to the enforcement of the
liquor laws and this ordinance. No liquor license fee shall be
increased without providing mailed notice of a hearing on the
proposed increase to all affected licensees at least 30 days before
the hearing.
C. Prorated Fees. The fee for all licenses, except temporary licenses,
granted after the commencement of the license year shall be
prorated on a quarterly basis.
D. Payment. All license fees shall be paid in full at the time the
application is filed with the city. If the application is denied, the
license fee shall be returned to the applicant except for any costs
incurred by the City for investigation of the application/applicant.
E. Refunds. License fees shall be refunded if an application for a
license is denied by the City Council, except where rejection is for a
willful misstatement in the license application. No part of the fee
paid for any issued license shall be refunded except as authorized
under Minnesota Statutes Section 340A.408, subd. 5, upon
application to the City Clerk within 20 days of the happening of any
event provided under Minnesota Statutes Section 340A.408,
subdivision 5, and except as provided in Section 9 D.
Section 10. Council Discretion to Grant or Deny a License.
The Council in its sound discretion may either grant or deny the application for any
license or for the transfer or renewal of any license. No applicant has a right to a
license under this ordinance.
Section 11. Application for License.
A. Form. Every application for a license issued under this ordinance
shall be on a form provided by the city. Every application shall
Page 6 of 18
state the name of the applicant, the applicant's age, with references
as the Council may require, the type of license applied for, the
business in connection with which the proposed license will operate
and its location, a description of the premises, whether the
applicant is owner and operator of the business, how long the
applicant has been in that business at that place, and other
information as the Council may require from time to time. An
application for an on-sale intoxicating liquor license shall be in the
form prescribed by the Commissioner of Public Safety and shall
also contain the information required in this section. The form shall
be verified and filed with the city. No person shall make a false
statement in an application.
B. Financial Responsibility. Prior to the issuance of any license'
under this ordinance, the applicant shall demonstrate proof of
financial responsibility as defined in M.S.340AA09, as it may be
amended from time to time, with regard to liability under
M.S.340A.801, as it may be amended from time to time. This proof
will be filed with the City and Commissioner of Public Safety. Any
liability insurance policy filed as proof of financial responsibility
under this section shall conform to M.S. 340A.409, as it may be
amended from time to time. Operation of a business which is
required to be licensed by this ordinance without having on file with
the city at all times proof of financial responsibility to include liquor
liability/dram shop, general liability, and workers compensation
insurance coverage is a cause for revocation of the license.
1. Liquor Liability/Dramshop. Proof of financial responsibility
shall be given by filing one of the following:
a. A certificate that there is in effect an annual
aggregate insurance policy for dram shop
insurance of not less than statutory
requirements per policy year to cover each
person, each occurrence, property damage
each occurrence, Joss of means of support per
person, loss of means of support each
occurrence, and policy aggregate; or
2. A certificate of the State Treasurer that the licensee has
deposited with him $100,000 in cash or securities which may
legally be purchased by savings banks or trust funds having
a market value of $100,000.
C. General Liability. Proof of financial responsibility shall be given by
filing a certificate that there is in effect for the license period an
insurance policy or pool providing at least $50,000 of coverage
because of bodily injury to anyone person in anyone occurrence,
$100,000 because of bodily injury to two or more persons in any
Page 7 of 18
one occurrence, $10,000 because of injury to or destruction of
property of others in anyone occurrence, $50,000 for loss of
means of support of anyone person in anyone occurrence, and
$100,000 for loss of means of support of two or more persons in
anyone occurrence.
D. Workers' Compensation Insurance. The policy limits for workers'
compensation insurance shall be as provided for by state law.
E. Additional Requirements. The liability insurance required by this
section must provide that it may not be canceled for any cause by
either the insured or the insurer unless the canceling party has first
given ten days' notice in writing to the City of intent to cancel the
policy.
All corporations, partnerships, and associations must designate an Operating Manager.
The Operating Manager must be a person designated by the licensed premises who is
in charge of day-to-day liquor sales.
Execution of Application
If the application is by an individual, it shall be signed and sworn to by such person; if by
a corporation, by an officer thereof; if by a partnership, by one of the partners; if by an
incorporated association, by the operating officer or managing officer thereof. If the
applicant is a partnership, the application. license, and insurance policy shall be made
and issued in the name of all partners. It shall be unlawful to make any false statement
in an application. Falsification is a cause for revocation or denial of the license.
Section 12. Description of Premises.
The application shall specifically describe the compact and contiguous premises within
which liquor may be dispensed and consumed. Except as for otherwise provided for
herein.
Section 13. Applications For Renewal.
At least 90 days before a license issued under this ordinance is to be renewed. an
application for renewal shall be filed with the city. The decision whether or not to renew
a license rests with the sound discretion of the Council. No licensee has a right to have
the license renewed.
The general procedure for renewal is as follows:
A. The city will mail all application forms by September 30 with a letter
stating the timeframes and requirements for completion of the
application process. The form used will be the Minnesota
Department of Public Safety Renewal of Liquor, Wine of Club
License (form PS9093-98 or the most current form used by Alcohol
and Gambling Enforcement).
Page 8 of 18
B. Licensees will return the required forms to the city by October 30.
C. Applicants are responsible to verify information on citations and
violations with the Chief of Police prior to October 30 and
submission to the city.
D. The Council shall place on the agenda each year at the first
scheduled Council meeting in November to review and hear
testimony by any interested individual or party concerning the
renewal of liquor licenses. This process allows for appeal of a
denied license and the required approval from the state prior to the
December 31 license expiration date.
E. Approvals are contingent upon licensee proof of required payment
of insurances, property taxes, and city utility bills.
F. The application shall specifically describe the compact and
contiguous premises within which liquor may be dispensed and
consumed. Except as for otherwise provided for herein.
G. The Chief of Police is requested to provide Council by October 15
each year, a summary of officer calls and the nature of those calls
to licensed establishments. The Chief of Police is also requested to
report a graphical depiction of alcohol related issues such as
citations and arrests for driving under the influence or alcohol
related infractions for the previous 3 year period.
H. The City Administrator shall verify all information prior to issuing a
license.
Section 14. Transfer of License.
No license issued under this ordinance may be transferred without the approval of the
Council. Any transfer of stock of a corporate licensee is deemed to be a transfer of the
license, and a transfer of stock without prior Council approval is a ground for revocation
of the license. An application to transfer a license shall be treated the same as an
application for a new license, and all of the provisions of this ordinance applying to
applications for a license shall apply.
Death of Licensee
In the event of the death of a person holding a license, the personal representative of
that person shall be allowed to continue to operate the business within the terms of the
license for a period not to exceed 180 days after the death of the licensee.
Section 15. InvestiQation.
A. Preliminary background investigation. On an initial application for a
license, on an application for transfer of a license and, in the sound
Page 9 of 18
discretion of the Council that it is in the public interest to do so, on
an application for renewal of a license, the city shall conduct a
preliminary background investigation of the applicant or it may
contract with the Commissioner of Public Safety for the
investigation. The applicant shall pay with the application an
investigation fee of $500 which shall be in addition to any license
fee. If the cost of the preliminary investigation is less than $500,
the unused balance shall be returned to the applicant. The results
of the preliminary investigation shall be sent to the Commissioner of
Public Safety if the application is for an on-sale intoxicating liquor
license or an on-sale wine license.
B. Comprehensive background investigation. If the results of the
preliminary investigation warrant, in the sound discretion of Council,
a comprehensive background investigation, the Council may either
conduct the investigation itself or contract with the Commissioner of
Public Safety for the investigation. The investigation fee for this
comprehensive background and financial investigation to be paid
by the applicant shall be $500, less any amount paid for the initial
investigation if the investigation is to be conducted within the state,
and $10,000, less any amount paid for the initial investigation, in
the investigation is required outside the state. The unused balance
of the fee shall be returned to the applicant whether or not the
application is denied. The fee shall be paid in advance of any
investigation and the amount actually expended on the
investigation shall not be refundable in the event the application is
denied. The results of the comprehensive investigation shall be
sent to the Commissioner of Public Safety if the application is for an
on-sale intoxicating liquor license or an on-sale wine license.
Section 16. Hearing and Issuance.
The Council shall investigate all facts set out in the application and not investigated in
the preliminary or comprehensive background investigations. Opportunity shall be
given to any person to be heard for or against the granting of the license at the first
scheduled Council meeting in November for renewals or at the time of review for a new
application. After the investigation and hearing, the Council in its sound discretion may
grant or deny the application. No license shall become effective until the proof of
financial security has been approved by the Commissioner of Public Safety.
Should the City Council deny the applicant's request for a license due, partially or solely,
to the applicant's prior conviction of a crime, the City Council shall notify the applicant of
the grounds and reasons for the denial; the applicable complaint and grievance
procedure as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 364.06; the earliest date the
applicant may reapply for a license; and that all competent evidence of rehabilitation will
be considered upon reapplication.
Section 17. Restrictions on Issuance.
Page 10 of 18
A. Each license shall be issued only to the applicant for the premises
described in the application.
B. No license shall be granted or renewed for operation on any
premises on which taxes, assessments, utility charges, service
charges or other financial claims of the city are delinquent and
unpaid.
C. No license shall be issued for any place or business ineligible for a
license under state law.
D. No new license shall be granted within 500 feet of any school or
church. The distance is to be measured from the closest side of
the church or school to the closest side of the structure on the
premises within which liquor is to be sold. The provisions of this
paragraph shall not apply to any existing license existing on the
effective date of this ordinance or to the renewal of an existing
license as long as the establishment is in compliance with
applicable zoning regulations.
Section 18. Conditions of License.
Every licensee is responsible for the conduct of the place of business. The act of an
employee on the licensed premises is deemed the act of the licensee as well, and the
licensee shall be liable to all penalties provided by this ordinance equally with the
employee.
The failure of the licensee to meet anyone of the conditions of the license specified
below shall result in suspension of the license until the condition is met.
A. Every licensee shall allow any peace officer or health officer to
conduct compliance checks.
B. No on-sale establishment shall display liquor to the public during
the hours when the sale of liquor is prohibited.
C. Compliance with financial responsibility requirements of state law
and this ordinance is a continuing condition of any license.
Section 19. Hours and Davs of Sale.
A. The hours of operation and days of sale shall be as those set by
M.S. 340A.504, as it may be amended from time to time.
B. No person shall consume nor shall anyon-sale licensee permit any
consumption of intoxicating liquor or 3.2 percent malt liquor in an
on-sale licensed premises more than 30 minutes after the time
when a sale can legally occur.
Page 11 of 18
C. No on-sale licensee shall permit any glass, bottle, or other
container containing intoxicating liquor or 3.2 percent malt liquor to
remain upon any table, bar, stool or other plac~ where customers
are served, more than 30 minutes after the time when a sale can
legally occur.
D. No person other than the licensee and any employee shall remain
on the on-sale licensed premises more than 30 minutes after the
time when a sale can legally occur.
E. Any violation of any condition of this section may be grounds for
revocation of suspension of the license.
Section 20. Restrictions InvolvinQ UnderaQe Persons.
A. No licensee, his agent, or employee shall serve or dispense upon
the licensed premises any intoxicating or 3.2 percent malt liquor to
a person under the legal drinking age; nor shall such licensee, or
his agent or employee, permit any such person to be furnished or
allowed to consume any such liquors on the licensed premises; nor
shall such licensee, his agent, or employee, permit any such
person to be delivered any such liquors.
B. No person under the legal drinking age shall enter a licensed
premises for the purpose of purchasing or consuming any alcoholic
beverage:
C. No person under the legal drinking age shall consume or receive
delivery of intoxicating or 3.2 percent malt liquor.
D. No person under the legal drinking age shall possess any
intoxicating or 3.2 percent malt liquor. Possession of an alcoholic
beverage by a person under the legal drinking age at a place other
than the household of the parent or guardian is prima facie
evidence of intent to consume it at a place other than the
household of the person's parent or guardian.
E. Misrepresenting Age. No underage person shall misrepresent the
person's age for the purpose of obtaining intoxicating liquor or 3.2
percent malt liquor, nor shall the person enter any premises
licensed for the retail sale of intoxicating liquor or 3.2 percent malt
liquor for the purposes of purchasing or having served or delivered
any alcoholic beverage. Nor shall any such person purchase,
attempt to purchase, consume, or have another person purchase
for the underage person any intoxicating liquor or 3.2 percent malt
liquor.
F. Identification Requirements
Page 12 of 18
1. Identification Required.
Any person shall, upon demand of the licensee, his
employee, or agent, produce and permit to be
examined one of the forms of identification provided
under Minnesota Statutes Section 340A.503, subd. 6.
2. Prima Facie Evidence.
In every prosecution for a violation of the provisions of
this section relating to the sale or furnishing of
intoxicating liquor or 3.2 percent malt liquor
beverages to underage persons and in every
proceeding before the Council with respect thereto,
the fact that the uunderage person involved has
obtained and presented to the licensee, his employee
or agent, a driver's license, passport or identification
card from which it appears that said person was not
an underage person and was regularly issued such
identification card, shall be prima facie evidence that
the licensee, his agent or employee is not guilty of a
violation of such a provision and shall be conclusive
evidence that a violation, if one has occurred, was not
willful or intentional.
Section 21.
This Section has been left blank for future use.
Section 22. Revocation or Suspension of License.
The Council may suspend or revoke any license for the sale of intoxicating or 3.2
percent malt liquor for any of the following reasons:
A. False or misleading statements made on a license application or
renewal, or failure to abide by the commitments, promises or
representations made to the City Council.
B. Violation of any special conditions under which the license was
granted, including, but not limited to, the timely payment of real
estate taxes, and all other charges.
C. Violation of any Federal, State, or local law regulating the sale of
intoxicating liquor, 3.2 percent malt liquor, or controlled substance.
D. Creation of a nuisance on the premises or in the surrounding area.
E. That the licensee suffered or permitted illegal acts upon the
licensed premises or on property owned or controlled by the
licensee adjacent to the licensed premises, unrelated to the sale of
intoxicating liquor or 3.2 percent malt liquor.
Page 13 of 18
F. Expiration or cancellation of any required insurance, or failure to
notify the City within a reasonable time of changes in the term of
the insurance or the carriers.
Section 23. Hearina Notice For Revocation or Suspension of License.
Revocation or suspension of a license by the City Council shall be preceded by public
hearing conducted in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Section 14.57 to 14.70. The
City Council may appoint a hearing examiner or may conduct a hearing itself. The
hearing notice shall be given at least 10 days prior to the hearing, include notice of the
time and place of the hearing, and state the nature of the charges against the licensee.
Section 24. Prohibited Conditions.
A. Prostitution. No licensee shall knowingly permit the licensed
premises or any room in those premises or any adjoining building
directly under the licensee's control to be used by prostitutes.
B. Controlled Substances. No licensee shall knowingly permit the
sale, possession or consumption of controlled substances on the
licensed premises in violation of state law.
C. Gambling. Gambling and gambling devices, with the exception of
licensed charitable gambling organizations, are not permitted on
licensed premises. State lottery tickets may be purchased and sold
within licensed premises as authorized by the director of the state
lottery.
Section 25. Inactive License.
The City Council may revoke the intoxicating liquor or 3.2 percent malt liquor license of
any establishment granted a license that is not under construction and exhibiting
satisfactory progress toward completion within 6 months from its issuance, or any
establishment that ceases operation for a period of 6 months. A hearing shall be held to
determine what progress has been made toward opening or reopening the
establishment and, if satisfactory progress is not demonstrated, the Council may revoke
the license.
Section 26. Buildina Chanqes.
Proposed enlargement or substantial alteration which changes the character of the
establishment, or extension of premises previously licensed shall be reported to the City
Clerk at or before the time application is made for a building permit for any such
change. The enlargement, substantial alteration or extension shall not be allowed
unless the Council approves an amendment to the license.
Section 27. Public Character of liquor Sales.
Page 14 of 18
No sale of liquor shall be made to or in guest rooms of hotels unless:
A. the rules of such hotel provide for the service ,of meals in guest
rooms;
B. the sale of such liquor is made in the manner on-sales are required
to be made;
C. such sale accompanies and is incidental to the regular service of
meals to guests therein;
D. the rules of such hotel and the description, location, and number of
such guest rooms are fully set out in the application for the liquor
license.
Section 28. Presumptive Civil Penalties.
A. Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to establish a standard by
which the City Council determines the length of license
suspensions and the propriety of revocations, and shall apply to all
premises licensed under this ordinance. These penalties are
presumed to be appropriate for every case; however, the Council
may deviate in an individual case where the Council finds that there
exist substantial reasons making it more appropriate to deviate,
such as, but not limited to, a licensee's efforts in combination with
the State or City to prevent the sale of alcohol to minors. When
deviating from these standards, the Council will provide written
findings that support the penalty selected.
B. Minimum Penalties for Violations. The minimum penalties for
convictions or violations must be presumed as follows (unless
specified, numbers below indicate consecutive days' suspension):
The following violations require revocation of the license on the first
violation:
· Commission and/or of a felony related to the licensed
activity.
· Sale of alcoholic beverages while license is under
suspension.
· Sale of intoxicating liquor where only license is for 3.2
percent malt liquor.
Any violation not listed in the previous information would be heard
by the Council and they would review all information and
circumstances and determine a penalty with the maximum fine of
$2,000 and/or 50-day suspension or determine the license should
be revoked.
Page 15 of 18
License holders have the right to request a hearing before the City
Council if not in agreement with the presumptive penalty. The City
Administrator also has the right to request a hearing before the
Council if he/she/they believe there exists substantial reason
making it appropriate to deviate from the presumptive penalty. If the
City Administrator and licensee agree on the presumptive penalty,
these will be reported to the City Council in a staff report.
C. Multiple Violations. At a licensee's first appearance before the
Council, the Council must act upon all of the violations that have
been alleged in the notice sent to the licensee. The Council in that
case must consider the presumptive penalty for each violation
under the first appearance column in subsection (B) above. The
occurrence of multiple violations is grounds for deviation from the
presumed penalties in the Council's discretion.
D. Subsequent Violations. Violations occurring after the notice of
hearing has been mailed, but prior to the hearing, must be treated
as a separate violation and dealt with as a second appearance
before the Council, unless the City Administrator and licensee
agree in writing to add the violation to the first appearance. The
same procedure applies to a second, third, or fourth appearance
before the Council.
E. Subsequent Appearances. Upon a second, third, or fourth
appearance before the council by the same licensee, the Council
may impose the presumptive penalty for the violation or violations
giving rise to the subsequent appearance without regard to the
particular violation or violations that were the subject of the first or
prior appearance. However, the Council may consider the amount
of time elapsed between appearances as a basis for deviating from
the presumptive penalty imposed by this Section.
F. Computation of Violations. Multiple violations are computed by
checking the time period of the three years immediately prior to the
date of the most current violation.
G. Other Penalties. Nothing in this Section shall restrict or limit the
authority of the council to suspend up to sixty (60) days, revoke the
license, impose a civil fine not to exceed two thousand dollars
($2,000.00), to impose conditions, or take any other action in
accordance with law; provided, that the license holder has been
afforded an opportunity for a hearing in the manner provided in this
Chapter.
H. Notification. If a licensed establishment is cited for a violation of
this ordinance, the Chief of Police must provide a letter of
notification to the licensee and the City Council through the City
Administrator within 30 days after the violation occurred.
Page 16 of 18
Regular Penalty Grid:
Type of
License
On-sale
Intoxicating
Li uor
Off-sale
Intoxicating
Liquor
On-sale
Beer and
Wine
Off-sale
3.2 Malt
First
Violation
$500 and
5 Days
Sus ens ion
$500 and
3 Days
Suspension
$500 and
5 Days
Sus ension
$1,000 and
10 Days
Sus ension
Second
Violation
$1,000 and
10 Days
Sus ension
$1,000 and
7 Days
Suspension
$1,000 and
10-Days
Sus ension
$1,500 and
20 Days
Sus ens ion
Third
Violation
$2,000 and
15 Days
Sus ension
$2,000 and
12 Days
Sus ens ion
$2,000 and
15 Days
Sus ens ion
$2,000 and
40 Days
Sus ens ion
Fourth
Violation
Revocation
Revocation
Revocation
Revocation
I. Best Practices Program
Establishments entering into an agreement with the Police
Department as a Best Practice Program will use the Best Practices
violation grid as described in this ordinance.
The following violations fall under this violation grid broken down by
type of license.
. Sale of alcoholic beverages to under-age persons.
. Sale of alcoholic beverages to obviously intoxicated person.
· After hours sale/display/consumption of alcoholic beverage.
. Illegal gambling on premises.
· Failure to take reasonable steps to stop person from leaving
premises with alcoholic beverages (on-sale allowing off-sale).
BEST PRACTICES PENALTY GRID:
Type of First Second Third
License Violation Violation Violation
On-sale $500 $1,000 and Return to regular penalty grid
Intoxicating 5 Days and Off Best Practices for one
Liquor Suspension year
Stayed
Off-sale $500 $1,000 and Return to regular penalty grid
Intoxicating 3 Days and Off Best Practices for one
Liquor Suspension year
Staved
On-sale $500 $1,000 and Return to regular penalty grid
Beer and 10 Days and Off Best Practices for one
Wine I Suspension year
Page 17 of 18
Stayed
Off-sale $1,000 $1,500 and Return to regular penalty grid
3.2 Malt 10 Days and Off Best Practices for one
Suspension year
Staved
Section 29. Effective Date.
This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon the date of its publication.
Adopted by the City Council of Centerville this
day of
,2002.
Tim Swedberg
Mayor
Attested:
Teresa Bender
City Clerk
Page 18 of 18
,
.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
AUGUST 6, 2002
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning Commission held their regularly
scheduled meeting on August 6, 2002, at 6:30 p.m.
PRESENT:
Ray DeVine
Tom Wilharber
Mary 10 Hehnbrecht
~:r~E @i~
None
r?@\V7(D\@
~S "D'IY \;!9
ABSENT:
COUNCIL:
None
STAFF:
Ms. Bender
I. CALL TO ORDER
1. Roll Call
The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m.
II. PUBLIC HEARlNG(S)
None.
III. A W ARDS/PRESENT A nONSI APPEARANCES
1. Mr. Roger Fink. 6907 Center Street/20th Avenue (Rezone from B-1 to R2A)
Mr. Roger Fink of Center Oaks Partnership addressed the Commission to discuss a
concept plan for building twinhomes if the property is rezoned.
Mr. Fink explained where the parcel he wanted to rezone was located and indicated that it
is adj acent to single family residential.
Mr. Fink explained that Kenco Homes is a sister unit and would build the twinhomes
being considered for this site.
Page I of 10
Planning and Zoning
August 6, 2002
Meeting Minutes
Mr. Fink indicated he felt this proposal would enhance the tax base because if the parcel
remains a business district it may be a long time before a commercial user would be
interested in it.
Mr. Fink indicated that the project is targeted for empty nesters or seniors with a slab on
grade one level living design. He then indicated the homes would have a two car
attached garage and a generous backyard/open space area.
Commissioner Wilharber asked if the garages would be on the north of the twinhomes.
Mr. Fink indicated that each unit has a garage in the front and pointed out the location on
a map.
Commissioner DeVine asked what price range the twinhomes would be in.
Mr. Fink indicated the estimate is in the low $150,000's. He then said he drove through
Eagle Pass and did not check to see what the homes sold for but they seem to be selling
as fast as they are built.
Commissioner Helmbrecht indicated that the information provided indicates a 420 square
foot garage and pointed out that the City's Code requires a minimum of 440 square feet.
Mr. Fink explained that they ran into grading issues with the low elevation in back as
well as setback issues and this concept allowed them to comply with the 20 feet between
each structure for sideyard setback, a 10 foot sideyard to the west, and a 35 foot setback
from the street curb.
Ms. Bender indicated there would need to be the right-of-way plus the 35 feet. Mr. Fink
indicated he would look at that but said he is not sure ifthe drawing shows the curb or the
right-of-way.
Chair Hanson asked if these twinhomes would have their own association. Mr. Fink
indicated this would be its own separate association and would not be folded into any
other.
Commissioner McLean commented that there is a concern with the commercial tax base
and a need to balance whether the property would ever develop commercially versus
allowing this type of change in zoning.
Mr. Fink indicated if the parcel remained business it would be a small building due to the
size of the parcel and he estimates the City would end up with a 1200 square foot
building. He then said that he calculates that the tax base from that size building would
be $5,000 to $6,000 whereas the twinhomes as proposed would generate around $8,000
for the tax base.
Commissioner DeVine indicated that residents have said they want owner-occupied
housing when there was a previous public hearing.
Page 2 of 10
Planning and Zoning
August 6, 2002
Meeting Minutes
Ms. Bender indicated that someone had called on the north property and expressed
interest in making it a boat manufacturing company. She then indicated that residents
have said they would prefer something more residential than commercial.
Commissioner Wilharber commented that owner-occupied is important because there are
a lot of rental units in Willow Glen and they generate more calls for service from the
police and social services. He then asked how that would be controlled to ensure that the
units would always be owner-occupied.
Mr. Fink indicated he would be willing to sign an agreement with the City to sell to
buyers that are willing to take occupancy of the property but said that it would be difficult
for the City to control someone's right to rent out their property. He also commented that
the design of the home may limit interest in renting.
Commissioner Wilharber asked if Mr. Fink had spoken to Mr. Palzer in public works for
further information. Mr. Fink indicated he had not but said he would be communicating
with Rice Creek Watershed District and the building official. He then indicated that a
wetland delineation had been done for the property and commented that they are not
intending to impact the wetlands in any way.
Commissioner Wilharber asked ifMr. Fink had met with the neighbors to the south. Mr.
Fink said he had not.
Commissioner Wilharber commented that this would be a movement that would more
easily meet with the approval of residents in Center Oaks.
Commissioner Kilian said he could not see rezoning the property when no one can know
what will happen in the future.
Commissioner Wilharber clarified that there would be such a small commercial building
that the tax base would not be a large benefit to the City.
Commissioner Helmbrecht indicated that a wetlands trade could be done in order to allow
room for a larger building. She then said that the commercial property in town is very
limited and she would be hesitant to zone away from commercial.
Commissioner Wilbarber indicated that he felt the concept was good but said the lawyer
would need to look at it for the developer's agreement and public works would need to
make sure codes are met.
Commissioner Kilian asked for clarification as to whether it is 420 square feet of garage
for each unit or per building. Mr. Fink held up an elevation drawing of the homes they
built in Blaine and said it seems they are two garages for each unit.
Page 3 of 10
Planning and Zoning
August 6, 2002
Meeting Minutes
Chair Hanson asked what market they were going after with the split entry model shown.
Mr. Fink indicated that empty nesters go for the split entry to get more square footage as
well as first time homebuyers because of the price point.
Mr. Fink asked if they were to proceed with a formal application for rezoning how that
would be received.
Chair Hanson said he would think that the neighbors would be in support of it rather than
commercial property.
Commissioner DeVine asked what the timeframe would be. Mr. Fink asked what the
timeframe for rezoning would be.
Commissioner DeVine indicated it would be about two months. He then said that one of
the main goals of the current Mayor and City Council was to increase the commercial tax
role of the city. He further said that he does not agree that the goal would be diminished
by this and then said that he is not sure that Council would approve a rezone if
recommended by the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Kilian indicated that he felt it would be a domino effect if the property is
rezoned back to residential as the other parcels along that stretch would want to do the
same.
Commissioner McLean commented that the City could be sitting on the property for a
number of years waiting for it to develop commercially. He then said that he does not
think the property would develop until after the industrial park is full.
Commissioner DeVine commented that a planner would say R2A would fit in fine but as
taxpayers he wants to say do not take away our commercia! property. He then said that if
someone tried to put in something like a McDonalds there would be opposition from the
neighbors.
Chair Hanson commented that the parcel is a bad location for business.
Commissioner Wilharber commented that, if the County gets its way with widening Main
Street, the City may need to rezone some parcels as the residences will be lost.
Commissioner Kilian commented that there have been complaints of traffic on
Centerville Road and more and more traffic is traveling on 20th Avenue. He then said he
does not think it will be that long before the property develops commercially.
Commissioner Wilharber commented that the group was split 50/50 and then said that
Council makes the final decision.
Mr. Fink thanked the Commission for the comments and said they would discuss it and
determine what to do.
Page 4 of 10
Planning and Zoning
August 6, 2002
Meeting Minutes
IV. OLD BUSINESS
1. Right of Way Ordinance
Commissioner Helmbrecht indicated the language concerning codes in the begirming is
not needed. She then said she questioned on Page 2 whether continuous length in excess
of 500 feet was used by other cities or what the standard is.
Commissioner DeVine said others are using that number because this was received from
the League of Minnesota Cities.
Ms. Bender indicated she would look into whether the ordinance as presented was
approved by other cities or if th~wording was changed.
Commissioner Helmbrecht asked about fees for unreasonable delays and permit
extensions as it seems the two sections do not agree.
Commissioner DeVine explained the delay penalty happens if the permit is extended
without the applicant making an application to do so. He then commented that the
penalty is set by the City Council.
Commissioner Helmbrecht asked that public works reVIew the wording on Page 3
concerning pavement patching.
Commissioner Helmbrecht suggested reviewing the language on Page 5 because she is
not sure the City has a capital improvement plan.
Commissioner Helmbrecht asked that the wording on Page 7 under Subdivision 2 be
changed to add "and the well being of the general public. She also asked for the same
change on Pages 9 and 10.
Commissioner Helmbrecht asked for an explanation of what franchise fees were. Ms.
Bender indicated the City does not have franchise fees.
Commissioner Helmbrecht asked that someone look into the franchise fee section. Ms.
Bender indicated Staff would review the matter.
The Commission asked to delete the wording "for reasons beyond the permittee's
control."
Commissioner Helmbrecht asked whether the City would need to consider an under
grounding ordinance.
The Commission asked Staff to check with Mr. Palzer to see if the City needs an under
grounding ordinance.
Page 5 of 10
Planning and Zoning
August 6, 2002
Meeting Minutes
Commissioner DeVine said he would be concerned with removing things before showing
the ordinance to the attorney. He then said that the questions should be shown to the
attorney before anything is removed from the ordinance.
Ms. Bender indicated that she would ask the attorney to reVIew the Commission's
proposed modifications.
Commissioner Helmbrecht asked if the fees were comparable to other cities. Ms. Bender
suggested removing that section and adding the fees to the fee schedule as the ordinance
would not need to be changed each time the fee changed. She then said that she could
verify the fees charged in other cities.
Commissioner DeVine asked forthe following request to be bolded in the minutes: THE
COMMISSION REQUESTED THAT STAFF SEEK THE OPINION OF THE
CITY ATTORNEY WITH REGARD TO THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE
RIGHT OF WAY ORDINANCE BEFORE THOSE CHANGES ARE MADE.
V. NEW BUSINESS
I. Ordinance #59 - Star Citv Commission (Repeal- Program Sunsetted)
Motion bv Commissioner DeVine, seconded bv Commissioner Wilharber to
recommend repealine: Ordinance #59. Aves - 5, Navs - 1 (Helmbrecht). Motion
carried.
VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS
I. 2003 Planning and Zoning Meeting Minutes
Motion bv Commissioner DeVine, seconded bv Commissioner Wilharber to approve
the 2003 bude:et as the same as 2002.
Ms. Bender asked if the Commission wanted to keep professional services at $3,000.
The Commission indicated that it did.
Ms. Helmbrecht asked for clarification of the $2,400 from 200 I. Ms. Bender indicated
that it was for AP A, the recording secretary and memberships.
Commissioner Kilian asked for clarification of the $822.00 spent year-to-date for
professional services. Ms. Bender indicated she could provide detailed information on
the requested items if desired.
Commissioner DeVine asked which budget is charged when the Commission seeks the
opinion of the City Attorney.
Page 6 of 10
Planning and Zoning
August 6, 2002
Meeting Minutes
Commissioner Helmbrecht suggested recommending that Council ask for clarification
from the City Attorney.
Commissioner Kilian asked what the total budget is.
Chair Hanson indicated the total budget is $6,780.00.
VOTE: All in favor. Motion carried unanimouslv.
2. Fencing Issues & Zoning PermitlRevision to Ord #4 (September)
Commissioner DeVine indicated that the Commission has been waiting for Mr. Palzer to
provide a list of items he wants to have permits for. Ms. Bender indicated she would ask
for an update in memo form from Mr. Palzer.
Ms. Bender indicated there are two cases where fences were placed on property lines
without securing a neighbor's signature as required.
Commissioner Hehnbrecht asked if they could get permission after the fact.
Ms. Bender explained that in one situation the neighbors agreed on a privacy fence but a
chain link fence was installed and the neighbor has not yet provided signed permission.
She then said that she had been told that these types of issues are civil issues between the
parties but the residents are suggesting it is a City responsibility.
Commissioner DeVine commented that the ordinance was written with the intent to
require your neighbor's permission.
Chair Hanson indicated that the matter is a civil issue.
Ms. Bender commented that it is an ordinance violation because there is no signature by
the neighbor.
Chair Hanson indicated the fence would need to come down or be moved.
Commissioner DeVine asked for copies of other fence ordinances to see what other cities
are doing. He then said that it is common to allow fences on the property line.
Commissioner Helmbrecht commented that Ms. Moore-Sykes had recommended
requiring a fence permit.
Ms. Bender explained the other fencing issue is between two neighbors who are fighting
over the fence but also the true location of the property line and they think it is a City
responsibility and refuse to have a survey done.
Page 7 of 10
Planning and Zoning
August 6, 2002
Meeting Minutes
Commissioner DeVine said he would like to look at other ordinances to see how other
cities handle this type of situation.
Commissioner Wilharber indicated tbat Mr. Sweeney had sent in an Ordinance #4
question concerning setbacks for enclosed front porches. Ms. Bender commented that if
it is not completely enclosed it is allowed.
Ms. Bender indicated there had also been a complaint concerning an accessory structure
tbat is quite tall with a barn style roof. She tben commented tbat Staff had reviewed tbe
ordinance and accessory structures can be as tall as 35 feet per ordinance.
Chair Hanson indicated he had thought the Commission limited the height of accessory
structures to no more than 14 feet.
Ms. Bender found the section in Ordinance #4 and read it for the Commission.
The Commission agreed that the maximum height of accessory structures needed to be
addressed.
Commissioner Helmbrecht asked for an update of what will be published for Ordinance
#4.
The Commission asked for a copy of the new ordinance.
Commissioner Kilian asked for copies of the ordinances that have been finished in the
last two or three years.
Chair Hanson also asked for a list of the ordinances that are more tban three years old.
Commissioner Helmbrecht asked for the adult ordinance to be on the agenda for the next
meeting.
Chair Hanson asked why there was no public hearing on the tattooing and body piercing
as requested. Ms. Bender indicated that Council had requested that changes be made and
the public hearing will be in August.
Commissioner DeVine said he did not think the ordinances were given to Council as the
request was to schedule the public hearing.
Ms. Bender explained tbat the process has been modified so tbat the City Council can
provide review and input before tbe public hearing in an effort to save tbe City money.
She further commented that tbere have been several instances when a public hearing is
held and a recommendation made and tben Council makes changes.
Page 8 oflO
Planning and Zoning
August 6, 2002
Meeting Minutes
Commissioner Kilian asked that Staff provide information in packets in this type of
situation in the future so that the Commission is aware of why the public hearing, as
requested, has not been scheduled.
Ms. Bender asked if the Commission was aware that the Mayor has requested that any
meeting where there is a public hearing scheduled be cablecast. She then asked if the
Commission wanted to have the public hearing at the Planning Commission or Council
level.
The Commission indicated that Council could make that determination and said that it
would be a cost savings to have the public hearing at the Council level so that there is not
more cost to cablecast meetings.
Ms. Bender indicated that any public hearings for Ordinance #4 require two public
hearings and there would be one at the Planning Commission level and one at Council.
Ms. Bender asked if the Commission wanted to see Ordinances 70 and 71 before the
public hearing. The Commission indicated that they wished to see the ordinances as well
as information on Council input.
Commissioner McLean asked if the Commission still has a vacancy. Ms. Bender
indicated that there is a vacancy on the Commission and said that information is being
run on cable concerning the opening.
Commissioner Wilharber suggested that the vacancy be placed in the week in review that
is published in the Ouad to reach more residents.
Commissioner Kilian indicated he was asked by City workers why the berm is not on the
east side of the Drilling development. He also indicated that there was a question as to
why it had not been sodded and looks like seed will be used. Ms. Bender indicated a trail
needed to be constructed.
Commissioner Kilian indicated there is also a concern about handicap accessibility.
Commissioner DeVine suggested directing the questions to Ms. Moore-Sykes as that type
of issue is not a zoning issue.
Commissioner Wilharber commented that the matter is a City issue and asked Ms.
Bender to direct them to Ms. Moore-Sykes. Ms. Bender commented that she wished that
Staff would feel more comfortable talking to Ms. Moore-Sykes with these types of issues.
Commissioner Kilian indicated he would come to City Hall around 10:30 a.m. on Friday,
August 9, 2002 to discuss the matter with Ms. Moore-Sykes.
Ms. Bender asked for clarification as to whether the Commission wanted to review the
adult establishment ordinance or the adult ordinance that was never approved.
Page 9 of 10
Planning and Zoning
August 6, 2002
Meeting Minutes
Commissioner Hebnbrecht indicated the Commission wished to review the adult
establishment ordinance to confrrm that there is language ~overing body piercing and
tattooing.
VII. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
1. Julv 2, 2002 Planning and Zoning Meeting Minutes
Motion bv Commissioner Helmbrecht. seconded bv Commissioner DeVine to
approve the JulV 2. 2002 Meetin!! Minutes as amended. All in favor. Motion
carried unanimouslv.
Commissioners Kilian and McLean abstained from voting as they were not present at the
meeting.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Motion bv Commissioner Wilharber. seconded bv Commissioner Kilian to adiourn
the Aue:ust 6. 2002 Plannm!! Commission Meetine: at 7:58 p.m. All in favor. Motion
carried unanimouslv.
Transcribed by:
Joan Lenzmeier, Recording Secretary
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
Page 10 of 10
"
'~
;.",
ii, tervi{{e
,h ",."''" 'w The Best Practices Program
Each licensee's participation can be customized to help fit their business, While
there are mandatory criteria, businesses chose elective criteria as long as they
meet the minimum required points for participation. The agreement is then
signed by the licensee and key managers or operators of the establishment and
the Police Chief, City Administrator, and Mayor. By establishing this program,
the goal of the City of Centerville is: No Alcohol Sales to Minors. The City also
wishes to enter into proactive practices in alignment with the Community Policing
Philosophy to prevent and solve enforcement issues.
There are (4) four required criteria for participation in the Best Practice Program
for establishments:
A. They must first agree to the annual inspection I background
investigation to ensure criteria are being met.
B. They must commit to a minimum of 75% of their employees
trained by the Police Department. The training program
options are covered in a later section. The 75% figure
allows for the issue of employee turnover, but key persomel
must be trained.
C. The establishment must have a program in place for on-
going training of new and current employees.
D. A yearly meeting with managers gives the police department
the opportunity to sit down with the on-site managers to go
over any problems, concerns, or issues on either side for a
better working relationship. If in the opinion of the Chief of
Police or City Administrator a licensee is not acting in good
faith, the licensee will not be allowed to participate in the
Best Practices Program.
There are several elective criteria in the program:
. The establishment has a policy in place requlnng
identification checks on all customers who do not appear to
be at least 40 years of age on all alcohol purchases.
. The establishment has a reward program in place for
employees who find underage people attempting to
purchase and turn them into the police.
. The establishment has an automated 10 card scanner
system in place.
. The establishment has an internal compliance check
program in place which has been approved by the police
department. These programs usually involve using
individuals who are old enough to purchase but do not
appear so, to see if they are checked for identification.
. Pre-agreement to meet immediately on compliance check
violations. The police department waits for the criminal court
process on the clerks who are charged to be completed
before handling the administrative fine process with the
business. In this option, the licensee agrees to meet on the
administrative process without waiting for the criminal court
process to be completed which speeds up the process as
often the court process can take several months.
. Pre-agreement to work on secondary sales. This is an
enforcement project to work with police on individuals old
enough to purchase themselves who purchase for others
who are underage.
Compliance Checks
The Police Department may conduct two compliance checks each year for the
Best Practices Program participants. A third compliance check is authorized for
any establishment that has failed a compliance check.
The Police Department is authorized to conduct frequent compliance checks at
establishments not participating in the Best Practices Program.
The City will allow any independent apprehension of a minor attempting to
purchase that leads to charges to count as a pass for one of their two compliance
checks for that year.
Recognition and Community Education
Recognition and community education are critical components of this project.
Everyone can take pride in prevention of underage consumption. This ordinance
establishes a recognition program at City expense to include:
. Letters of Recognition to individual employees by officers at
the time of the passed compliance check with a Letter of
Thanks to the licensed establishment.
. Each establishment that passes both compliance checks
within a year will be given a framed certificate recognizing
their achievement.
. Annually, those establishments passing both compliance
checks will be recognized in the Quad Press and Hugonian
with a letter of thanks from the Council for the
establishment's excellent prevention efforts focused on
underage alcohol consumption.
· Signage indicating a "Best Practice" license holder provided
by the City for posting, a 5% discount on license renewal
fees, and a separate penalty grid for violations
· Best Practice establishments with a 3-year history of no
compliance check failures, shall be designated "Gold Star
Best Practice" license holders. They will receive signage by
the City and receive a 10% discount on license renewal fees.
If they have a compliance check failure, they follow the Best
Practice penalty grid, and return to "Best Practice"
establishment status.
. Both the Police Department and City Administrator are
encouraged to work with the school district and other
organizations to educate citizens about the program and the
preventive efforts of the Best Practices Program.
· Both the Police Department and City Administrator are
encouraged to work with licensee's for additional
opportunities to recognize prevention results.
Training Program
The Police Department shall designate a Best Practices Program Coordinator.
The Coordinator will focus on liaison with licensed establishments and the City
Administrator. The coordinator will provide opportunities to train employees
using an accredited or recognized program.
If a business, operating in the City of Centerville with a license defined under
Section 8 of this ordinance with the exclusion of Temporary 3.2 Percent Malt
Liquor licenses, On-Sale Temporary Intoxicating liquor licenses or a One Day
Consumption permit agrees to be a "Best Practices" establishment.
With this agreement we understand we must agree to several of the following
items, including the first four mandatory items, to a total point value of at least
100 points.
Selected Points Item Description
Items
Mandatory 15
Mandatory 15
Mandatory 15
Mandatory 15
Managers, Owners, and Police Department
rsonnel
10 Employee reward program for rewarding
employees who catch underage persons
attem tin to urchase
10 A roved intemal com Iiance check ram
25 Preagreement to meet immediately on violations
(meet with the Police Department and/or City
Administrator immediately instead of waiting for
criminal court roceedin s
10 Pre-agreement to work with Police Department
on seconda sales
5 25% of employees trained by Accredited Training
Pro ram
10 50% of employees trained by Accredited Training
Pro ram
20 75% of employees trained by Accredited Training
Pro ram
15 Discretion of the Police Chief/Administrator to
acknowled e sitive ractices
, .
4 tervi[!e
C,II'WaJiM"d l&F
City of Centerville
Best Practices Application
Business Address:
Business Phone:
All owners and operating managers please sign, date, and provide a home
phone or other reliable contact number.
Signature
Date
Phone
Signature
Date
Phone
Signature
Date
Phone
For the City of Centerville
Signature
Chief of Police
Date
Phone
Signature
City Administrator
Date
Phone
Signature
Mayor
Date
Phone
Ucensed establishments that choose not to participate in the Best Practices U21
Program or are found in violation for a third time will follow the regular penalty grid.
FINANCING OVERVIEW ANDTIMEUNE
For
teroi{le
'r:.ii#~';~Jrr;r Ul..;~'"
$635,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 2002
Pheasant Marsh Phase 2
Presented to:
Mayor Tim Swedberg
Members, City Council
Kim Moore-Sykes, Administrator
George Eilertson
V~OU UlJIIUBU)opn&OU ~fi3J lQl1USJ.q
lnunJ ~.NO~qA
':;l-",:} .,_:,y
- -"'
-,-.J
".h,.,"
Vice President
August 28, 2002
City of Centerville
1880 Main Street
Centerville, MN 55038
612-370-2948
.
$635,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 2002
Project Overview & Financing l1meline Re(:OIIIIIIendation$
Proceeds of lhis issue will be used to finance street, curb and gutter, sewer, water and storm
improvements in relation to the 2"" Phase of the Pheasant Marsh subdivision project.
We recommend the foUuwing for the Bonds:
1. Action Requested
To establish the date and time of receiving fiDancing bids.
2. Sale Date and Time
Wednesday, September 25, 2002 at 11 ;00 A M, with award
by the City Council on the same day at 6;30 P. M
3. Estimated Bond Closing Date
The estimated closing date of the Bonds is October 14, 2002.
4. Authority and Purpose
The Bonds are being issued pmsuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Chapter 429 and 475 to finance street, curb and
gutter, sewer, water and stonn improvements within the City
and in relation to the Pheasant Marsh Phase 2 subdivision
projecL
.
5. Principal Amount of Offering
$635,000
6. Repayment Term
The Bonds will mature ammally on February I, beginning in
2005 with the final matmity in 2014.lnterest on the Bonds
will be payable on August I, 2003, and semiannually
thereafter on each February I and August 1.
7. Source of Debt Service Revenues
Debt service will be payable from special assessments against
affected property owners and supported by ad valorem taxes
on all taxable property within the City.
8. Prepayment Provisions
Bonds matmiug on or after February I, 2009 will be
callable February I, 2008 and any business date thereafter at a
price of par pIns accrued interest
.
.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF ANOKA
CITY OF CENTERVllLE
RESOLUTION #02-33
RESOLUTION ESTABLISmNG PROCEDURES
RELATING TO COMPLIANCE WITH RElMBURSEMENT BOND
REGULATIONS UNDER THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Centerville,
Minnesota (the "City"), as follows:
1. Recitals.
(a) The Internal Revenue Service has issued Treasury Regulations, Section
1.150-2 (as the same may be amended or supplemented, the "Regulations"), dealing with
"reimbursement bond" proceeds, being proceeds of bonds used to reimburse the City for
any project expenditure paid by the City prior to the time of the issuance of those bonds.
(b) The Regulations generally require that the City (as the issuer of or the
primary obligor under the bonds) make a declaration of intent to reimburse itself for such
prior expenditures out of the proceeds of subsequently issued bonds, that such declaration
be made not later than 60 days after the expenditure is actually paid, and that the bonding
occur and the written reimbursement allocation be made from the proceeds of such bonds
within 18 months after the later of (1) the date of payment of the expenditure or (2) the
date the project is placed in service (but in no event more than 3 years after actual
payment).
(c) The City heretofore implemented procedures for compliance with the
predecessor versions of the Regulations and desires to amend and supplement those
procedures to ensure compliance with the Regulations.
(d) The City's bond counsel has advised the City that the Regulations do not
apply, and hence the provisions of this Resolution are intended to have no application, to
payments of City project costs first made by the City out of the proceeds of bonds issued
prior to the date of such payments.
2. Official Intent Declaration. The Regulations, in the situations in which they apply,
require the City to have declared an official intent (the "Declaration") to reimburse itself for
previously paid project expenditures out of the proceeds of subsequently issued bonds. The
Council hereby authorizes the Administrator to make the City's Declarations or to delegate from
time to time that responsibility to other appropriate City employees. Each Declaration shall
comply with the requirements of the Regulations, including without limitation the following:
1382917vl
.
(a) Each Declaration shall be made not later than 60 days after payment of the
applicable project cost and shall state that the City reasonably expects to reimburse itself
for the expenditure out of the proceeds of a bond issue or similar borrowing. Each
Declaration may be made substantially in the form of the Exhibit A which is attached to
and made a part of this Resolution, or in any other format which may at the time comply
with the Regulations.
(b) Each Declaration shall (1) contain a reasonably accurate description of the
"project," as defined in the Regulations (which may include the property or program to be
financed, as applicable), to which the expenditure relates and (2) state the maximum
principal amount of bonding expected to be issued for that project.
( c) Care shall be taken so that the City, or its authorized representatives under
this Resolution, not make Declarations in cases where the City doesn't reasonably expect
that reimbursement bonds will be issued to finance the subject project costs, and the City
officials are hereby authorized to consult with bond counsel to the City concerning the
requirements of the Regulations and their application in particular circumstances.
(d) The Council shall be advised from time to time on the desirability and
timing of the issuance of reimbursement bonds relating to project expenditures for which
the City has made Declarations.
3. Reimbursement Allocations. If the City is acting as the issuer of the
reimbursement bonds, the designated City officials shall also be responsible for making the
"reimbursement allocations" described in the Regulations, being generally written allocations that
evidence the City's use of the applicable bond proceeds to reimburse the original expenditures.
4. Effect. This Resolution shall amend and supplement all prior resolutions and/or
procedures adopted by the City for compliance with the Regulations (or their predecessor
versions), and, henceforth, in the event of any inconsistency, the provisions of this Resolution
shall apply and govern.
Adopted this _ day of
, 2002, by the CentervilIe City Council.
1382917v1
2
.
CERTIFICATION
The undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Administrator of the City of
Centerville, Minnesota, hereby certifies the following:
The foregoing is true and correct copy of a Resolution on file and of official, publicly
available record in the offices of the City, which Resolution relates to procedures of the City for
compliance with certain IRS Regulations on reimbursement bonds. Said Resolution was duly
adopted by the governing body of the City (the "Council") at a meeting of the
Council held on , 2002. Said meeting was duly called, regularly held, open to
the public, and held at the place at which meetings of the Council are regularly. held.
Councilmember moved the adoption of the Resolution, which motion was
seconded by Councilmember . A vote being taken on the motion, the
following members of the Council voted in favor of the motion to adopt the Resolution:
and the following voted against the same:
Whereupon said Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The Resolution is in
full force and effect and no action has been taken by the Council which would in any way
alter or amend the Resolution.
WITNESS MY HAND officially as the Administrator of the City of Centerville,
Minnesota, this _ day of , 2002.
Administrator
City of Centerville, Minnesota
3
1382917vl
EXHIBIT A
Declaration of Official Intent
The undersigned, being the du1y appointed and acting Administrator of the City of
Centerville, Minnesota (the "City"), pursuant to and for purposes of compliance with
Treasury Regu1ations, Section 1.150-2 (the "Regulations"), under the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, as amended, hereby states and certifies on behalf of the City as follows:
1. The undersigned has been and is on the date hereof duly authorized by the
Centerville City Council to make and execute this Declaration of Official Intent (the
"Declaration") for and on behalf of the City.
2. This Declaration relates to the following project, property or program (the
"Project") and the costs thereof to be financed:
3. The City reasonably expects to reimburse itself for the payment of certain
costs of the Project out of the proceeds of a bond issue or similar borrowing (the
"Bonds") to be issued after the date of payment of such costs. As of the date hereof, the
City reasonably expects that $ is the maximum principal amount of the
Bonds which will be issued to fmance the Project.
4. Each expenditure to be reimbursed from the Bonds is or will be a capital
expenditure or a cost of issuance, or any of the other types of expenditures described in
Section 1. 150-2(d)(3) of the Regulations.
5. As of the date hereof, the statements and expectations contained in this
Declaration are believed to be reasonable and accurate.
Date:
,2002
Mayor
1382917vl
Administrator
A-I
EXHIBIT A
Declaration of Official Intent
The undersigned, being the duly appointed and acting Administrator of the City of
Centerville, Minnesota (the "City"), pursuant to and for purposes of compliance with
Treasury Regulations, Section 1.150-2 (the "Regulations"), under the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, as amended, hereby states and certifies on behalf of the City as follows:
1. The undersigned has been and is on the date hereof duly authorized by the
Centerville City Council to make and execute this Declaration of Official Intent (the
"Declaration") for and on behalf of the City.
2. This Declaration relates to the following project, property or program (the
"Project") and the costs thereof to be financed:
3. The City reasonably expects to reimburse itself for the payment of certain
costs of the Project out of the proceeds of a bond issue or similar borrowing (the
"Bonds") to be issued after the date of payment of such costs. As of the date hereof, the
City reasonably expects that $ is the maximum principal amount of the
Bonds which will be issued to finance the Project.
4. Each expenditure to be reimbursed from the Bonds is or will be a capital
expenditure or a cost of issuance, or any of the other types of expenditures described in
Section 1.I50-2(d)(3) of the Regulations.
5. As of the date hereof, the statements and expectations contained in this
Declaration are believed to be reasonable and accurate.
Date:
,2002
Mayor
Administrator
1382917vl
A-I
.
Extract of Minutes of Meeting
of the City Council of the City
ofCenterville, Anoka County, Minnesota
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
ofCenterville, Anoka County, Minnesota, was held at the City Hall in the City on Wednesday,
August 28, 2002, commencing at 6:30 o'clock P.M.
The following members of the Council were present:
and the following were absent:
* * *
* * *
* * *
The following resolution was presented by Councilmember
, who moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTIONNO. #02-034
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF
$635,000 GENERAL OBUGATION IMPROVEMENT
BONDS OF 2002
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Centerville, Anoka County,
Minnesota (City) as follows:
SJB-219027vl
CE155-19
I
,
L 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);
Proiect Designation & Description:
Total Project Cost
Pheasant Marsh Phase 2
proj ect Costs
Costs ofIssuance
Capitalized Interest
Less: Est. ConstL Fund Investment Income
Rounding factor
$580,909
24,040
32,720
(1,139)
(1,530)
Total Issue:
$635,000
(b) it is necessary and expedient to the sound financial management of
the affairs of the City to issue $635,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 2002
(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 $626, 11 O. To provide in part the additional interest required to market the Bonds
at this time, additional Bonds will be issued in the amount of $8,890. The excess of the purchase
price of the Bonds over the sum of $626,110 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-219027vl
CE155-19
TERMS OF PROPOSAL
$635,000
General Obligation Improvement
Bonds of2002
City of Centerville
Anoka County, Minnesota
(BOOK ENTRY ONLY)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that sealed proposals for the purchase of the above bonds
will be received until 11:00 o'clock A.M., C.T. on Wednesday, September 25, 2002, in the
offices of Juran & Moody, a division of Miller Johnson Steichen Kinnard Investment Securities,
Inc. in Minneapolis, Minnesota, at which time the proposals will be opened and tabulated for
consideration by the City Council at a meeting at 6:30 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 October 1, 2002, 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
2005 $55,000 2010 $65,000
2006 55,000 2011 70,000
2007 55,000 2012 70,000
2008 60,000 2013 70,000
2009 60,000 2014 75,000
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.
SID-219027vl
CE155.19
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 (nDTcn),
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
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 ofthe Bonds, will be required to
deposit the Bonds with DTC.
Ootional Redemption
The City may elect on February 1, 2008, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due
on or after February 1,2009. 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 August 1, 2003, 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. Each rate must be in an integral multiple of 1/20 or 1/8
ofl%. Interest will be computed on the basis ofa 360-day year of twelve 30-day months.
SJB~219027vl
CE155-19
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.
Award
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.
SJB-219027vl
CE155-19
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.
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 l5c2-12 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 [Bid] Proposal Form with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby that if its [bid] 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.
Continuin!;! Disclosure
Participating underwriters need not comply with the continuing disclosure requirements
of Rule 15c2-l2 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.
SlB-219027vl
CElSS-19
Type of Proposal - Amount
A sealed proposal will be for not less than $626,110 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 $12,700, 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 Steichen Kinnard Investment
Securities, Inc., prior to the opening of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must identify
each underwriter whose Deposit is guaranteeifby 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 Steichen Kinnard Investment
Securities, Inc., in the form of a certified or cashier's check or wire transfer as instructed by Juran
& Moody, a division of Miller Johnson Steichen Kinnard Investment Securities, 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
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 118 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
f sf Teresa Bender
City Clerk
Dated: August 28, 2002.
Sffi-219027vl
CE155.19
3. Juran & Moody, a division of Miller Johnson Steichen Kinnard Investment
Securities, Inc. is authorized and directed to negotiate the Bonds in accordance with the
foregoing Terms of Proposal. The City Council will meet at 6:30 o'clock P.M. on Wednesday,
September 25, 2002, to consider proposals on the Bonds and take any other appropriate action
with respect to the Bonds.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duIy 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.
SJEM219027vl
CE155.19
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)
COUNTY OF ANOKA )
)
CITY OF CENTERVILLE )
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting City Clerk-Treasurer 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,
August 28, 2002, 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 $635,000 General
Obligation Improvement Bonds of2002 of the City.
WITNESS My hand as City Clerk and the corporate seal of the City this _ day of
,2002.
City Clerk
City of Centerville, Minnesota
(SEAL)
SJB.219027vl
CE155-19
tervi[[e
'Esta6{isfzeci 1857
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF ANOKA
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
1880 Main Street _ Centervi{{e, 'M'J{ 55038
(651) 429-3232 _ :Ja?( (651) 429-8629
RESOLUTION #02-035
RESOLUTION RATIFYING ACTIONS TO
ORDER PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR PHEASANT MARSH
WHEREAS, the City ofCenterville ("City") received a petition dated August 22,2001 from
Ground Development, Inc. (the "Developer"), the owners of 100% of certain property to be
benefited by public improvements to that property, for the city to undertake such improvements and
assess the cost against such property, all in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429; and
WHEREAS, the subject property consists of the plat known as the Pheasant Marsh
Subdivision, and the petitioned improvements include sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer, streets,
sidewalks, curb and gutter and trails (the "Improvements"); and
WHEREAS, the Developer further waived all rights of appeal and objection to special
assessments for the Improvements in an amount not to exceed $1,871,642; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 01-015 approved August 22,2001, the City Council found
that the petition was signed by all owners of benefited property, and further ordered Phase I of the
Improvements; and
WHEREAS, subsequent to such action, the Council has proceeded further to prepare plans
and specifications and accept bids for Phase II of the Improvements, which additional
Improvements are within the scope of the original petition signed by Developer on August 22, 2001;
NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Centerville,
Minnesota as follows:
1. The Council orders Phase II of the Improvements for the Pheasant Marsh
subdivision previously petitioned by Developer.
2. This resolution is intended to ratify all actions of the City staff and the City engineer
in preparing plans and specifications and taking all other actions in connection with Phase II of the
Improvements for Pheasant Marsh.
Approved by the City Council of the City ofCenterville, Minnesota this 26th day of August, 2002.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
SJB-219471vl
CE155-19
~.
FINANCIAL ADVISORY SERVICE AGREEMENT
BY AND BETWEEN
THE CITY OF CENTERVILLE, MINNESOTA
AND
JURAN & MOODY
This Agreement made and entered into by and between the City of Centerville, Minnesota (hereinafter
"City'') and Juran & Moody, a division of Miller Johnson Steichen Kinnard, Incorporated of Minneapolis,
Minnesota (hereinafter "JM'').
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, the City desires to use the services of JM related to the issuance of City debt as described
herein ("Debt"), and
WHEREAS, 1M desires to furnish services to the City as hereinafter described,
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the parties as follows:
SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY JM
Debt Issuance:
Serve as the City's Financial Advisor for the issuance of Debt For the issuance of the municipal bonds,
JM will provide all services necessary to analyze, structure, offer for sale and close the transaction
including, but not limited to, the following:
Planning and Development
. Meet with the City officials and others as directed to define the scope and the objectives.
. Assemble and analyze relevant statistical infonnation.
. Prepare a preliminary feasibility study or discuss with City officials possible funding
options and the fiscal implications of each.
. Prepare details on the recommended options - information on the issue structure,
method of issuance, term, sale timing, call provisions, etc.
. Prepare a schedule of events related to the issuance process.
. Attend meetings of the City Council and other project and bond issue related meetings as
needed and as requested.
Bond Sales
. Prepare, cause to be printed, and distribute the Official statement and Bid Fonn to
prospective bidders.
. Cause to be published the Official Notice of Sale ifrequired by law.
. Recommend whether the issue should secure a bond rating. If the issue is to be rated,
prepare and furnish to the rating agencies the information they require to evaluate the issue
and provide their rating. Serve as the City's representative to the rating agencies.
. Directly contact underwriters most likely to serve as syndicate managers to assure that
bidding interest is established.
. Assist the City in receiving the bids, compute the accuracy of the bids received and
recommed to the City the most favorable bid for award.
. Coordiuate with bond counsel the preparation of required contracts and resolutions.
Post Sale Support
. Coordiuate the bond issue closing including making all arrangements for bond printing,
registration, and delivery.
. Furnish to the City a complete transcript of the transaction.
. Assist, as requested by the City, with the investment of bond issue proceeds.
Investment Assistance:
Should the City desire to invest the proceeds from the issuance of the Debt issuance or any other funds of
the City through JM in its capacity as broker, JM shall, at all times, transact such investments as principal.
COMPENSA nON
For the proposed sale by the City in 2002 of its approximate $635,000 General Obligation Improvement
Bonds of2002 (the "Bonds"), JM's fee shall be lump sum of$8,750.00. The fee due to JM shall be
payable by the City upon the closing of the Bonds.
JM agrees to pay the fullowing expenses from its fee:
. The cost of distributing the Official statements, if any.
. Out-of-pocket expenses such as travel, long distance phone, and copy costs.
. Production and distribution of material to rating agencies and lor bond insurance
companies.
. Preparation of the bond transcript.
The City agrees to pay for all other expenses related to the processing of the bond issue including,
but not limited to, the following:
. Engineering and/or architectural fees.
. Publication oflegal notices
. Bond counsel and local attorney fees.
. The cost of printing Official Statements.
Page 2
. Fees for various debt certficiates.
. City staff expenses.
. Rating agency fees, if any.
. Bond insurance fees, if any.
. Accounting and other related fees.
It is expressly understood that there is no obligation on the part of the City under the tenus of this
Agreement to issue the Bonds. If the Bonds are not issued, 1M agrees to pay its own expenses and receive
no fee for any services it has rendered.
AUTHORIZATION TO BID
As a broker dealer, JM is subject to the rules of the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (hereinafter
"Board'). Pursuant to Rule G-23 of the Board, the City consents and does authorize 1M or any entity or
company affiliated with JM to submit a comPetitive bid for the purchase of the Bonds. 1M agrees that any
bid so submitted shall be fuxed directly to the City for receipt at least fifteen (15) minutes prior to the
deadline otherwise established for the reciept of such a bid.
SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS
The tenns and provisions of this Agreement are binding upon and inure to the benefit of the City and 1M
and their successors or assigns.
TERM OF TillS AGREEMENT
This Agreement may be tenninated by thirty (30) days written notice by either the City or 1M and it shall
tenninate sixty (60) days following the closing date related to the issuance of the Bonds.
Dated this 28th day of August, 2002.
Juran & Moody
By:
Richard G. Asleson, Vice President
City of Centerville, Minnesota
By:
Mayor
By:
Administrator
Page 3
tervi[[e
'Estaflishetf 1857
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
August 28, 2002
TO:
Mayor and City Council
Kim Moore-Sykes, City Administrator ift~
FROM:
RE: Rescheduling December 25, 2002 Council Meeting
............................................................................
Because the last meeting of December falls on December 25th, we will need to reschedule
or cancel the last Council Meeting of the month and year. If you are interested in
rescheduling, please come with possible dates to reschedule this meeting.
tervi[[e
'Esta6lislied 1857
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
August 28, 2002
TO:
Mayor and City Council
Kim Moore-Sykes, City Administrator ,dAtI;;
FROM:
RE:
2003 Tax Levy
.........................................................................
By law, cities are required to set their preliminary levy this year by September 13, 2002.
While we do have one more Council meeting before that deadline, Staff put it on the
agenda to give Council an opportunity to discuss it before it has to be approved and
before Councilmember Broussard Vickers is on vacation. Councilmember Broussard
Vickers did notify Staff and Council that she will be in Europe for most of September.
Also, Council has indicated to Staff that Monday, August 26th is the last budget
worksession and Staff felt that if Council can agree on the levy after this worksession,
that we can get the resolution adopting the levy to the State sooner.
The final levy is set and submitted to the State in December. The preliminary levy is
generally set at the maximum allowed at this time to provide more time to determine
what the final levy will be. As has been the case in previous years, a council can set it at
the maximum and back down from there but a city cannot go higher from the preliminary
levy.
"
'"
tervi{{e
'EstaEJ[isftd 1857
1880 :Main Street . Centeroi1!e, :Jvf';A[ 55038
(651) 429.3232 . '.fa:c(651) 429.8629
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF ANOKA
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
RESOLUTION #02 - 036
RESOLUTION APPROVING PROPOSED 2003 BUDGET AND TAX LEVY
BE IT RESOL YED by the City Council ot'the City of Centerville, County of Anoka,
State of Minnesota, that the following proposed budget and tax levy be adopted for taxes
payable in 2003 in the City ofCenterville for the following purposes:
Expenditures
Revenues
Tax Levy
General Fund
$1,981,526
$418,846
$1,562,680
BE IT RESOL YED that the City Clerk is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of
this resolution to the County Auditor of Anoka County, Minnesota.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council this 28th day of August, 2002.
Attest
Mayor
City Clerk
~
,
COUNTY
OF
ANOKA
PROPERTY RECORDS AND TAXATION DIVISION
GOVERNMENT CENTER. 2100 3RD AVENUE. ANOKA, MN 55303
FAX (763) 323-5421,
.
. Property Assessment
. Property Records and Public Service
. Property Tax Accounting and Research
AU" " n '
b "lJ ilJUi
August l6, 2002
Ms. Ellen Paul seth
Finance Director
City of Centerville
laao Main 8t
Centerville, MN 55038-9794
Dear Ms. Paulseth:
The Truth in Taxation law, M.S. 275.065 requires cities to hold a public budget hearing
for property taxes payable in the year 2003. The dates for this hearing cannot conflict
with the initial hearing set by the county, metropolitan agencies or the school districts
located in your city. However, your continuation hearing may conflict with the
continuation hearing of another taxing district. These hearings must be held between
November 29 and December 20, 2002. The continuation hearing must be at least 5 but no
more than 14 business days after your initial hearing. Additionally, Chapter 389, Laws of
1998, requires that the first and second Mondays of December are reserved for use by the
cities until September 15. The following taxing districts within your city have set the
fo~~owing hearing dates:
TAXING HEARING
DISTRICT DATE
AnokaCounty........ .......... . December 5
Metropolitan Agencies......... . December 4
8D #l2... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . December 3
RECONVENING
DATE
December-----r7
December 11
December 12
With this information you can now set the initial date for your public hearing and a
date for reconvening the meeting, if necessary. In addition, the time and location of the
initial meeting, the phone number an interested taxpayer may call and your payable 2003
certified proposed property tax levy is due on or before September 16, 2002. A proposed
levy and hearing date certification form is enclosed.
If you have any questions concerning the Truth in Taxation process, please call at
(7,,3) 323-5435.
Sincerely I
~~~
JtJ..n Flavin
Manag~r-of Property Tax Accounting
Encl.
Affirmative Action I Equal Opportunity Employer
..
ervi[[e
1880 'Jv(ainStreet _ CenterrJilfe, 'Jv('X. 55038
(651) 42;9-3232 . 'faz (651) 429-8629
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF ANOKA
CITY OF CENTERV/ILLE
RESOLUTION 01-017
Resolution Approving 2001 Tax Levy, Collectible in 2002
Be it resolved by the council of the City of Centerville, County of Anoka,
Minnesota, that the following sums of money be levied for the current year,
collectible in 2002, upon taxable property in the City of Centerville, for the following
purposes:
Total Levy
$1,480,623.00
$1,834,413.00
Budget Amount
Based on the recommendation of the city's accounting firm, the council of
the City of Centerville will certify the maximum amount allowed. As we gain
experience with the new State of Minnesota changes and work on the details of
our budget, the City of Centerville may have a reduction forthcoming at the time of
the final property tax levy.
The city clerk is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this
resolution to the county auditor of Anoka County, Minnesota.
~
(-_..__._.._~' -" J'" - /
--Attest'-\~",,--<7"-"," K,1~,~, J
City ClerklTreasurer
Mayor
180000
160000
140000
120000
100000
80000
60000
40000
20000
o
Receipts & Disbursements
and Payroll
8-14-02 thru 8-23-02
Cash Receipts
$62,172.78
. C\\.~
eW
eP
"S:-~
rcC;)
(j
~i\
0f
ccr"
~'-
",0
~'2J.'l
Payroll
$4WJeO.38
~i\
Xi
ccr"C
~\..
e~
e~
J:.Cj
.~
Q"
...
"
nio::;hl1r""fYl1;>nt
$163,439.84
'"
. .
Amount
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
Cash Receipts
August 14 through August 23. 2002
Tran
Date R Comments
Batch
Name
08/23/02 2:32 PM
Page 1
Account Oeser
FUND 101 GENERAL FUND
Act Type G
$2.50 8/1412002
$0.50 8/14/2002
5200.00 8/14/2002
$77.50 8/14/2002
$0.50 8/1412002
564.00 8/14/2002
$200.00 8i14/2002
$88.50 8/14/2002
$200.00 8/14/2002
$0.60 8/14/2002
$1.50 8/14/2002
$1.50 8/16/2002
50.50 8/16/2002
$0.69 8i16/2G02
51,500.00 8/16/2002
$0.50 8116/2002
$0.50 8/16/2002
$0.50 811612002
$0.50 8/21/2002
$0.50 8121/2002
$0.50 8/21/2002
$0.50 812112002
$0.50 8121/2002
$0.19 8121/2002
$0.50 8121/2002
$0.50 812112002
$0.50 8121/2002
$30.21 8/22/2002
Act $2,374,19
Act Type R
$3.20 8/6/2002
$25.00 8/14/2002
$104.30 8/14/2002
$184.00 8/14/2002
$1,877.04- 3/14/2002
52,685.29 8/14/2002
$25.00 8/14/2002
$229.85 8/1412002
52,373.44 8114/2002
$250.00 8/1412002
52,939.39 8/14/2002
$75,00 8/1412002
$25.00 8/14/2002
$8.00 8/1412002
$25,00 8114/2002
$16.00 8116/2002
$100.00 811812002
5110.00 8116/2002
$85.00 811612002
$50.00 811612002
$104.30 8116/2002
5250.00 8/21/2002
$60.00 8121/2002
$100,00 8/21/2002
$60.00 8/21/2002
o.
06825 CENTERVILlE RD - 02-127 8-14-02 G 101-24500 Bldg. Permit SurCharge
o 1721 DUPRE RD - P02-025 8-14..()2 G 101-24501 Plmbing Permit Surcharg
o 1748 DUPRE RD - 02-125 - TC BUILDERS 8-14-02 G 101-24504 Site Main. Escrow
o 1748 DUPRE RD - 02-125 - TC BUILDERS 8-14-02 G 101-24500 Bldg. Permit Surcharge
o 1689 PELTIER LAKE DR ~ 02-061 8~14w02 G 101-24503 Elec. Permit Surcharge
06987 PORTAGE WAY - 02-123 - SWIFT CONSTR 8-14-02 G 101-24500 Bldg, Permit Surcharge
06987 PORTAGE WAY - 02-123 - SWIFT CONSTR 8-14-02 G 101-24504 Site Main. Escrow
o 6817 GROUSE HOLLOW-02-126 - JAMES MELCH 8-14-02 G 101-24500 Bldg. Permit Surcharge
o 6817 GROU$E HOLLOW-02-126 - JAMES MELCH 8-14-02 G 101-24500 Bldg. Permit Surcharge
o US UR Receipt Group 02 COMMERCIAL 8.14-02U G 101w11500 Accounts Receivable
o 1941 -73RD ST. 02-124 8-14-02 G 101M24500 Bldg. Permit Surcharge
07232 MILL RD - 02-128 -RE-ROOF 8-16-02 G 101-24500 Bldg. Permit Surcharge
07249 CENTERVILLE RD - C02-063 8-16-02 G 101-24503 Elec. Pem1it Surcharge
o US UR Receipt Group 01 RESIDENTIAL 081502UT G 101-11500 Accounts Receivable
01681 HUNTER'S TRAIL - SOD/GRADING ESCRO 8-16-02 G 101-24505 Sod Escrow
o 1721 DUPRE RD - C02-064 8-16-02 G 101-24503 Elec. Permit Surcharge
07018 EAGLE TRAIL - C02-062 8-16-02 G 101-24503 Elec. Permit Surcharge
01778 DUPRE RD - P02-026 8-16-02 G 101-24501 Plmbing Perm,t Surcharg
o 1778 DUPRE RD - M02-053 8-21-02 G 101 -24502 Mech. Permit Surcharge
o 1778 DUPRE RD - C02-065 8-21-02 G 101-24503 Elec. Permit Surcharge
o 1755 OJIBWAY OR - P02-028 8-21-02 G 101-24501 Plmbing Permit Surcharg
o 1721 DUPRE RD - M02-052 8-21-02 G 101-24502 Mech. Pemlit Surcharge
o 1757 OJIBWAY DR - P02-027 8-21-02 G 101-24501 Plmbing Permit Surd,arg
o US UR Receipt Group 01 RESIDENTIAL 8-21-02U G 101-11500 Accounts Receivable
o 1697 HUNTER'S TRAIL - P02-030 8-21-02 G 101-24501 PJmbing Permit Surcharg
07035 DUPRE RD - M02-054 8-21-02 G 101-24501 Plmbing Permit Surcharg
o 1735 DUPRE RD - P02-029 8-21-02 G 101-24501 Plmbing Permit Surcharg
o US UR Receipt Group 01 RESIDENTIAL 8-22-02ut G 101-11500 Accounts Receivable
o UB Receipt Serv 102 CERTIFICATION 8-6-02UT
06817 GROUSE HOLLOIV-02-126 - JAMES MELCH 6-14-02
o 1941 -731m ST - 02-124 8-14-02
o BICYCLE AUTION PROCEEDS - CENTENNIAL L 8-14-02
o JULY 2002 FiNES/FEES 3,14-02
o 1748 DUPRE RD - 02-125 - TC BUILDERS 8-14-02
06987 PORTAGE WAY - 02-123 - SWIFT CONSTR 8-14-02
06825 CENTERVILLE RD - 02-127 8-14-02
06987 PORTAGE WAY - 02-123 - SWIFT CONSTR 8-14-02
o APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL RUBBISH CO 8-14-02
06817 GROUSE HOlLOW-02-126 - JAMES MELCH 8-14-02
o 1721 DUPRE RD - P02-025 8-14-02
o 1689 PEL TIER lAKE DR - 02-061 8-14-02
o DOG TAG # 172 - D. JENSEN 8-14-02
o 1748 DUPRE RD - 02-125 - TC BUILDERS 8-14..()2
o DOG TAG # 173 -T. DiAl -7262 CENTERVILLE R 8-16-02
o 1778 DUPRE RD - P02-026 8-16-02
o 1721 DUPRE RD - C02-064 8-16-02
o 7249 CENTERVILLE RD - C02-063 8-16-02
07018 EAGLE TRAil - C02-062 8-16-02
07232 MILL RD - 02-128 -RE-ROOF 8-16-02
o APPL. FOR COMMERICAl RUBBISH COLLECTI 8-21-02
o 1721 DUPRE RD - M02-052 8-21-02
o 1778 DUPRE RD - M02-053 8-21-02
o 1757 OJIBWAY DR - P02-027 8-21-02
R 101-36200 Miscellaneous Revenues
R 101-32300 Site Maintenance Fees
R 101-32210 Building/Mech, Pemlits
R 101-32000 Special Use/Grading/Burn
R 101-35000 Fines and Forfeits
R 101-32210 Building/Mech< Permits
R 101 <32300 Site Maintenance Fees
R 101-32210 Building/Mech, Permits
R 101-32210 Building/Mech, Permits
R 101-32100 RentaliLiquor Licenses
R 101-32210 BuildingiMech. Permits
R 101-32180 Plumbing Permits
R 101-32225 Electrical Inspection
R 101-32200 Anima! Licenses
R 101 M32300 Site Maintenance Fees
R 101~32200 Animal Licenses
R 101-32180 Plumbing Permits
R 101~32225 Electrical Inspection
R 101-32225 Electrical Inspection
R 101-32225 Electrical Inspection
R 101-32210 Building/Mech. Permits
R 1 01 ~321 00 RentaliLiquor Ucenses
R 1 01 ~3221 0 Building/Mech. Permits
R 101-32210 Building/Meetl. Permits
R 101-32180 Plumbing Permits
c -
,
FUND 10
Amount
Act
$60.00
$95.00
$110.00
$250,00
5100.00
$95.00
$12,474.81
8121/2002
Bj21 i2002
8/2112002
8/2112002
8121/2002
8/21/2002
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
Cash Receipts
August 14 through August 23, 2002
Tran
Date R Comments
...r
o 1755 OJIBWAY DR - P02-028
o 1735 DUPRE RD - P02-029
o 1778 DUPRE RD - C02-005
o APPL FOR COMMERICAL RUBBISH - ACE SOLI
o 7035 DUPRE RD - M02-054
o 1697 HUNTER'S TRAIL - P02-030
FUND 415 STORM WATER IMP PROJECTS
Act Type R
FUND 41
$14,849.00
Act
$0.30
$57,00
5170.89
$1,65
$0.36
5210-29
5200,00
5200.00
$200,00
$0.60
$110,37
$0.S8
5268.34
$9.00
$44.94
$4.45
$92,66
$8,94
$25,65
$2.55
$1,608.87
$1,608.87
FUND 601 WATER FUND
Ac.t Type G
Act
50.44
$11.72
$1.55
$13.71
Act Type R
$78.15
5731.00
$4,08
$2,126.02
$172-01
$9.33
$2,763.34
$290.00
$1,420.34
$0.05
$1,500,00
$6.82
Batch
Name
8-21-02
8-21-02
8-21-02
8-21-02
8-21-02
8-21-02
08/23/02 2;32 PM
Page 2
Account Oeser
R 101~32180 Plumbing Permits
R 101-32180 Plumbing Permits
R 1 01 ~32225 Electlicallnspectlon
R 101-32100 RentaliLiquor Licenses
R 101~32100 Rental/Uquor Licenses
R 1D1-32180 Plumbing Permits
8/5/2002 0 US Receipt Serv Pen 10 DRAIN FEE 8w5-02u R 415-32350 Storm Water Drainage Fu
8/5/2002 0 US Receipt Serv 1Q DRAIN FEE 8-5~02u R 415~32350 Storm Water Drainage Fu
8/6/2002 0 US Receipt Serv 10 DRAIN FEE 8~6"02UT R 415-32350 Storm Water Drainage Fu
8/612002 0 UB Receipt Serv Pen 10 ORP.1N FEE 8-6-02UT R 415-32350 Storm Water Drainage fu
8/14/2002 0 UB ReceIpt Serv Pen 10 DRA1N FEE 8~ 14-02U R 415-32350 Storm Water Drainage Fu
811412002 0 UB Receipt Serv 10 DRA!N FEE 8-14~02U R 415-32350 Storm Water Drainage Fu
8/14/2002 06817 GROUSE HOLLOW-02-126 - JAMES MELCH 8~14-02 R415-32350 Storm Water Drainage Fu
8/14/2002 0 6987 PORTAGE WAY - 02-123 - SWIFT CONSTR 8-14-02 R 415-32350 Storm Water Drainage Fu
8114/2002 0 1748 DUPRE RD - 02-125 - TC BUILDERS 8-14-02 R 415-32350 Storm Water Drainage Fu
8}1412002 0 US Receipt Serv Pen 10 DRAIN fEE 8-14-02U R 415-32350 Storm Water Drainage Fu
8/1412002 0 US Receipt Serv 10 DRAIN FEE B-14-02U R 416-32350 Storm Water Drainage Fu
8/1612002 0 UB Receipt Sellt Pen 10 DRAIN FEE 081502UT R 415-32350 Storm Water DraInage Fu
8/1612002 0 UB Receipl Serv 10 DRAIN FEE 081502UT R 415-32350 Storm Waler Drainage Fu
8/16/2002 0 US Receipt Serv 10 DRAIN FEE 8-14-02-2 R 415-32350 Storm Water Drainage Fu
8/19/2002 0 UB Receipt Serv 10 DRAIN FEE 8-19-02ut R 415-32350 Storm Water Drainage Fu
8/1912002 0 UB Receipt Ser, Pon 10 DRAIN FEE 8-19-02ul R 415-32350 Storm Water Drainage Fu
8/21/2002 0 US Rece(pt Ser\} 10 DRAIN FEE 8-21-02U R 415-32350 Storm Water Drainage Fu
8121/2002 D UB Receipt Serv Perl 10 OAAIN FEE B-21-02U R 415~32350 Storm Water Drainage Fu
8J22/2002 0 UB Receipt Serv 10 DRA!N FEE 8-22-02ut R 415-32350 Storm Water DraInage Fu
8f22i2002 0 UB Receipt Serv Pen 10 DRAIN FEE 8-22~02ut R 415-32350 Storm Water Drainage Fu
B!14f2002 0 UB Receipt Sure 1 SALES TAX
811412002 0 US Receipt Sure 1 SALES TAX
8/16/2002 0 US Receipt Sure 1 SALES TAX
8/512002
8/Si2002
8/5/2002
81612002
816/2002
81612002
811412002
8/14/2002
8114/2002
8/14/2002
Sf 14/2002
8/1412002
o UB Receipt Serv 30 WATER TEST FEE
o UB Receipl Serv 1 WATER
o US Receipt Serv Pen 1 WATER
o UB Receipt Serv 1 W ATE R
o US Receipl Serv 30 WATER TEST FEE
(} UB Receipt Ssrv Pen 1 WATER
o UB Receipl Serv 1 WATER
01748 DUPRE RD - 02-125 - TC BUILDERS
o UB Receipt Serv 1 WATER
o UB Receipt Serv Pen 15 WATER COMM
o 1748 DUPRE RD - 02-125 - TC BUILDERS
o US Receipt Sarv Pen15 WATER COMM
8-14-02U G 601-20800 State Sales & Use Tax
8-14-02U G 601-20800 Slate Sales & Use Tax
081502UT G 601-20800 State Sales & Use Tax
8-5-02u
8-S-02"
8.5-02u
8-6-02UT
8-6-02UT
8-6-02UT
8-14-02U
8-14-02
8-14-02U
8-14-02U
8-14-02
8-14-02U
R 601-34400 Safe Drinking Water Fee
R 601-37100 Water Sales
R 601-37100 Water Sales
R 601-37100 Water Sales
R 601-34400 Safe Drinking Wate.r Fee
R 601-37100 Water Sales
R 601-37100 Water Sales
R 601-34600 Water Meter Charges
R 601-37100 Water Sales
R 601-37100 Water Sales
R 601-37'150 Water ConnectlReconnec
R 601-37100 Water Sales
.
Amount
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
Cash Receipts
Augusl14 through August 23, 2002
Tran
Date R Comments
Batch
Name
08/23/022:32 PM
Page 3
Account Oeser
Act
$1,500.00
8180.39
80.36
$275.62
$1,500.00
$290.00
$9.74
$134.56
$6.73
$290.00
$3,342.26
$6.92
$23.80
8320.24
$90.10
$10.42
853.41
$584.44
$58.17
$5.26
8698.03
$65.21
$4.84
$53.86
$159.49
$15.95
$14.69
$1.46
$18,797.09
FUND 60
$18,810.80
FUND 602 SEWER FUND
Act Type G
$1,200.00
$1.200.00
$1,200.00
Act $3,600.00
Act Type R
$882.00
$4.90
$187.50
$8.95
$3.060.90
$20.86
$0.13
$2,000.00
$10.75
81.798.94
$0.54
8103.44
$2,000.00
83.331.62
$2,000.00
$5.34
$65.27
."..
811412002 06987 PORTAGE WAY - 02-123 - SWIFT CONSTR 8-14-02 R 601-37150 Water Connect/Reconnec
811412002 0 UB Receipt SeN 15 WATER COMM 8-14-02U R 601-37100 Water Sales
8/1412002 0 U8 Receipt SeN Pen 1 WATER 8-14-02U R 601-37100 Water Sales
8/14/2002 0 US Receipt Serv 30 WATER TEST FEE 8-14-02U R 601-34400 Sa.fe Drinking Water Fee
8114/2002 06817 GROUSE HOLLOW-02-126 - JAMES MELCH 8-14-02 R 601.37150 Water Connect/Reconnoc
8/1412002 0 6817 GROUSE HOLLOW-02-126 - JAMES MELCH a-14-(J2 R 601-34600 Water Meier Charges
8/1412002 0 UB Receipt SeN Pen 1 WATER B-14-02U R 601-37100 Water Sales
8114/2002 0 UB Receipt Serv 30 WA TER TEST FEE 6-14-02U R 601-34400 Safe Drinking Water Fee
81'14/2002 0 US Receipt Serv 15 WATER COMM 8-14-02U R 601-37100 Water Sales
8/1412002 06987 PORTAGE WAY - 02-123 - SWIFT CONSTR 8-'14-02 R 601-34600 Wa'er Meter Charges
8116/2002 0 UB Receipt Sef\/ 1 WATER 08'1502UT R 601-37100 Water Sales
8116/2002 0 UB Receipt SaN Pen 1 WATER 081502UT R 601-37100 Water Sales
8116/2002 0 UB Receipt Serv 15 WATER COMM 081502UT R 601-37100 Water Sales
8116/2002 0 U8 Receipt SON 30 WATER TEST FEE 081502UT R 601-34400 Safe Drinking Water Fee
8/16/2002 0 U8 Receipt SeN 1 WATER 8-14-02-2 R 601-37100 Water Sales
8i16/2002 0 U8 Receipt SON 30 WATER TEST FEE 8-14-02-2 R 601-34400 Safe Drinking Waler Fee
8f19/2002 0 US Receipt Sarv 30 WATER TEST FEE 8.19-02ut R 601-34400 Safe DrinKing Water Fee
8/19/2002 Q US Receipt Serv 1 WATER 8-19-02ut R 601-37100 Water Sales
8/19i2002 0 US Receipt Serv Pel11 WA TER 8~19~02ut R 601-37100 Water Sales
8/19/2002 0 US Receipt Serv Pen 30 WATER TEST FEE 8~19-02ut R 601-34400 Safe Drinking Water Fee
812112002 0 U8 Receipt SON 1 WATER 8-21-02U R 601-37100 Water Sales
8/2112002 0 UB Receipt Sarv Pen 1 WATER 8-21-Q2U R 601-37100 Water Sales
8/21/2002 0 US Receipt Serv Pen 30 WATER TEST FEE 8-21-02U R 601-34400 Safe Drinking Water Fee
8/21/2002 0 UB Receipt Sew 30 WATER TEST fEE 8-21-02U R 601-34400 Safe Drinking Water Fee
8i22/2002 0 US Receipt Sew 1 WATER 8-22-0Zut R 601-37100 Water Sales
8/2212002 0 US Receipt Serl Pen 1 WATER 8-22-02ut R a01-371QO Water Sales
8122/2002 0 US Receipt Serv 30 WATER TEST FEE 8-22-02"t R 601-34400 Safe Drmking Water Fee
8122i2002 0 UB Receipt Serv Pen 30 WATER TEST FEE 8-22-02ut R 601-34400 Safe Dfinking Water Fee
8/1412002
8/14/2002
8i14/2002
8/512002
6/5/2002
81612002
8/612002
816/2002
81612002
811412002
8/14/2002
8/14/2002
8114/2002
8f14/2002
8/14/2002
8/1412002
6114/2002
811412002
8/1412002
&11412002
o 6987PORTAGEWAY-02-12:J-SWIFTCONSTR 8-14.02
06817 GROUSE HOLLOW-02-126 - JAMES MELCH 8.14-02
o 1748 DUPRE RD - 02-125 - TC BUILDERS 0.14-02
o UB Receipt Serv 6 SEWER 8-5-02"
o US Receipt Serv Pen 6 SEWER 8-5-02u
o UB Receipt SeN 18 SEWER COMM 8-8-02UT
o US Receipt SeN Pen 18 SEWER COMM 8-6-02UT
o UB Receipt SeN 6 SEWER 8-6-02UT
o UB Receipt SeN Pen 6 SEWER 8-6-02UT
o UB Receipt SeN Pen 18 SEWER COMM 8-14-02U
06987 PORTAGE WAY - 02-123 - SWIFT CONSTR 6.14-02
o UB Receipt SeN Pen 6 SEWER 8-14-02U
o UB Receipt SeN 6 SEWER 8-14-Q2U
o UB Receipt SeN Pen 18 SEWER COMM 8-14-0ZU
o UB Receipt SeN 18 SEWER COMM 8-14-02U
06817 GROUSE HOLLOW-02-126. JAMES MELCH 8-14-02
o UB Receipt SeN 6 SEWER 8-14-QZU
o 1748 DUPRE RD - 02-125 - IC BUILDERS 6-14-02
o UB Receipt SeN Pen 6 SEWER 8-14-02U
o UB Receipt SeN 18 SEWER COMM 8.14-02U
G 602-34407 Service AvailabWty Cherg
G 602~34407 Service Availability Charg
G 602-34407 Service Availabmty Charg
R 602-37200 Sewer Sales
R 602-37200 Sewer Sates
R 602-37200 Sewer Sales
R 602M37200 Sewer Sales
R 602-37200 Sewer Sales
R 602-37200 Sewer Sales
R 602-37200 Sewer Sales
R 602~37250 Sewer ConnectlReconnec
R 602~37200 Sewer Sales
R 802-37200 Sewer Sales
R 602-37200 Sewer Sales
R 602-37200 Sewer Sales
R 602-37250 Sewer ConnE:ctlReconnec
R 802-37200 Sewer Sales
R 602-37250 Sewer ConnecilReconn8c
R 602-37200 Sewer Sales
R 602-37200 Sewer Sales
.
Amount
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
Cash Receipts
August 14 through August 23, 2002
Tran
Date R Comments
08123102 2:32 PM
Page 4
Batch
Name
Account Oeser
Act
$14,51
$98,00
$49,00
$392,00
$4,244,50
$73.03
$733.67
$13.36
$142,02
$1,469,64
$133,64
$41B.15
$41.85
$23,305,11
FUND 60 $26,905,11
$62,173.7B
..
B115/2002 0 U8 Receipt Se", Pen 6 SEWER
811612002 0 US Receipt Serv 6 SEWER
8/16/2a02 0 U8 Receipt Se", 18 SEWER COMM
8/16/2002 0 U8 Receipt Serv 18 SEWER COMM
811612002 0 US Receipt Serv 6 SEWER
8/19/2002 0 US Receipt Serv Pen 6 SEWER
8119/2002 0 US Receipt Se", 6 SEWER
6/2112002 0 US Receipt Se", Pen 18 SEWER COMM
8i21/2002 0 UB Receipt Serv Pen. 6 SEWER
8/21/2002 0 US Receipt Serv 6 SEWER
8/21/2002 0 US Receipt Serv 16 SEWER COMM
8122/2002 0 US Receipt Serv 6 SEWER
8J22!2002 0 US Receipt Serv Pen 6 SEWER
081502UT R 602-37200 Sewer Sales
8-14-02-2 R 602-37200 Sewer Sales
081502UT R 602-37200 Sewer Sales
8~14-02-2 R 602~37200 Sewer Sales
081502UT R 602-37200 Sewer Sales
8-19-0Zut R 602~37200 Sewer Sales
8-19-0211t R 602~37200 Sewer Sales
8-21-02U R 602-37200 Sewer Sales
8~21-02U R 602-37200 Sewer Sales -
8-21-02U R 602-37200 Sewer Sales
8-21-02U R 602-37200 Sewer Sales
8-22~02ut R 602-37200 Sewer Sales
8-22-02ut R 602-37200 Sewer Sales
FILTER: (([Period] in(8) and [Act Year] = '2002') and [Tran Nbr] in(10,13)) and {({{{{{({Not [Tran OateJ=#8/1/2002#))) AND
{(Not [Tran Oate]=#8/2/2002#))) AND {(Not [Tran Oate]=#8/7/2002#))) ANO ((Not [Tran Oate]=#8/8/2002#))) AND ({Not
[Tran Oate]=#8/9/2002#))) ANO ({Not [Tran Oate]=#8/12/2002#))) ANO ((Not [Tran OateJ=#8/13/2002#)))
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
08/23/02 2:30 PM
Page 1
*Check Summary Register@
.
Name
AUGUST 2002
Check Date
Chock Amt
10100 MAIN STREET BANK
Paid Chk# 017242 AID ELECTRiC CORPORATION
Paid Chk# 017243 CENTENNIAL LAKES POLICE DEPT
Paid Chk# 017244 COpy IMAGES iNC
Paid Chk# 017245 CORNER EXPRESS
Paid Chk# 017246 E.S.R.1. INC.
Paid Chk# 017247 EARTH BURNERS INC.
Paid Chk# 017248 GOLOENGA TE INTERNET SERVICES
Paid Chk# 017249 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL INC
Paid Chk# 017250 HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT
Paid Chk# 017251 HOMES BY JAMES
Paid Chk# 017252 ICBO
Paid Chk# 017253 IMAGE PRiNTING & GRAPHICS
Paid Chk# 017254 INSTRUMENTAL RESEARCH iNC
Paid Chk# 017255 LANG BUILDERS
Paid Chk# 017256 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES
Paid Chk# 017257 MENARDS - FOREST LAKE
Paid Chk# 017258 METRO SALES INCORPORATED
Paid Chk# 017259 MINNEGASCO'
Paid Chk# 017260 MN DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Paid Chk# 017261 NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE
Paid Chk# 017262 PC SOLUTIONS. INC.
Paid Chk# 017263 PIERCE & ASSOC.
Paid Chk# 017264 PRESS PUBLICATIONS
Paid Chk# 017265 QWEST
Paid Chk# 017266 REHBEINS BLACK DiRT
Paid Chk# 017267 SOLBERG ElECTRIC INC
Paid Chk# 017268 SOUTHWIND BUILDERS
Paid Chk# 017269 STORK TWiN CiTY TESTING CORP
Paid Chk# 017270 SWIFT CONSTRUCTION
Paid Chk# 017271 T.C. BUILDERS
Paid Chk# 017272 TIME SAVER
Paid Chk# 017273 TOWN CRIER PROMOTIONS
Paid Chk# 017274 W. W. GRAINGER, iNC,
Paid Chk# 017275 WHITE BEAR LOCKSMITH
Paid Chk# 017276 WILLOW GLEN HOMEOWNERS ASSN.
Paid Chk# 017277 XCEL ENERGY
FILTER: None
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
8128/2002
8/28/2002
8128/2002
812812002
8/28/2002
8128/2002
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
812812002
8128/2002
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
8128/2002
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
8128/2002
8/28/2002
812812002
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
8/28/2002
Total Checks
$104.55
$35,510.56
$89.71
$258.61
$506.50
$116.206.85
$60.00
$55.80
$807.12
$25.00
$85.00
$550.87
$61.50
$25.00
$320.00
$38.00
$1.310.39
$120.90
$1,022,00
$32.00
$947.58
$25.00
$832.15
$60.58
$22.37
$221.00
$25.00
$485,85
$100.00
$50.00
$145.00
$147.44
$946.12
$215.40
$20.00
$2,005.99
--- ~--
$163,439,84
.
;;;
0.. "
"' '"
"'ff
N
'"
!2
'"
':!
'"
o
'" ~ 0 0 0 '" '" 0 0 0 0 '" 0 '"
0 ~ 0 '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 '" e- '"
" 0 .. .0 <ti 00 .n ro N .. 0 r-: .. r-:
.>::~
U<:l '" e- "' e- ~ '" >Ii '" "' 0 OJ '"
"'. ". q "' ": '" ;;; "'. ~ r--
;;; '" ;;; N oj ~ ;;; ;;; ;;; .n
'" '" '" '" ;;;
'" C '" "' "' " <D "' " 0 '" r-- '" '"
0 '" ~ '" <q '" ~ " <q " '"
" " 0 .0 r-: cri r-: CO;
-" 0 '<t "' '" r-- ;;;
U E '" '" ;;; '" '" '" '" "' " '" 0
"' "'- "'. "'- '" '" '" ~ '" r-- 0
..: '" ~ '" ;;; ~ '" '" '" '" '" CO;
'" '"
'"
w OJ '" '" '" '" '" '" OJ OJ OJ OJ
~2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
..J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
..J " " '" '" '" ':! OJ '" OJ '" '" ~ ~
130 "' "' "' "' in in in "' in "' "'
> .... ~ ~ ~ ~
ell ;<; ro ;<; ro ro ~ ro ;<; ro ;<; ;<;
0:: .... '"
<II
W '0,
t-
Z Ql
W U 0'"
U .><: o 0
0 1Il "
LL Ql 1Il
0 ..c:
>- U
t- ;:;: .J
U -1 -<
oc :r:
UJ ({)
'" 0: Z
;;; -1 -< W
'" Z UJ Cl ;;; <! f-
:r: -; w 0 Cl ({) (/J
" f- CIi -1 -, W :j ci w ii:
E UJ -1 ~ -1
:J w lJ) Z f- W '"
" z " " Cl w "
z z <{ >- :i 0 Z > W f- ,:
" UJ "- Z (/J l-- (/J 0 -< ~
" " ti -< W lJ) '" (f) 0 U) ci w
,., :r: (f) w '" UJ W Z
0 '" w '"
N 0.. -1 :r: W CIi 0 Cl lJ)
Q. 0 -1 W 0 :J "- f- ;;: '" Z w
E a <! f- a <{ 0 lJ) w UJ :;;
W 0 "- (/J ;;; "- ~ CL 0 '" '" (f)
""
" e- '" '" '<t '" ~ "' 0 '" '" 0
'<t OJ '" '" '" '" e- o '" '" "'
g; 0 <0 0 0 0 0 0 C; <0 0 <0
0 <0 <0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 <0
C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
E 0 0 0 <0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
'" "' '" 0 <D N '" " "' '" r-- '"
"' "' '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '"
u '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '"
" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '"
r. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
U", 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
"C
;"0 e- e- e- ~ " e- ~ .... ~ .... ....
~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
a.
;.,"
" 0 C; .; C; .; C; ;; ;; C; ;:; ;; ;:;
a."
:. OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ '" 8i N N OJ
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
>- OJ N '" OJ OJ OJ '" OJ OJ '" '"
Centennial Fire District
Check Register
8/21/2002
The disbursements listed below are submitted by the Centennial Fire District for your approval:
DATE
7/16/2002
7/16/2002
711612002
7/16/2002
7/16/2002
7/16/2002
7/16/2002
7/16/2002
7/16/2002
7/16/2002
7/16/2002
7/16/2002
7/16/2002
7/16/2002
7/1612002
711612002
7/16/2002
7/16/2002
7/16/2002
7/16/2002
7/16/2002
7/1612002
7/16/2002
7/16/2002
CHECK# NAME
13354
13355
13356
13357
13358
13359
13360
13361
13362
13363
13364
13365
13366
13367
13368
13369
13370
13371
13372
13373
13374
13375
13376
13377
Allina Health System
***VOID***
Amoco Oil Company
Arthur Mohler
Aspen Mills
Citgo Petroleum Corporation
Connexus Energy
Desmond Englund
International Assn. of Arson Investigators
Loffler Business Systems
Lynn Card Company
MN Chapter IAAI/Jeff G. Schadegg
Oxygen Service Company, Inc.
Postmaster
Qwest
Reliant Energy Minnegasco
Ross Industries, Inc.
Xcel Energy
Stacy's Specialty Stitching
Arthur Mohler
Mark's Meat Products
Milo Bennett
Viking Office Products
York Photo Labs
1 of 1
ACCOUNT
42180 - Office Supplies
00000 - VOID
42100 - Fuel and Lube
45010 - Safety Camp Expense
42120 - Uniform Expense
42100 - Fuel and Lube
42252 - Station 1 - Electric
42280 - Miscellaneous Expense
42200 - Dues and Memberships
42110 - Other Maintenance
42180 - Office Supplies
42200 - Dues and Memberships
42270 - Breathing Air
42180 - Office Supplies
42240 - Telephone
42253 - Station 2 - Gas
42190 - Fire Prevention Supplies
42254 - Station 2 - Electric
45600 - Donated Items Expense
45010 - Safety Camp Expense
45010 - Safety Camp Expense
45010 - Safety Camp Expense
45010 - Safety Camp Expense
45010 - Safety Camp Expense
Total
AMOUNT
24.00
0.00
182.77
48.92
6.00
220.26
355.35
17.95
SO.OO
27.89
81.30
25.00
80.00
134.00
297.85
114.39
916.28
558.02
23.00
84.91
140.00
15.90
49.48
16.55
$3,469.82
.
"
~ Bonestroo
II:JI Rosene
n Anderlik &
. ~. Associates
Engint~rs & A<<hitetts
Owner: City of Centerville, 1880 Main St., Centerville, MN 55038 Date: Auaust 6, 2002
For Period: 6/13/2002 to 8/6/2002 Renuest No: 1
Contractor. Earth Burners Inc.. 5910 Fremont St., Duluth, MN 55807
CONTRACTOR'S REQUEST FOR PAYMENT
CSAH 14 WATER MAIN EXTENSION
BRA FILE NO, 616-01-123
SUMMARY
Original Contract Amount $ 158,803.00
2 Change Order - Addition $ 0.00
3 Change Order - Deduction $ 0.00
4 Revised Contract Amount $ 158,803.00
5 Value Completed to Date $ 122,323.00
6 Material on Hand $ 0.00
7 Amount Earned $ 122,323.00
8 Less Retainage 5% $ 6,116.15
9 Subtotal $ 116,206.85
10 Less Amount Paid Previously $ 0.00
11 Liquidated damages - $ 0.00
12 AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO. $ 116.206.85
Recommended for Approval by:
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERlIK & ASSOCIATES, INC,
~~ w;~..-
~
Approved by Contractor:
EARTH BURNERS INC
~#
.-/
Approved by Owner:
~~
t};" Ad~,1-<1vcx.40lr
Specified Contract Completion Date:
September 13, 2002
Date:~
I~ Za;z..
.
4~q-Lflq~5- 300
61601123REQ1.xls
.
Contract Unit Quantity Amount
No. Item Unit Quantity Price 10 Date to Date
Base Bid:
1 12" HOPE, DR11 water main ~ directional drill LF 2622 39.00 2622 $102.258.00
2 6" HOPE. directional drill LF 60 25.00 60 $1.500.00
3 Directional drilling, extreme condition, any pipe
size LF 200 5.00 $0.00
4 8" PVC water main LF 30 30.00. 28 $840.00
5 6" PVC water main LF 10 28.00 20 $560.00
6 12" gate valve and box €:A 2 2300.00 1 $2.300.00
7 8" gate valve and box €:A 1 1750.00 1 $1.750.00
8 6" gate valve and box EA 2 1500.00 2 $3.000.00
9 Valve rod extension EA 8 150.00 $0.00
10 Hydrant wlvalve €:A 3 3000.00 2 $6.000.00
11 Connect to existing 8" PVC EA 1 1500.00 1 $1.500.00
12 Fittings LB 2000 0.40 $0.00
13 6" Pipe Restraint EA 15 5.00 14 $70.00
14 8" pipe restraint EA 3 5.00 3 $15.00
15 12" pipe restraint EA 19 15.00 2 $30.00
16 Clearing and grubbing LS 1 1000.00 1 $1.000.00
17 Traffic control LS 1 1000.00 1 $1.000.00
18 Cross under SPWU culverts LS 1 500.00 1 $500.00
19 1" Copper service LF 100 14.00 $0.00
20 1" Copper service ~ directional drill LF 210 14.00 $0.00
21 1" curb stop and box EA 9 450.00 $0.00
22 1" corporation stop EA 9 450.00 $0.00
23 Reconstruct manhole EA 1 10000.00 $0.00
24 Sodding SY 500 4.00 $0.00
25 Seeding. MnDOT Mix 30B AC 0.6 2000.00 $0.00
26 Silt fence, regular LF 100 2.00 $0.00
27 Street sweeper HR 5 100.00 $0.00
28 Salvage and replace fence LF 40 20.00 $0.00
29 Transplant tree or bush EA 5 200.00 $0.00
Total Base Bid: $122.323.00
Total Base Bid:
Total Work Completed To Date
$122,323.00
$122.323.00
61601123REQ1.xls
.'
PROJECT PAYMENT STATUS
OWNER CITY OF CENTERVILLE
BRA FILE NO, 616-01-123
CONTRACTOR EARTH BURNERS INC
CHANGE ORDERS
No.
Date
Description
Amount
Total Change Orders
PAYMENT SUMMARY
No. From
06/13/2002
To
08/06/02
Payment
116,206.85
Retainage
6,116.15
Completed
122,323,00
Material on Hand
Total Pavment to Date $116,206.85 Oriainal Contract $158,803.00
Retainane Pav No. 1 6,116.15 Chanoe Orders
Total Amount Earned $122,323.00 Revised Contract $158.803.00
61601123REQ1.x1S
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
August 14, 2002
6:30 p.m.
PRESENT:
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City of Centerville held their regularly scheduled
lQI! . ....l.
'f',)f;;
Mayor Tim Swedberg
Council Member Dick Travis
Council Member Mari Nelson
Council Member Linda Broussard Vickers
Council Member Capra
ABSENT:
None.
STAFF:
City Administrator, Ms. Moore-Sykes
City Engineer, Mr. Tom Peterson
City Attorney, Mr. Jim Hoeft
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Swedberg called the August 14, 2002, City Council meeting to order at 6:33 p.m.
II. SET AGENDA
Council Member Nelson requested that the audit be removed from the Consent Agenda
and added under Council Business.
Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated there were some technical issues with Ordinance #4 and
asked whether Council wished to remove it from the Consent Agenda.
Mayor Swedberg indicated Ordinance #4 should stay on the agenda and noted he would
explain the matter when it is approved.
Motiou bv Couucil Member Nelson. seconded bv Council Member Travis to
approve the aeenda as presented. All in favor. Motion carried unanimouslv.
III. A W ARDS/PRESENTATIONS/APPEARANCES
1. Mr. Milo Bennett (Centennial Lakes Fire Department Budget - 2003)
City of Centemlle
August 14,2002
Council Meeting Minutes
Milo Bennett addressed council and presented the 2003 budget for the Centennial Lakes
Fire Department. He then indicated that the 2003 budget increased 5.6% over the 2002
budget. He further explained that the largest increase comes with payroll and benefits.
Fire Chief Bennett indicated the department made a significant reduction in the early 90's
in the vehicle maintenance category but those numbers are slowly creeping up again.
Fire Chief Bennett indicated they had hired a full time inspector which accounts for the
5.6% increase and noted the Centerville portion would be $81,620 versus $76,000 last
year. He also explained that Centerville pays 12.6% of the overall fire district budget and
that is based on run experience and population.
Fire Chief Bennett indicated that the cost per person for the Fire Department is $24.50
per $100,000 valuation.
Council Member Nelson thanked Chief Bennett for the report.
Motion by Council Member Nelson, seconded by Council Member Broussard
Vickers to approve the 2003 budeet for tbe Centennial Lakes Fire Department. All
in favor. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Swedberg thanked Chief Bennett for his service to the City.
Chief Bennett indicated he had placed information on the desk regarding safety camp and
noted that of the 102 children registered 98 attended.
2. Mr. Mark Pangell. 7029 Eagle Trail (Drainage Issues)
Mr. Mark Pangell of 7029 Eagle Trail provided a letter to Council and then read parts of
it.
Mr. Pangell indicated that the drainage in his yard has been seriously and adversely
affected by the townhomes that were constructed on the adjoining property. He also
commented that there was no silt fence in place during construction and the silt has filled
in the drainage area and there is no a lake effect when it rains. He then indicated that
City Public Works had been out there and has said it is at 1 % but he does not feel that the
grade is at 1 % and he is worried that the standing water and wet conditions will
compromise his foundation.
Mr. Pangell said he was there to ask the Council to have someone come out to assess the
situation and see if the drainage is designed correctly and how it could be corrected to get
the water flowing to the controlled drainage pond.
Council Member Capra asked if the water stays or drains. Mr. Pangell indicated that it
eventually dissipates but stands for a long time. He then said he was hoping the City
Page 2 of21
City of Centerville
August 14, 2002
Council Meeting Minutes
could authorize someone to come out and assess the problem and get it taken care of
within 30 days.
Council Member Capra asked if Mr. Peterson looked at this property. Mr. Peterson
indicated that he had not been in the back yard but City Staff shot the ditch and said it is
I % which is a little flat but falls within the normal specifications for the slope.
Council Member Nelson asked if this was the same issue as the Eagle Pass Pond. Mr.
Peterson indicated it was two different ponds.
Mr. Steven St. George of 1861 Pioneer Lane played a videotape taken on July 28,2002
immediately after a storm. He then asked if the ditch was surveyed this year or last year.
Mr. Palzer indicated it was done in May of this year.
Mr. St. George indicated it was done before the townhomes had sod installed.
Mr. Peterson indicated that any erosion caused by the construction could be removed but
said the grade itself cannot be altered much. He then eXplained that the water flows
down to the pond and out through a system of pipes and eventually ends up in Clear
Water Creek.
Mr. Greg Noner of 1855 Pioneer Lane indicated he had come to show support for his
neighbors. He then said he had called Mr. Cook because Swift has not finished the
landscaping behind the houses and then spoke to Carrie from Swift who assured him that
it would be done next week.
Mr. Noner indicated that he had asked Mr. Cook when the grade was last shot and was
told it was done last fall and was also told that Staff cannot come out every 30 days to
shoot the ditch. He then said that the area was eroding all spring and summer and has
obviously affected the 1 % grade.
Mr. Noner said he felt the City needed to shoot the grade to see if the 1 % was affected
and Staff has said that it cannot do so without direction from Council. He then said that
he feels that Swift should be held accountable for the problem.
Mr. Robert Domer of 7031 Eagle Trail indicated he receives the residual from the
ponding as he is directly behind the elevation in question. He then said that the grade
behind his property has been lifted more than 30 inches within 8 feet of his property and
the drainage area changed from 5 feet wide. He further indicated that he is a civil
engineer for Dakota County and it is a negative grade in that location.
Mr. Dolner indicated he felt Gorham and/or Swift should be held responsible for the
problem. He also indicated he would question the setback to the easement.
Mr. Domer indicated that when he installed his fence he had three inches of clearance
under it and now the fence has soil and grass growth up 4 inches. He then indicated that
Page 3 of21
City of Centerville
August ]4, 2002
Council Meeting Minutes
you can see that there is no erosion control based on the muddy water. He also said that
the grade has been lifted by eight inches and a I % grade is minimum, not typical.
Mr. Domer indicated he would like to see Swift bring a few guys with a bobcat to the
area to clean out the easement and fix the grade. He then said that it is very frustrating to
have City workers come out, walk the fence line and leave without shooting it.
Council Member Travis asked if the pond is low enough. Mr. Domer indicated that the
grade starts out at about 1 % but because of erosion has to climb to get up and over and
then down to the pond. He then said that Swift impeded the cubic feet of water or the
flow part of the grade behind the fence line and it needs to be examined.
Council Member Capra asked if Mr. Dolner had lived there since 1998. Mr. Dolner
indicated that he had. He then said that during rainy times the water used to flow better
and sometimes there was a small ponding area but that has gotten much worse since the
townhomes were built. He then said the townhomes are 9.5 feet off of the property line
and have a large roofline with no erosion control and it has filled in the easement.
Mr. Domer indicated he had put railroad ties in around the base of his fence. He then
said that if the City cannot help him with this issue he intends to raise the grade of his
property IO inches to solve the problem. He further explained that his wife runs a
daycare out of the home and the County is involved because the backyard is unsafe for
children.
Mr. Dolner indicated that every lot is graded differently by three or four inches. He then
indicated that there was to be a natural barrier along the fence line because it is 33 feet
house to house and he was okay with that because of the foliage and pines but those were
bulldozed. He further explained that he had gone through the whole process of getting
that row of pines put back in but Swift is not willing to discuss the grading issues.
Mr. Dolner suggested that the trees be picked up and the easement area cleaned out. He
then said that he knows there are ordinances against changing the grade of your property
but said he will make his backyard livable for the daycare kids.
Mayor Swedberg indicated he had been out to the location and said there was substantial
water out there that backed up almost out to Eagle Trail. He then said that it seems that
the whole thing compresses down to a bottleneck area where the water is not flowing. He
further indicated that the easement area was wider before and asked City Attorney Hoeft
how the City should proceed.
City Hoeft indicated the City is not sure what the problem is and has no information that
tells him what the situation is. He then suggested that the City determine what exactly
the problem is before attempting to assist the residents with holding Swift accountable.
Page 4 of21
City of Centerville
August 14,2002
Council Meeting Minutes
Council asked Mr. Domer to shoot the elevations and provide the information to the City
Administrator and then asked the City Administrator to work with the City Engineer on
the matter.
Council Member Broussard Vickers suggested that the engineer should contact the
developer if he finds that there is something that should not be that was caused by the
development.
Mayor Swedberg told the residents that staff would work on it and, if necessary, it would
be on the next agenda.
3. Mr. Glen Powers. 1870 Quebec Street
Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated that Mr. Glenn Powers would like to address Council.
Mr. Glen Powers of 1870 Quebec Street indicated he knew that the City had come out
and shot elevations but said he had not heard anything yet. Mr. Peterson indicated he was
working on it right now and has some plans to send out to Roso contracting for a quote
and he will have that for the next meeting. He then explained that the plan is to run a
pipe with a catch basin and the residents can run a drain tile into that pipe.
Mr. Powers asked if the City would be bringing up the grade. Mr. Peterson indicated
there was no plan to bring up the grade.
Mr. Powers indicated he had put in 18 yards of dirt and it all washed away. Mr. Peterson
indicated it would take a major undertaking to fill in the area.
Council Member Capra indicated that putting the catch basin in would hold the water
rather than having it flow and wash away the dirt. Mr. Peterson indicated that the low
spots of the yard could have drain tile installed to drain to the storm sewer.
Mr. Powers said he feels the City needs to bring up the grade to 1 % as per Ordinance 8
and that would mean the City would need to haul in fill.
Council Member Travis asked where the grade is not 1 %. Mr. PaJzer indicated the last
three lots on Quebec Street are not at 1 %.
Ms. Mary Mathison of 1874 Quebec Street indicated that the water washes across the
middle ofthe backyard and then out to the street.
Mr. Powers indicated that the homes behind him flow to his yard and his sump pump
runs 24 hours a day.
Council Member Broussard Vickers asked how long the residents had lived in their
homes. Mr. Powers indicated he had been there since July of 1996 and Ms. Mathison
said she had lived there since May of 1996. Ms. Mathison then indicated that multiple
Page 5 of21
City of Centerville
August 14, 2002
Council Meeting Minutes
loads of dirt were removed from the location that should not have been and suggested
that Rehbein excavating be held accountable.
Mr. Peterson indicated that the grading plan shows the drainage the way it is occurring
but the elevation is flatter than it was supposed to be.
Ms. Mathison indicated that she sodded her backyard right away and that would have
prevented erosion from her yard and would have caught any erosion from Mr. Powers
yard.
Council Member Nelson indicated she lives on 73rd and her backyard stays spongy wet
and then commented that the City is built in the swamps.
Council Member Capra indicated she would like to see the engineer and public works
work with the two property owners.
Mr. Peterson said he feels the drain tile will help. Ms. Mathison indicated she would be
happy if there was no more standing water.
Mr. Powers asked if Roso was picking up the costs. Mr. Peterson indicated the City
would pay for the catch basin and manholes.
IV. PUBLIC HEARING(S)
None.
V. COUNCIL BUSINESS
I. Pheasant Marsh Phase II Developer's Agreement
Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated that Staff had faxed to the developer the agreement of
assessment and waiver of irregularity and appeal.
Council Member Nelson asked if Pheasant Marsh was one of the accounts that had
outstanding capital funds. Ms. Paulseth indicated that there was not a problem with that
project as it was a 429 and there are enough bond funds to cover the amounts.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated that he had drafted the proposed development contract for
Phase II mirroring the Phase I development contract. He then explained that the private
improvements are different and noted the numbers were provided by Mr. Palzer and he
has no reason to doubt them but has not confirmed them.
Council Member Broussard Vickers asked if the trail and the building of it is in the
document. City Attorney Hoeft indicated that would be under the 429 Section.
Page 6 of21
City of Centerville
August 14,2002
Council Meeting Minutes
Mr. Palzer indicated he had gone over the numbers and met with Mr. Runkle and is
satisfied with them.
City Attorney Hoeft noted that 150% of the retainage amount would be required with this
contract as it was with Phase I.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated that the figure on Page 5 for improvements is $462,881.05.
Mr. Palzer indicated that number was obtained from the contract for the improvements.
Mr. Runkle indicated the number was from the bids and is correct.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated that Mr. Runkle has said that the principal of Ground
Development will execute the waiver of objection and right of appeal to that dollar
amount as soon as he is available.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated the park dedication fee had been calculated to be $54,000
and the storm water fee is $13,058. Mr. Palzer indicated he had generated the figure for
the storm water fee.
Mr. Runkle indicated he was trying to verify that number but thinks it should be real
close. City Attorney Hoeft explained that the storm water fee is not negotiable.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated the liability insurance requirements have not changed.
Council Member Capra asked if the driveways were in the agreement. Council Member
Travis indicated that the driveways are in there.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated that the agreement requires the developer to comply with
whatever erosion control methods the City requires.
Council Member Capra said she thought there was to be two feet of sod. Council
Member Travis indicated the sod would not grow as there would not be anyone to
maintain it. Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated that there would be silt fencing and a gravel
driveway for each lot.
Motion bv Council Member Travis. seconded bv Council Member Nelson to
approve the development contract for Pheasant Marsh Phase II continl!:ent upon the
developer sil!:ninl!: an al!:reement of assessment and waiver of irrel!:ularitv and appeal
for the amount of $462,881.05 and the verification of the storm water fee
calculation.
Council Member Capra commented that the agreement received bye-mail was different
than what was received tonight. City Attorney Hoeft indicated there was more
information in the one provided at the meeting.
VOTE: Aves - 4, Navs - O. Abstain -l(Broussard Vickers). Motion carried.
Page 7 of2l'
City of CentervilJe
August 14,2002
Council Meeting Minutes
2. Dead Broke Charitable Gambling Renewal (Trio Inn & Wiseguys Pizza)
Mark Larson appeared before Council to ask for a renewal of the charitable gambling
licenses.
Council Member Capra indicated she had a question on disbursements to the Minnesota
High School Rodeo Association as she thought that the ordinance required that the
disbursements be within the trade area.
Mr. Larson indicated that the money given to that organization comes out of their 50%
not the City's 50%. He then indicated he is operating four sites, two in this City, one site
in Hugo and one in Lino Lakes.
Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated that the Park and Recreation Committee
would like to apply for funds but has not gotten a return call from anyone explaining how
to do that. Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated she had spoken to Mr. Larson earlier and he had
said that a letter should be sent detailing the project, the requested amount, and the date
the funds will be needed. She then indicated she had relayed that information to the
Committee.
Motion bv Council Member Broussard Vickers, seconded by Mayor Swedberl!: to
approye the renewal as presented. All in fayor. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Swedberg asked if there were others in the audience who needed to speak before
Council. Ms. Helmbrecht asked if the county engineer would be speaking at this
meeting.
Council Member Nelson indicated the county engineer would be present at the August
28, 2002 meeting.
Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated there would be town hall meetings scheduled for those
interested.
3. 1540 Peltier Lake Drive
Ms. Elizabeth Wagner of 1525 Peltier Lake Drive addressed Council and indicated she
lives across from the Moreland property and would like the City to consider having
exterminators or trappers on the premises when the clean up begins because last time rats
were dispersed during the clean up and ended up in her yard. She then indicated that she
is dangerously allergic to bees and has been told by Ms. Moreland that the garage is full
of bee's nests. She further indicated she would like to be informed by the City when that
garage is going to be disturbed because she does not want to get caught outside and get
stung.
Ms. Donna Germaine of 1548 Peltier Lake Drive indicated she lives right next door to
the Moreland residence and had decided it was time to submit a written complaint
Page 8 of21
City of Centerville
August 14,2002
Council Meeting Minutes
because things were getting so bad. She then said that the stench and trash flow over
onto her property and she would like an update on how things are progressing.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated Council had given him direction to begin the process of
preparing an administrative search warrant to allow access to the home and property to
determine what the hazards are. He then explained that, based on what is found, the
process may turn into a hazardous building declaration. He further explained that he is
not sure if the building official, Fire Chief, or Police Chief will be signing the application
but he will finalize the application very soon and submit it to the courts.
Council Member Nelson asked if Staff would be able to notify Elizabeth Wagner of when
anything is going to be done at the property that would disturb the bees so that she could
make sure she is indoors.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated that once the search warrant is obtained officials will go
onto the property and into tile residence to determine what needs to be done so he would
not anticipate anything happening immediately. He then indicated that the Fire
Department, Police Department and the Building Official will determine whether there
are any circumstances that pose a health or safety issue for the resident or the neighbors
and proceed from there.
Council Member Broussard Vickers asked if the City contacted Anoka County and
whether the County will be assisting the resident. Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated she
contacted Anoka County and was told the County is familiar with the situation but carmot
go in and assist if the resident refuses help. She then indicated she had contacted the state
to see if there was anyone who could help and was referred to the County.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated he would be contacting Anoka County before entering the
property to ask that they have someone present.
Council Member Broussard Vickers asked if the City would be violating any privacy
laws if, as the process moves along, the City does mailings to keep the adjoining property
owners informed of what is going to be happening.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated the City could send mailings to the adjoining property
owners' as the information is public. He then cautioned that opinions should be left out
ofthe matter and factual information relayed.
Council Member Broussard Vickers said she would like communication kept up with the
neighbors and she felt a mailing would save time for Staff rather than telephoning each
resident.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated the City could notifY residents when something will
happen at the property. He then commented that, based on information received, it
appears that an independent contractor may be necessary to come in and do considerable
clean up.
Page 9 of21
City of Centerville
August 14,2002
Council Meeting Minutes
Council Member Nelson indicated she was not as concerned about letting everyone know
but is very concerned about the resident that has asked to be notified of activity due to her
allergy to bees. She then said that she would like that resident called and informed of
when the clean up is going to begin.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated there may be a situation that, after seeing the inside of the
building, the City may have to set up a perimeter for rodent control to prevent the spread
to other areas.
Mayor Swedberg asked if Ms. Moreland would be at the property when the City goes in.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated that, if she is there, the warrant from the Court will be
presented and permission sought to enter the property. If that is not given, they will enter
the property without permission with the assistance of the police whether or not the
resident wants to let them in.
Council Member Broussard Vickers asked if there is an ombudsman servIce for
vulnerable adults to act on her behalf when the City goes into her home.
Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated that when she talked to the state she spoke to the Department
of Aging and was told that they did not know of anyone that could assist other than the
County.
Council Member Broussard Vickers asked to have the County available to provide
services if she changes her mind because at the moment that the City gains entry to her
home she may change her mind and ask for help. She then asked if the City would be
able to locate a family member, friend, or someone from church that could act on her
behalf.
Council Member Nelson said she feels police and fire are trained to deal with situations
like this and when there are issues they can remove the person and take them somewhere
where they would be safe.
Council Member Broussard Vickers asked that the City do whatever it can do to provide
her with an advocate.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated that this has been done in other communities and noted that
the door would not be kicked in this would be done as respectfully as possible. He then
said that he feels that police and fire will do a fine job interacting with her.
Council Member Nelson said she would like to make certain that the City has good
documentation in the address file of the process that has taken place through this
hazardous building process including a police report and whatever other information is
available for future Councils to see what was done.
Page 10 of2l
City of Centerville
August 14,2002
Council Meeting Minutes
Council Member Travis commented that, to date, all Council had done was to direct the
City Attorney to prepare the warrant. He then asked if Council had agreed to move
forward with the warrant.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated that he was planning on completing the application,
presenting it to the district Court Judge, getting it signed, and then bringing it to Council
for authorization to proceed.
Council Member Broussard Vickers asked if the warrant could be obtained within less
than two weeks time.
Motion by Council Member Nelson, seconded by Council Member Travis to
approve the execution of the administrative search warrant.
Council Member Broussard Vickers asked if a letter was sent to the resident. Ms. Moore-
Sykes indicated she was in the process of putting that letter together and commented that,
unfortunately, a letter appeared in the newspaper before that letter could be sent out.
VOTE: All in favor. Motion carried unanimously.
Council recessed at 8:00 p.m.
Council reconvened at 8:07 p.m.
4. Approval of North Metro Telecommunications CommissionlMedia Center 2003
Budget
Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated that the Telecommunications Commission is seeking the
City's approval of the 2003 budget for the Commission and the Media Center. She then
indicated that there will be a decrease for the 2003 budget because there will not be costs
associated with the formal franchising process.
Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated that the Commission is recommending that the PEG fee be
increased from 2.38 to 2.45 which is a 2.8 CPI change found to be necessary to meet the
goals.
Mayor Swedberg asked if this needed to be done by resolution.
Council Member Broussard Vickers asked where the money comes from.
Council Member Capra indicated that the City receives money from the Cable
Commission.
Motion by Council Member Broussard Vickers, secouded by Council Member
Capra to approve the 2003 Telecommunications Commission and the Media Center
Page 11 of21
City of Centerville
August 14, 2002
Council Meeting Minutes
Bud!!:et as recommeuded and to approve the recommended PEG increase from 2.38
to 2.45. All in favor. Motion carried unanimouslv.
5. Anoka County Five- Year Highway hnprovement Plan for 2003-2008
Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated a letter was received from the Anoka County Engineering
Department but the overall plan was not received. She then said she met with Doug
Fisher, the County Engineer, to talk about the County Road 14 improvements proposed
for 2004 through 2006 and, as Council Member Nelson indicated earlier, he is willing to
come and talk to Council on August 28, 2002.
Council Member Capra asked if it would be possible to obtain a drawing or diagram of
the proposed changes to the road in Centerville prior to that meeting.
6. Electronic Payment for Services Proposal
Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated Council had asked for a recommendation from staff and the
recommendation would be to conduct a survey next year or the year after to see if more
residents want to pay electronically.
Mayor Swedberg asked if Ms. Paulseth had thoughts on the electronic payments. Ms.
Paulseth said it is her feeling that there is not enough interest to warrant the cost at this
point.
Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated there were a lot of people against the idea. Council Member
Broussard Vickers indicated that residents liked the idea but do not want to pay for it.
Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated that Council would need to determine whether to assess the
costs to those using the service or expect all taxpayers to pay for it.
Council agreed to review electronic payments next year.
7. Debt Related Transfers - Resolution #02-031
Ms. Paulseth indicated that it is necessary to transfer funds to cover debt service
payments. She then commented that the City has done this at the end of the year by
having the auditor do it and it is more appropriate to do it during the year by resolution
rather than by journal entry adjustment.
Motion by Council Member Broussard Vickers. seconded by Council Member
Nelson to approve Resolution 02-031, transferrin!!: !!:eneral funds to the City Hall
and 1987 streets debt service funds for 2003 debt services per the recommendation
of the Finance Director. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously.
Page 12 of21
L
City of Centerville
August 14,2002
Council Meeting Minutes
8. Council Chamber Microphone Replacement (Cable Funds)
Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated the City Clerk had prepared a memorandum contmmng
information on the microphone replacement. She then indicated that the clerk had
indicated that the cable fund shows a balance of$16,392.33 and that is more than enough
to pay to replace the microphones.
Council Member Capra commented that she had inquired about microphones and PEG
fees and what the City receives in revenue and had asked Ms. Bender to investigate how
much money was available. She then commented that it is recommended that three
VCRs be replaced and a remote camera be added. She further indicated that to replace
the camera is $6,000 and each VCR is $300 so, if the City spent $2,600 for microphones
there would still be enough to replace the other equipment when needed.
Mayor Swedberg asked if there would be a microphone for the podium for the public.
Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated it was her understanding that the microphones can be
installed on the podium so that it does not tip over.
Motion bv Council Member Broussard Vickers, seconded bv Council Member
Capra to direct Staff to spend UP to $3,000 to replace Council Chamber
microphones as recommended.
Council Member Travis suggested hanging a microphone from the ceiling to pick up the
comments of residents that do not approach the podium.
Council Member Capra asked if Staff looked into cordless microphones.
Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated the prices for cordless microphones vary and the problem is
the microphones use a lot of batteries.
Council Member Nelson indicated she felt that residents should be asked to come to the
microphone for comment.
Mayor Swedberg said he feels the mute switch is a nice feature and he would like to have
that, if possible.
VOTE: All in favor. Motion carried unanimouslv.
9. Anonymous Complaints
Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated that Staff is seeking clarification from Council as to how
Council wants to have anonymous complaints handled. She then indicated that there
have been several instances where Staff becomes embroiled in neighborhood disputes
because of the complaint.
Page 13 of2l
City of Centerville
August 14,2002
Council Meeting ,Minutes
Council Member Broussard Vickers suggested keeping track of the date, address and the
complaint and if Staff receives the complaint several times then it should be looked into.
She then said it was her understanding that it was up to Staffs discretion as to whether a
complaint should be investigated.
Council Member Capra expressed concern for people who call in to complain and will
not give their name to City Hall. She then said that her other concern is anonymous
letters being distributed in packets.
Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated it was her intent that the anonymous letter was to go into
Council packets only.
Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated she would like to see the letter if someone
goes to the trouble of writing it and would like it in her packet.
Council Member Capra indicated she would be fine with Council getting the letter.
Council Member Nelson indicated she saw no problem with someone remaining
anonymous, if possible, as long as the City can identify the resident. She then
commented that she was told that when Council receives a letter, phone call or e-mail it is
public information.
Council Member Broussard Vickers commented that by giving your name to City Hall
you are no longer anonymous.
Mayor Swedberg commented that the letter in question should not have gone in the
Council packet as it contained nothing constructive that could be fixed by a Council and
was merely somebody venting. He then said that was inappropriate and he would not
want to see that type of thing in any way shape or form.
Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated she wanted to see any letters received and
asked that they be placed in her mailbox ifthey are not going to be put in packets.
Council Member Nelson asked if, as one person, Council Member Broussard Vickers is
attempting to override a Council decision.
Council Member Broussard Vickers said it happens all the time here and then commented
that she would like to see any public information that is submitted.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated that any. document that comes to City Hall is a public
document.
Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated she was fine with not putting the letters in
packets but said she would like a copy in her mailbox.
Council Member Capra indicated the letters would need to be kept on file at City Hall
Page 14 of2l
City of Centerville
August 14, 2002
Council Meeting Minutes
Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated she felt Staff should use discretion and if
they feel something comes up more than once and there rriay be a foundation for the
complaint they should look into it but should not chase every anonymous complaint.
Council Member Capra asked if the City has a responsibility to identify the person
making the complaint to the resident who the complaint was made against if Staff feels
they know who the person is even though they did not identify themselves.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated that, if the complaint is going to result in some type of
action, then the person would have to be identified otherwise the City could not move
forward without verifying the violation. He then said that, if there is a way to verify the
violation and keep the person anonymous, that would be fine.
Council Member Nelson indicated she would want to see the complaints because she
thinks as Council they need to see information jointly and not individually.
Council Member Broussard Vickers asked if Council Member Nelson wanted to see
letters or phone calls. Council Member Nelson said both.
Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated that keeping a complaint log would give a
data base to keep track of frequently made complaints.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated that taking a phone call with a request to look into
something is not public information but reducing it to a phone log creates a document
that is public. He then suggested telling residents that a phone log is being kept with
complaint information when they call.
10. 2001 Audit
Council Member Nelson indicated the City's recycling fund had a deficit balance but
when she read the July 8 Park and Recreation minutes it said that the City Clerk reports
there is $5,000 in SCORE funds available. She then said she would like to know if the
$5,000 SCORE funds could be used to offset the deficit.
Ms. Paulseth indicated that the City just applied for SCORE funds to replace money from
the recycling fund.
Council Member Nelson gave the minutes from the Park and Recreation Committee to
Ms. Paulseth for review.
Ms. Paulseth said she thinks the City is looking at a general fund transfer on that one but
said she would look into it.
Page 15 of21
City of Centerville
August 14, 2002
Council Meeting Minutes
Council Member Nelson commented that the City celebration shows a $34,962 deficit
and there is a gambling donation of $25,230 and she would like to make a motion to use
the gambling donation to offset the largest portion of the city celebration.
Motion bv Council Member Nelson. seconded bv Council Member Capra to use the
$25.230 eamblinf! donation to offset the larf!est portion of the City celebration.
Ms. Paul seth indicated the City celebration enterprise fund has been closed and that was
done with a general fund transfer and the gambling money is in the general fund.
Council Member Capra asked if the $25,230 gambling donation was the amount
accumulated to the end of2001. Ms. Paulseth indicated that was her understanding.
Council Member Capra asked what happens with the funds. Ms. Paulseth indicated it is
up to Council to determine what happens to the funds.
Council Member Nelson indicated the funds went into the general fund when received.
Council Member Capra indicated she would like to investigate with the Gambling
Control Board to see if it is okay to do that.
Ms. Paulseth indicated that the funds are considered a donation to a govermnent entity.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated the funds became part of the general fund when received
by the City.
Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated that there is no limit as to what the funds
can be used for anymore once the Lions made their charitable gambling donation to the
City.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated anybody can give the City money and ask that the money
be used for a specific purpose but the City does not have to do so. He then commented
that, if the City wishes to continue receiving donations, it may be a good idea to use the
funds as requested, however.
Council Member Nelson indicated she felt using the funds for the City celebration
benefits the whole City and seems an appropriate use of the funds.
Council Member Travis asked if the funds being discussed are the Lion's funds.
Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated they are the donated funds from the Lions
for the concession stand that was voted against at the last meeting.
Council Member Travis called the question.
Council Member Capra clarified that the brand new concession stand was voted against.
She then said she is against spending $30,000 to run sewer to the concession stand. She
Page 16 of21
City of Centerville
August 14, 2002
Council Meeting Minutes
further said she is not in favor of a concession stand out there because of cost but was not
opposed to renovating the current one in some fashion.
Council Member Nelson commented she thinks it is good to pay bills before buying new
things. She then said that because the City used the general fund to payoff the City
celebration and that is a bill that the City has she thinks it is an appropriate way to wash it
rather than with property taxes.
Council Member Capra indicated she was not in favor of doing that but sees the $34,962
that needs to be paid off.
Council Member Nelson commented that it means at the end of the year there would be a
deficit of that amount because it was paid out ofthe general fund.
Council Member Broussard Vickers said that what it means is that the money will not be
accessible to the Park and Recreation Committee to use in any way for anything they
would like to do in 2003.
Mayor Swedberg said he thinks it is pretty clear that putting in a concession stand is not
the thing to do. He then said that ifhe had his way he would send the money back to the
Spring Lake Park Lions but that cannot be done. He further said that the true use for the
money is to be for police and fire and there are needs there because the police will not
have a garage ifthe Turcotte property is sold.
Mayor Swedberg commented that, as much as he appreciated the thoughts on cleaning up
the deficit, he would not vote for this because there is some sort of sense of a consensus
that was done at a certain time concerning the funds. He then said that he does get upset
when Park and Recreation keeps pushing the concession stand because he wants to get
something for the kids done as there is enough adult stuff already.
Council Member Capra commented that she had hoped that by this time Council would
have had a recommendation from Park and Recreation with regard to renovation of the
currcnt building or a covered pavilion or warming house roof. She then commented that
Council had asked a Park and Recreation member to bring to the meeting the possibility
of putting a roof over the existing hockey rink. She also commented that it would be nice
to have windows in the warming house for the attendant to be able to watch the rink from
all sides.
Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated that the direction was given to Park and
Recreation at the last Council Meeting that a new building would not be acceptable. She
then said that all the members are volunteers and Lions and were busy putting together
the City celebration so they have not met to discuss recommendations for the funds. She
further commented that now, with clear direction, they would be meeting to discuss it.
Council Member Capra indicated that no budget has been received from Park and
Recreation.
Page 17 of21
City of Centerville
August 14,2002
Council Meeting Minutes
Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated they are working on it but were told it was
not needed until the end of August.
VOTE: Aves -l(Nelson), Navs - 4. Motion failed.
Council Member Nelson indicated that on Monday night Council had said it would vote
on whether or not to add a halftime park person or no person. She then indicated that she
and the Mayor did not want a park person and Council Members Capra and Broussard
Vickers wanted to have a halftime person.
Ms. Paulseth indicated that Staff was looking for approval to publish the 2001 audit as it
was supposed to be published on June 30, 2002.
Motion bv Council Member Nelson. seconded bv Mavor Swedberl! to approve the
2001 audit. Aves - 4, Navs -1 (Broussard Vickers). Motion carried.
Council Member Nelson indicated she had heard some talk about interviewing new firms
for the next audit and asked if that should be addressed now.
Council agreed to discuss it at another meeting.
I 1. Budget
Motion bv Council Member Nelson, seconded bv Council Member Capra to amend
the al!enda to include a budl!et discussion. All in favor. Motion carried
unanimously.
Council Member Travis said he felt it was necessary to have at least a half time person.
Council Member Capra indicated she had found out that Park and Recreation has park
dedication fees of $47,000.
Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated there should be more than $70,000.
Ms. Paulseth indicated she was not clear whether the funds can be used for operating or
need to be used for capital improvement.
Council Member Capra indicated she would like to have the staff person be taken out of
the budget for Park and Recreation to use park dedication fees instead of the tax money.
Ms. Paulseth indicated the dollar amount that is planned for park improvement is being
funded by park dedication fees.
Mayor Swedberg indicated that park dedication fees are to purchase trails and equipment
and things like that.
Page 18 of21
City of Centerville
August 14, 2002
Council Meeting Minutes
Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated that three COlillCil Members feel that a part
time person is necessary and how to pay for it needs to be discussed.
Council Member Nelson asked if the two still want a halftime person there.
Council Member Capra indicated she did not want six months of a half time person but
would like four months of a half time person.
Council Member Nelson asked what dollar figure Council wanted to use in that position.
Council Member Broussard Vickers suggested using $15,000 and how that is funded can
be determined later.
VI. CONSENT AGENDA
I. The City of Centerville July 25, 2002 through August 14, 2002 Claims for
Approval
2. Centennial Fire District August 6, 2002 Claims
3. Approval of Ordinance #4 & Summary for Publication
4. Appointment of Election Judges
Mayor Swedberg pointed out there were some wording changes in Ordinance #4 that
would be corrected but would make no substantive changes to the Ordinance.
Motion bv Conncil Member Capra. seconded by Conncil Member Travis to approve
the Consent A!!enda as presented. All in favor. Motion carried nnanimously.
VII. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MINUTES
I. July 24. 2002 Council Meeting Minutes
Motion by Council Member Capra. seconded by Council Member Travis to approve
the July 24. 2002 Council Meetin!! Minutes as presented. All in favor. Motion
carried unanimously.
VIII. ANNOUNCEMENTS/uPDATES
1. State Auditor Inquiry
Council Member Nelson indicated the individuals who are considering doing a petition
have not decided whether to do it.
Page 19 of21
L-
City of Centerville
August 14,2002
Council Meeting Minutes
2. AT&T (Capra)
Council Member Capra indicated that the Commission is looking at approval of the
contract at the August 21, 2002 meeting. She then indicated that she would be given a
synopsis of the contract and could provide that to Council.
3. 1540 Peltier Lake Drive
This item was handled earlier in the meeting.
4. Commercial Developments InQuirv/Capital Proiects Analvsis
Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated that Staff continues to research the capital projects.
Ms. Paulseth indicated that she is having trouble finding the developer's agreement for
Apple Tree Square.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated that often times the prior City Administrator drafted the
agreements in house and if that was the case he may not have a copy at his office but said
he would look.
Council Member Broussard Vickers said she would like to have the developers billed out
if the developer's agreements can be found. Ms. Paulseth indicated she and Ms. Moore-
Sykes have had discussions about this with some of the developers and there are concerns
with the timeliness ofthe billing.
Ms. Paulseth indicated that the developers have been given itemized copies of the billings
that occurred over the years.
Council Member Capra asked if Council should set a timeframe for response or payment
on the accounts.
Council Member Nelson suggested 30 days.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated that it would be necessary to determine when the statute of
limitations began running before giving a time frame for payment. Ms. Paulseth
indicated that Deer Pass was closed out.
Council Member Broussard Vickers asked Staff to determine the statute of limitations of
the accounts that were closed out.
City Attorney Hoeft indicated that any continuing obligations on the part of the developer
would extend the contract. He then said he would review the contracts to determine the
statute of limitations.
Page 20 of21
City of Centerville
August 14, 2002
Council Meeting Minutes
Council Member Broussard Vickers asked for an update on which accounts need to be
pursued more vigorously and then said that either 30 days or 60 days would be fine for
those that do not have a statute oflimitations issue.
Council Member Nelson said she felt the same time frame should be used for everyone.
Council Member Capra suggested a response by the end of September.
Ms. Paulseth indicated there is more than one development where the developer indicated
other concerns with the City regarding the project.
Council Member Capra asked whether the City is figuring in 10% for attorney's fees for
future developments.
Staff indicated that the provision has always been in the contract but has not been used.
5. Mr. Craig Bode - ParaderFirework Preliminary Expenditures
Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated that Mr. Bode had expected to be at this meeting but
something came up and he is looking to be put on the agenda for the first meeting in
September.
Council Member Nelson asked if Staff received her pending list today. Ms. Moore-Sykes
indicated she received the list but had not had a chance to review it.
Council Member Nelson indicated there were some things for Mr. Palzer to look at such
as the Eagle Pass pond and the Hunter's Crossing trail.
Mayor Swedberg indicated that Lexington has asked to re-evaluate the structure of the
police commission itself and this opens up something that will require that the joint
powers agreement be re-written. He then said that Ms. Moore-Sykes will sit on that
committee and asked if anyone had contacted her. Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated she had
not yet been contacted.
Mayor Swedberg indicated the matter needed to be completed within 60 days.
IX. ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Council Member Travis, seconded by Council Member Nelson to
adiourn the AUl!ust 14, 2002 City Council Meetinl! at 9:14 p.m. All in favor.
Motion carried unanimously.
Transcribed by:
Joan Lenzmeier, Recording Secretary
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
Page 21 of21
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION MEETING
August 12, 2002
6:30 p.m.
Pursuant to due caU and notice thereof, the City of Centerville held a Work Session on August
12,2002, at City HaU, 1880 Main Street.
PRESENT:
Mayor Tim Swedberg
Council Member Mari Nelson
Council Member Linda Broussard Vickers
Council Member Capra
OO'I"'@O
I'
I"~ ...,
ABSENT:
Council Member Dick Travis
STAFF:
City Administrator, Ms. Moore-Sykes
Finance Director, Ms. EUen Paulseth
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Swedberg caUed the August 12, 2002, Work Session to order at 6:40 p.m.
II. SET AGENDA
III. AWARDS/PRESENT ATIONS/ APPEARANCES
IV. PUBLIC HEARlNG(S)
None.
V. COUNCIL BUSINESS
l. 2003 Budget
Council discussed the foUowing issues:
. Tax Levy
. Staff
. Salaries & Benefits
. State Aid
. Miscellaneous
. Capital Improvements
. Enterprise
City of Centerville
August 12,2002
Council Work Session Meeting Minutes
VI. CONSENT AGENDA
VII. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MINUTES
VIII. ANNOUNCEMENTS/UPDATES
IX. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Swedberg adjourned the Work Session meeting at 8:15 p.m.
Teresa Bender, City Clerk
Page 2 of21
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION MEETING
August 19, 2002
6:30 p.m.
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City of Centerville held a Work Session on August
19,2002, at City Hall, 1880 Main Street.
PRESENT:
Mayor Tim Swedberg
Council Member Mari Nelson
Council Member Linda Broussard Vickers
Council Member Capra
ABSENT:
Council Member Dick Travis
STAFF:
City Administrator, Ms. Moore-Sykes
Finance Director, Ms. Ellen Paulseth
:. rt,j. t y
: %/ '~,
. "-
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Swedberg called the August 19,2002, Work Session to order at 6:32 p.m.
II. SET AGENDA
III. A W ARDS/PRESENT ATIONS/ APPEARANCES
IV. PUBLIC HEARING(S)
None.
V. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. 2003 Budget
Council discussed the following issues:
. Tax Levy
. Staff Increases
. Administration of Enterprise Funds
. State Aid
. Miscellaneous
. Capital hnprovements
. Fire Protection
. Capital Outlay
. Enterprise
VI. CONSENT AGENDA
VII. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MINUTES
VIII. ANNOUNCEMENTS/uPDATES
IX. ADJOURNMENT
City of Centerville
August 19, 2002
Council Work Session Meeting Minutes
Mayor Swedberg adjourned tbe Work Session meeting at 8:35 p.m.
Teresa Bender, City Clerk
Page 2 of21
ervi((e
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
August 28, 2002
TO:
Mayor and City Council
Kim Moore-Sykes, City Administrator WUI/z,
FROM:
RE:
1540 Peltier Lake Drive
.........................................................................
Staff met with the City Attorney on Wednesday afternoon to go over the requirements of
submitting a request for an Administrative Search Warrant.
Staff has again contacted Anoka County regarding the individual at 1540 Peltier Lake
Drive. I spoke with Ms. Phyllis Linder, Senior Outreach Worker after finding her card in
this address file. She indicated to me that she tried to make contact with the property
owner but had no response. I told her what the City was in the process of doing and that
we wanted a social worker involved at the service of the Warrant. She agreed that that
was a good idea and gave me the names of County social workers who work with seniors
and vulnerable adults.
I also spoke with Deputy Chief Makela about the situation. He indicated that he would
have an officer serve the property owner with the letter that the Council asked me to
write. In this way, the City would have another record of its attempted contact with the
property owner. Officer Gleason reported on Friday that he was unable to deliver the
letter but did look over the property. He reported that he is concerned about the potential
fire hazard the property is and asked that the fire chiefbe involved. Officer Gleason and
the Public Works Director went back to the property to inspect the property and attempt
another service ofthe letter.
Staff has notified Chief Bennett of the situation.
ervi[[e
1880 Main Street . Centervi1le, 'M'J{ 55038
(651) 429-3232 .:Fa:( (651) 429-8629
August 19,2002
Mr. Bjorn Larson
1814 Houle Circle
Centerville, MN 55038
Dear Mr. Larson:
The City has received a complaint in regards to the length of the grass in the rear and side
yard of 1814 Houle Circle. The City has an ordinance in place regarding the length of
grass and when same becomes a violation. It appears that weeds and/or grass exceed
eight inches in the areas addressed above. Enclosed for your reference, please find
Ordinance #54.
The City understands that you are the new homeowner of this residence and understands
that same can be a very busy time; however, the City requests that you abate this
violation within 30 days from the date of this letter.
If you have any questions regarding this issue, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
~jt:~ ~.-
- ~Ore-SYkeS /
City Administrator
KMS/tdb
Enclosure: Ord. #54
Cc: City Council
L
--
,g\~ \\
f
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
COMMUNITY ACTION NOTICE
PART I. BACKGROUND
COMPLAINANT
Last Name (AnonymOUS
Address 1 011
Complaint Number
I 971
First Name
L
Date Complaint Taken
I 8/9/20021
Time 1 I
BY:
I Phone # - home
Phone # - work
-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
COMPLAINT INFORMATION
ADDRESS: I 18141 [HOUle Circle
NAME (IF KNOWN):
[Larson .~ fBjOm
l
Phone
J
Last
First
Junk Vehicle 0 Weeds ~ Animal 0 Noise 0 other 0
Explain
- ..
Excessive weed and grass growth. In excess of eight inches. ant #54 violation.
What type of Response is Required:
Complainant Response Required 0
Immediat 0 Time Permits 0 Complaintant Informed 0
RESPONSE METHOD:
I
Department Referred to: Administration (Department)
Teresa
(Employee)
-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-
PART II. FOLLOW UP:
Action Taken ISee attached letter.
. Completed 0 Date of Action I
Person Contacting Complainant: Department:
Additional Information
ROYALI9i~~
'l~ '-,~ -c;i.
August 14, 2002
Ellen Paulseth
City of Centerville
1880 Main Street
Centerville, MN 55038
RE: Lakeland Hills
Dear Ellen Paulseth,
Royal Oaks Realty, Inc. developed the Lakeland Hills project in 1997. We sold lots to
various builders. The last lot closed in 1999, therefore, our project was considered
completed in 1999. Our letter of credit was returned to us from the city.
In conclusion, we do not feel obligated and will not pay the invoice for $50,097.86.
Sincerely,
Royal Oaks Realty, Inc.
d
~~#f'~d~ :A~.~~
by: Marcel Eibensteiner, Pres.
1000 County Road E West, Suite 150. Shoreview, Minnesota 55126. (651) 483-5518. Fax (651) 483-5642
www.royaloaksrealty.com
,
tervi[[e
'Esta6fislid 1115;
AUG 2 1 2002.
Organization Name:
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
Monthly Gambling Summary
W-/n) ~"'([ S0-OtM'_ G..v~
Gambling Location:
11'1 i'1-- T(l--:::;) ::;::,u,)
/1 D?.-
MonthlYear:
Name ofIndividual Completing Form:
"k-l!.u;- W \kLJ..."'~(j., CP,k
Ten Percent Net Profit Calculation
A.
Net Receipts - T otallines 2c, 3c, 8c, 9c
(per Schedule A if more than one (I) site)
no3
B.
Sums of lines 22 thru 33
(per Schedule A ifmore than one (I) site)
51..1,,0
c.
Line a - line b
:z-z..'-\~
Miscellaneous Deductions (for this site only)
1.
Pulltab tax to distributor
i'b'1
2. Combined receipts tax for this site
3. Federal Taxes (per schedule CID)
4.
State Gambling Tax (per line 11)
-z.
~
F.
Line e X 50%
AMOUNT DUE
1'1"'2-
\L.-\S\
iUp
D.
Total Miscellaneous Deductions for this site
E.
Line c - line d
40%
5'bD List Receivers offundslor attach a
separate page
Signature:
\l.\t,., PAYABLE TO THE CITY OF
CENTERVILLE *DUE ANNUALLY
AS PER ORDINANCE*
if\Uil~
10%
tervi{{e
'uta6/L<lie,( 1857
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
Monthly Gambling Summary
Organization Name: ~~ V':n.~ ~Cl,'" CLv6
Gambling Location:
W::r:SR.. SV"l" P:i:""-'"
,
110'1.-
I
MonthlYear:
Name ofIndividual Completing Form:
'CfU..vT W ~u..~ c.f,."
Ten Percent Net Profit Calculation
A.
Net Receipts - T otallines 2c, 3c, 8c, 9c
(per Schedule A ifmore than one (1) site)
39/'-I
B.
Sums of lines 22 thru 33
(per Schedule A if more than one (I) site)
",c:~c:-
__t......J
C.
Line a - line b
L.H9
Miscellaneous Deductions (for this site only)
I.
Pulltab tax to distributor
YOG
2. Combined receipts tax for this site
3. Federal Taxes (per schedule C/D)
4. State Gambling Tax (per line 11)
D.
Total Miscellaneous Deductions for this site
YD\':'
E.
Line c - line d
"""'7
I~
F.
Line e X 50%
AMOUNT DUE
?-.\
40%
n
List Receivers of funds/or attach a
separate page
10%
L-\
PAYABLE TO THE CITY OF
CENTERVILLE *DUE ANNUALLY
AS PER ORDINANCE*
Signature:
~~;l 'l1I]
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
MONTHLY SUMMARY and TAX RETURN (G-l)
lawful Gambling Activity
Month and Year Premises
JULY 2002 5
Address
19680 Harrow Avenue North. Forest lake MN 55025
Attached: Schedule A Schedule B2 Schedule F
5 10 1
(A) Gross (B) Prizes (C) Net
1 0.00 0.00 0.00
rganization license
03800
Name
Dead Broke Saddle Club
Schedule B-2 Game Count
124
1 Bingo. .
2 Raffles [ ] Exempt, Schedule-ER
3 Paddletickets. . . .
4 SUB-TOTAl (Add lines 1 through 3).
5 last Month line 6C, if it was negative
6 Adjusted Sub-Total (line 4 minus line 5) 6
7 Income from Interest and Dividends
7
8
9
.10
8 Tipboards.
9 Pulltabs .
10 TOTAlS (Add lines 6,7,8,9)
11 Gambling Tax (8.5% of line 6C)
12 Combined Receipts Tax (Schedule E, line 9)
2
3
4
5
0.00
1 , 140 . 00
1,140.00
1,102.00
1,102.00
0.00
38.00
38.00
0.00
38.00
29.49
0.00
49,054.00
49,121. 49
11
12
3.23
0.00
0.00
0.00
1,140.00
1,102.00
13 PAY THIS AMOUNT (line 11 plus line 12) Check to Department of Revenue. 13 3.23
29.49
0.00
250,657.00
251,826.49
0.00
201,603.00
202,705.00
14 Gambling Tax Paid to Distributors for Pulltabs & Tipboards
15 TOTAL Gambling Tax (Add lines 13 and 14) . . .
14
15
4,967.93
4,971.16
16 GROSS PROFIT, After Taxes (line laC minus line 15) to line 17, page 2. 16 44,150.33
.of Revenue,
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
MONTHLY SUMMARY and TAX RETURN (G-l)
PaQe 2
Organization License Month and Year
03800 JULY 2002
17 Gross profit from line 16 of page 1. . . .
18 Beginning Inventory (Last Month Line 21) .
19 Gambling Product Obtained, with Sales Tax.
20 Goods Available (Line 18 plus Line 19)
21 Ending Inventory (excludes Sales Tax).
22 Goods Used (Line 20 minus Line 21)
23 Compensation and Payroll taxes. .
24 Penalty or Interest on Taxes paid during the month
25 Advertising. . . . .
26 Accounting and Legal Services.
27 Miscellaneous Expenses, Supplies & Bank Charges.
28 Purchase/Repair of Furnishings or Devices for Gambling
29 Rent for the Purpose of Conducting Lawful Gambling
30 Ut i1 it i es. . . . . . . . . . .
31 Theft and Liability Insurance.
32 Manager's Bond, Licenses, Local Fee, Premises Permit
33 Cash Long(-) or Cash Short(+). . . .
34 DEPOSIT REQUIRED, Excess Cash Short Reimbursement(-)
35 Deposited Amount, Excess Expense Reimbursement(-).
.' .
36 TOTAL AllOWABLE EXPENSES (Add Lines 22 through 35)
37 NET PROFIT (Line 17 minus Line 36) . . . . . . . .
38 Prior Month Profit Carry-Over (Line 44 from Last Month).
39 Approved Adjustments (Attach Letter and/or Add Line 5C if not zero).
40 BALANCE Sub-Total (Add Lines 37, 38 and 39). . . .
41 Lawful Purpose Expenditures (Line 11 Schedule C/O)
42 Board-Approved Expenditures (Line 13 Schedule C/O)
43 Total Expenditures (Add Lines 41 and 42) .
44 PROFIT CARRY-OVER (Line 40 minus Line 43).
46 FUNDS BALANCE DIFFERENCE from Schedule F, Line 22.
47 Pulltab & Tipboard UNSOLD TICKETs this month . . .
.46 0.00
17 44,150.33
18 5,088.89
19 3,682.86
20 8,771. 75
21 4,565.28
22 4,206.47
23 16,992.61
24 0.00
25 0.00
26 0.00
27 37.88
28 270.00
29 2,450.00
30 550.00
31 0.00
32 1,200.00
33 -96.50
34 0.00
35 0.00
36 25,610.46
37 18,539.87
38 28,969.16
39 0.00
40 47,509.03
41 1,970.81
42 0.00
43 1,970.81
44 45,538.22
.47 71,659.00
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
LAWFUL GAMBLING ACTIVITY
G-I SCHEDULE A
RECEIPTS and EXPENSES PER PREMISE
gan.License
03800
Lines 1-10 and
Premise Number Premise Name
008 The Trio Inn
18-36 correspond to Form G-l
1 Bingo. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2 Raffles [ ] Exempt, Schedule-ER . 2
3 Paddletickets .......... 3
4 SUB-TOTAL (Add Lines 1 through 3). . . . . 4
5 Proportional Part, Last Month G-l Line 6C. 5
6 Adjusted Sub-Total (Line 4 minus Line 5) 6
7 Income from Interest and Dividends 7
8 Tipboards. . . . . . . . 8
9 Pu lltabs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
10 TOTALS (Add Lines 6 - 9) . . . . . .10
(A) Gross (B)
0.00
0.00
1,140.00
1,140.00
0.00
1,140.00
5.90
0.00
36,549.00
37,694.90
18 Beginning Inventory (Last Month Line 21) .
19 Gambling Product Obtained, with Sales Tax.
20 Goods Available (Line 18 plus Line 19) . .
21 Ending Inventory (excludes Sales Tax). . .
22 Goods Used (Line 20 minus Line 21) . . . .
23 Compensation and Payroll taxes. . . . . . . . . .
24 Penalty or Interest on Taxes paid during the month
25 Advertising. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
26 Accounting and Legal Services. . . . . . . . . . .
27 Bank Charges and Miscellaneous Supplies & Expenses. .
28 Purchase/Repair of Furnishings or Devices for Gambling
29 Rent for the Purpose of Conducting Lawful Gambling.
30 Ut il it i es. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
31 Theft and Liability Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . .
32 Manager's Bond, Licenses, Local Fee, Premises Permit
33 Cash Long(-) or Cash Short(+). . . . . . . . . . . .
34 DEPOSIT REQUIRED, Excess Cash Short Reimbursement(-)
35 Deposited Amount, Excess Expense Reimbursement(-). .
36 TOTAL ALLOWABLE EXPENSES (Add Lines 22 through 35) .
Report Month/Year
JULY 2002
Prizes
0.00
0.00
1,102.00
1,102.00
1,102.00
0.00
28,684.00
29,786.00
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
Line numbers correspond to the Tax Return (Form G-l) line numbers.
Gss 7/99
(C)
Net
0.00
0.00
38.00
38.00
0.00
38.00
5.90
0.00
7,865.00
7,908.90
1,328.63
566.90
1,895.53
1,345.62
549.91
4,459.17
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
300.00
50.00
0.00
290.00
11.00
0.00
0.00
5,660.08
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
LAWFUL GAMBLING ACTIVITY
G-1 SCHEDULE A
RECEIPTS and EXPENSES PER PREMISE
Organ.License
03800
Lines 1-10 and
Premise Number Premise Name
012 Wise GUYS Pizza & Pub
18-36 correspond to Form G-1
1 Bingo. . ., . ........ 1
2 Raffles [ ] Exempt, Schedule-ER . 2
3 Paddletickets ., .... .. 3
4 SUB-TOTAL (Add Lines 1 through 3). . . . . 4
5 Proportional Part, Last Month G-l Line 6C. 5
6 Adjusted Sub-Total (Line 4 minus Line 5) 6
7 Income from Interest and Dividends 1
8 Tipboards. ..... 8
9 Pulltabs. ...... . 9
lOTOTALS(AddLines6-9).. .. .10
(A)
Gross (B)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5.90
0.00
16,689.00
16,694.90
18 Beginning Inventory (Last Month Line 21) .
19 Gambling Product Obtained, with Sales Tax.
20 Goods Available (Line 18 plus Line 19) . .
21 Ending Inventory (excludes Sales Tax). . .
22 Goods Used (Line 20 minus Line 21) . . . .
23 Compensat i on and Payro 11 taxes . . . . " ..
24 Penalty or Interest on Taxes paid during the month
25 Advert i sing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
26 Accounting and Legal Services. . . . . . . . . . .
27 Bank Charges and Miscellaneous Supplies & Expenses. .
28 Purchase/Repair of Furnishings or Devices for Gambling
29 Rent for the Purpose of Conducting Lawful Gambling.
30 Utilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
31 Theft and Liability Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . .
32 Manager's Bond, Licenses, Local Fee, Premises Permit
33 Cash Long(-) or Cash Short(+). . . . . . . . . . . .
34 DEPOSIT REQUIRED, Excess Cash Short Reimbursement(-)
35 Deposited Amount, Excess Expense Reimbursement(-). .
36 TOTAl AlLOWABLE EXPENSES (Add Lines 22 through 35) .
Report MonthjYear
JULY 2002
Prizes (C)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
12,715.00
12,715.00
Line numbers correspond to the Tax Return (Form G-l) line numbers.
Gss 7/99
1-
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
Net
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5.90
0.00
3,974.00
3,979.90
512.32
265.75
778.07
478.93
299.14
2,413.17
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
270.00
100.00
0.00
0.00
290.00
153.00
0.00
0.00
3,525.31
MINNESOTA OEPARTMENT OF REVENUE G-I SCHEDULE 8-2
LAWFUL GAMBLING ACTIVITY REPORT OF GAMES PLAYED,
LOST or DESTROYED
I.~_nse 03800: Dead Broke Saddle Club Game Type
Premise 008: The Trio Inn PULLTABS PLAYED
Page 1 of 1
Report Month(Year
JULY 2002
MANUFACTURER's In-Play Ideal Ideal Unsold Gross Prizes IDEAL CASH Long Removed
ID Part # SERIAL # Date Gross Prize Value Receiots Value NET Deoosit -Short Date
AI PG749
AI PG880
IG 6862
AI PG912
TP 13216-MN
TP 13177-MN
AI PG928
Al PF006
GT 4513
060030 06/25 7198. 5670.
530361 06/26 2999. 2329.
O. 7198.00 5670.00 1528.00 1512.00 -16.00 07/02
O. 2999.00 2329.00 670.00 669.00 -1.00 07/02
4113813 06/29 3168. 2439. 534. 2634.00 2139.00 495.00 502.00
7.00 07/07
0.00 07/12
-3.00 07/12
12.00 07/19
8.00 07/23
330209 07/07 2999. 2318.
O. 2999.00 2318.00 681.00 681.00
D835106 07/03 3024.
D826798 07/13 3168.
2320. 263.
2438. O.
2761.00 2247.00 514.00 u511.00
3168.00 2429.00 739.00 751.00
2889.00 2240.00 649.00 657.00
430283 07/13 2999. 2300. 110.
140210 07/23 2999. 2313.
O. 2999.00 2311.00 688.00 700.00 12.00 07/25
5396766 06/28 3120. 2399. 554. 2566.00 2238.00 328.00 299.00 -29.00 07/27
13318-MN D839941 07/25 3168. 2430.
IG 7610 4134577 07/27 3168. 2440.
O. 3168.00 2428.00 740.00 741.00 1.00 07/30
O. 3168.00 2335.00 833.00 831.00 -2.00 07/31
Column I J K L M N
TOTAL THIS PAGE .......... Line 16 1461. 36549. 28684. 7865.00 7854.00 -11. 00
Total from previous page ......... O. o. o. 0.00 0.00 0.00
TO TAX RETURN or to next page 1461. 36549. 28684. 7865.00 7854.00 -11. 00
Gss 07/99
- .~
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE G-I SCHEDULE B-2
LAWFUL GAMBLING ACTIVITY REPORT OF GAMES PLAYED,
LOST or DESTROYED
Page 1 of 1
License 03800: Dead Broke Saddle Club Game Type
Premise 012: Wise Guys Pizza & Pub PULL TABS PLAYED
Report Month/Y
JULY 2002
MANUFACTURER's In-Play Ideal Ideal Unsold Gross Prizes IDEAL CASH Long Removed
10 Part # SERIAL # Date Gross Prize Value Receiots Value NET Oeoosit -Short Date
AN 32142
AI PG800
2419683 06/24 3000. 2325. 648. 2352.00 1719.00 633.00 529.00 -104.00 07/01
310036 06/21 2999. 2329. 688. 2311.00 1831.00 480.00 463.00 -17.00 07/05
TP 13318-MN 0839973 07/05 3168. 2430. 307. 2861.00 2218.00 643.00 632.00 -11.00 07/19
TP 12885-MN 0771468 06/22 7200. 5690. 2468. 4732.00 3243.00 1489.00 1345.00 -144.00 07/22
GT 4483
AI PG912
5386541 06/24 3136. 2422. 1702. 1434.00 1388.00 46.00 189.00 143.00 07/28
330210 07/19 2999. 2318. O. 2999.00 2316.00 683.00 663.00 -20.00 07/31
Column I J K L M N
TOTAL THIS PAGE .......... Line 16 5813. 16689. 12715. 3974.00 3821.00 -153.00
Total from previous page ......... O. o. o. 0.00 0.00 0.00
TO TAX RETURN or to next page 5813. 16689. 12715. 3974.00 3821.00 -153.00
Gss 07/99
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE G-I SCHEDULE B-2
LAWFUL GAMBLING ACTIVITY REPORT OF GAMES PLAYED, Page I of 3
LOST or DESTROYED
i.__nse 03800: Dead Broke Saddle Club Game Type Report Month(Year
Premise 008: The Trio Inn PADDLE TICKETS PLAYED JULY 2002
MANUFACTURER's In-Play Ideal Ideal Unsold Gross Prizes IDEAL CASH long Removed
ID Part II SERIAL II Date Gross Prize Value ReceiDts Value NET DeDosit -Short Date
JM 30llTlCKET 407145 07/12 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/12
S
JM 30#TICKET 407146 07/12 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/12
S
JM 30llTlCKET 407147 07/12 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/12
S
JM 30llTlCKET 407148 07/12 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/12
S
JM 30#TlCKET 407149 07/12 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/12
S
JM 30#TlCKET 407150 07/12 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/12
S
JM 30#TlCKET 407151 07/12 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/12
S
JM 30llTlCKET 407152 07/12 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/12
S
JM 30#TICKET 407153 07/12 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/12
S
.. 30llTlCKET 407154 07/12 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/12
S
JM 30llTICKET 407155 07/12 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/12
S
JH 30llTICKET 407156 07/12 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/12
S
JM 30#TICKET 407157 07/12 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/12
S
JH 30llTICKET 407158 07/19 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/19
S
JH 30#TICKET 407159 07/19 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/19
S
Column I J K L M N
TOTAL THIS PAGE .......... Li ne 16 O. 450. 435. 15.00 15.00 0.00
Total from previous page ......... O. o. o. 0.00 0.00 0.00
TO TAX RETURN or to next page O. 450. 435. 15.00 15.00 0.00
Gss 07/99
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 6-1 SCHEDULE 8-2
! LAWFUL GAMBLING ACTIVITY REPORT OF GAMES PLAYED, Page 2 of 3
LOST or DESTROYED
License 03800: Dead Broke Saddle Club Game Type Report MonthlY
Premise 008: The Trio Inn PADDLE TICKETS PLAYED JULY 2002
MANUFACTURER's In-Play Ideal Ideal Unsold Gross Prizes IDEAL CASH Long Removed
ID Part # SERIAL # Date Gross Prize Value ReceiDts Value NET DeDas it -Short Date
JM 30#TICKET 407160 07/19 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/19
S
JM 30#TICKET 407161 07/19 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/19
S
JM 30#TICKET 407162 07/19 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/19
S
JM 30#TICKET 407163 07/19 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/19
S
JM 30#TICKET 407164 07/19 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/19
S
JM 30#TICKET 407165 07/19 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/19
S
JM 30#TICKET 407166 07/19 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/19
S
JM 30#TICKET 407167 07/19 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/19
S
JM 30#TICKET 407168 07/19 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/19
S
JM 30#TICKET 407169 07/19 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/19
S
JM 30#TICKET 407170 07/19 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07, __
S
JM 30#TICKET 407171 07/26 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/26
S
JM 30#TICKET 407172 07/26 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/26
S
JM 30#TICKET 407173 07/26 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/26
S
JM 30#TICKET 407174 07/26 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/26
S
Column 1 J K L M N
TOTAL THIS PAGE .......... Li ne 16 O. 450. 435. 15.00 15.00 0.00
Total from previous page ......... O. 450. 435. 15.00 15.00 0.00
TO TAX RETURN or to next page O. 900. 870. 30.00 30.00 0.00
Gss 07/99
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE G-I SCHEDULE B-2
LAWFUL GAMBLING ACTIVITY REPORT OF GAMES PLAYED, Page 3 of 3
LOST or DESTROYED
L nse 03800: Dead Broke Saddle Club Game Type Report Month/Year
Premise 008: The Trio Inn PADDLE TICKETS PLAYED JULY 2002
MANUFACTURER's In-Play Ideal Ideal Unsold Gross Prizes IDEAL CASH Long Removed
ID Part # SERIAL # Date Gross Prize Value ReceiDts Value NET DeDos it -Short Date
JM 30#TICKET 407175 07/26 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/26
S
JM 30#TICKET 407176 07/26 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/26
S
JM 30#TICKET 407177 07/26 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/26
S
JM 30#TICKET 407178 07/26 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/26
S
JM 30#TICKET 407179 07/26 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/26
S
JM 30#TICKET 407180 07/26 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/26
S
JM 30#TICKET 407181 07/26 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/26
S
JM 30#TICKET 407182 07/26 30. 29. O. 30.00 29.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 07/26
S
Column I J K L M N
TOTAL THIS PAGE .......... Line 16 O. 240. 232. 8.00 8.00 0.00
Total from previous page ......... O. 900. 870. 30.00 30.00 0.00
TO TAX RETURN or to next page O. 1140. 1102. 38.00 38.00 0.00
Gss 07/99
MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING
SCHEDUlE C/O
Organization License MonthjYear Page of Alllended
Dead Broke Saddle Club 03800 JULY 2002 1 1 Schedule?
NO
SCHEDULE C: Lawful Purpose Expenditures
Approved Date of Check Reason Benefits
By Orqan Check Number Check Made Out To: TRCS Code MIF Amount
02/26/2002 07/20/2002 6663 Alan Spidahl a(7) Both 350.00
02/26/2002 07/20/2002 6664 Woodloch Tack a(7) Both 1,606.81
06/25/2002 07/20/2002 6667 City Of lino a(8) 14.00
Total for ALL PAGES:
to Tax Return Line 41.
1,970.81
SCHEDULE D: Board Approved Expenditures NONE
Approved Date of
Bv Orqan Check
Check
Number Check Made Out To:
Reason
TRCS Code
Date
Approved
Amount By Board
Total for ALL PAGES: 0.00
to Tax Return Line 42.
I declare this Schedule is complete and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Chief ~~~
~~~~ i g v-------=
Manager ~ ~_c
Mail to: GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD Suite '300 South
1711 West County Road B
Roseville, MN 55113
Date F- -/7-02-
Date B-1' ----6l t:::.-.
Gss 08/98
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
LAWFUL GAMBLING ACTIVITY
G-I SCHEDULE F
GAMBLING FUND RECONCILIATION
Organization Name License Number
Dead Broke Saddle Club 03800
Gamblina checkina account
1 End-of-month checking account balance from statements
2 Deposits made during the month not included in line 1
3 Add 1 i nes 1 and 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4 Checks written during the month not included in line 1.
5 RECONCILED BANK BALANCE (line 3 minus line 4) ....
Other funds not included in Checkina Balance
6 Starting banks for games . . 6a 10.000.00
Reimbursment after monthend. 6b 0.00
Monthend cash balance in starting banks. 6
Report Month/Year
JULY 2002
1 47.012.36
2 5.425.00
3 52.437.36
4 21.461.19
5 30.976.17
10.000.00
7 Total ending inventory (G-1 line 21) ., 7
8 Deposit after month-end for Games in G-1 8
9 Total in Savings & Other funds. . . . 9
10 Excess shortages (G-l, 34) and prior
reimbursement due for excess shortages 10
11 Fund Loss. (LG-250) . . . . 11a
Refund Due (G-7430) . . . . lIb
Open-Game prizes,by check . lIe
Prizes bought, not awarded. lId
Other additions . . . lIe
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Tota 1 11
12 Add lines 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 . .
13 Add lines 5 and 12 . . . . . . .
Unpaid Obliaations and Open Ga.e Deposits
14 Tax from G-1 line 13 and any
prior months taxes. . . . . .
15 Deposits for games still in play
14
15
4,565.28
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.23
0.00
16 Loaned amounts included in bank statement. 16 0.00
17 Product part of unpaid invoices.
17
18
18 Other subtractions.
0.00
0.00
19 Add Lines 14 through 18.
GAMBLING FUNDS RECONCILIATION
20 GAMBLING FUND BALANCE (line 13 minus 19) . . . . .
21 PROFIT CARRY-OVER (from Form G-l line 44). . . . .
22 FUND BALANCE equals PROFIT CARRY-OVER, Difference.
Signature ~
of Preoarer ' .....) \kw~
Gss 7/99
lDaf.e
'il \Uo1..
12
13
14.565.28
45.541. 45
19
3.23
20
21
22
45,538.22
45.538.22
0.00
612/464-7225
The 19th Annual Conference presented by the Minnesota Association
of Community Telecommunications Administratqrs (MA CTA)
ot Submergel
COfJVcj~e
'-'
October 10-11, 2002
Thunderbird Hotel, Bloomington, MN
macta
Minnesota State Chapter of NA TOA
and an affiliate of the League of Minnesota Cities
who shoulc:\ AHenc:\:
X' Elected Officials
X' Cable and Telecommunications Commissioners
X' Cable and Telecommunications Managers
X' City Managers
X' City Attorneys
X' Cable and Telecommunications Attorneys
X' PEG Access Managers and Staff
X' PEG Access Board Members
X' Cable Operators
D'ltes:
Thursday, October 10 and Friday, October 11, 2002
Loc'ltion:
Thunderbird Hotel, 2201 E 78th St, Bloomington, MN 55425.
Phone: 952.854.3411; Fax: 952.854.1183
A block of rooms will be held until September 20 for MACTA
conference participants. Special room rates are $83.00 plus tax
for single or double occupancy. Reservations should be made
directly with the hotel. Be sure to mention the MACTA conference
wi aking your reservation.
Continuing Ec:\uc'ltion Crec:\it:
Get these questions answered--and more--at the conference:
X' State Legislation - A new Governor, a n.e_w Legislature...is it time
for us to become "pro-active" and take the lead in sponsoring
legislation and amendments to Chapter 238? Who will carry our
message to the new Legislature?
X' Franchise Fees - Easy come, (but not so) easy go..:How is your
city coping with lost revenues following the FCC CableModem
decision? What are our options? Is there a judicial solution on
the horizon?
X' Serving Up a Tasty "Dish" - Thoughts and suggestions about the
challenges presented by competing methods of
telecommunications services...and diminishing competition from
franchisees. Is there a monopoly on the horizon?
We face these and many other critical issues in the immediate future.
This year's conference is a MUST!
Regish'ltion Fees:
Members' Non-Members
Postmarked by Sept 27 $275.00 $375.00
Postmarked after Sept 27 $325.00 $425.00
Register three or more people from the same organization on one
check, and deduct $20 per person from the fees listed above.
Registration fee includes educational sessions, handout materials,
trade show with exhibitors, Thursday and Friday continental
breakfasts and luncheons, Thursday reception, and refreshments.
*Non-Minnesota NATOA members may regisfer at the MACTA
member rate.
*New member applications will qualify for member rates.
Contact the MACTA Office for details and an application form.
Payment may be made by check, or Purchase Order mailed to:
MACTA, 1711 W. County Road B, Suite 300N, Roseville, MN 55113.
FAX: 651.635.0307
Cancel/afion Policy: Registration fee less a $25 administrative charge
may be refunded up to one week prior to the seminar. An 80% refund
may be made up to 72 hours before the seminar. No refund for
cancellation notice less than 72 hours.
For Questions:
Contact MACTAby phone 651.635.0306, byfax651.635.0307, by
CLE credit has been requested from the Minnesota State Board of email oei@assocmgmt.org, or online atwww.mactamn.org.
Continuing Legal Education.
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2002
,
8:00 AM REGISTRATION, EXHIBITS & CONTINENTAL BREAKFAST
8:30 AM WELCOME AND INTRODUCTION ................ ................................................................................. Jeff Lueders, MACTAPresident
8:45 AM GENERAL SESSION
Rough Waters or Smooth Sailing?
Charting Our Telecommunications Course ................................................................ Moderator: Mike Reardon
Panel: Cress Gackle, John Gibbs, Esq., JoAnn Hanson, Adrian Herbst, Esq., Edward "Ted" Jackson
A panel of telecom experts grapples with what isns not happening with their respective industries, and where it is/is not headed. This session
promises to jump-start the conference with a lively and engaging discussion as the panel debates competition, buyouts, financial pitfalls, and
regulatory barriers.
10:15AM VENDOR EXHIBITS AND REFRESHMENT BREAK
10:45 AM CONCURRENT SESSIONS:
1. Navigating Local Regulatory Issues ................................ ................................. .......... Moderator: Alan Miller
Panel: Brian Grogan, Esq., Stephen Guzzetta, Esq., Robert Vose, Esq.
So many issues, so little time...Bfessed with some of the best legal minds in the nation, MACTA members are fortunate to be able to listen to,
question, and bring back to your cities the conclusions of Brian Grogan, Steve Guzzetta, and Bob Vose as they cram into one session a concise
discussion of areas such as FCC matters, limited area franchises and their effect on cities, competition, national legislative and legal efforts, and the
like. Not only a must for administrators, but for city attorneys, commissioners, and government officials.
2. Production Planning & Performance ............................................ ............... Moderator/Speaker: Mark Moore
Panel: Neil Murray, Paul Ryan
Every successful producer knows the Five "P" Principle; Proper Planning Prevents Poor Performance. This session considers the importance of
script writing, set preparation, determining technical needs, reviews interview do's and don'ts, and many other aspects during the "pre" part of a
video production.
.12:00 PM )I,NNOUNCEMENTS '." ,. ......... '," .,."~",..,,......... ..................... ...".. ............. ............ ................... ....... .,............. ........ ....Jeff Luedel
Luncheon & Keynote Address: Keeping Our Heads Above Water......................... Moderator: Cor Wilson
Speaker: NATOA President Denise Brady
After an aU too brief respite, cable and telecommunications issues are heating up in Washington, DC. From the FCC to the halls' of Congress, local
franchising and rights-of-way authority are again under attack, and NATOA is on the front lines of the battle. NATOA President Denise Brady will
provide an overview of the many challenges we are facing and local government's response.
1: 15 PM CONCURRENT SESSIONS:
1. Broadband Network Management & Applications ............................................ Moderator: Cheryl Pasalic
Panel: Mary Benner, Bruce Pibum, Tom Robinson
Traditional I-Nets are being replaced by broadband and community networks with a wide variety of new and innovative applications. Some
communities are also exploring the opportunity to interconnect networks and share resources, The panel will discuss these networks and present
examples of these applications. . ,
2. Political Blanket: Effective. Methodso~(:over!ng,EI~c::tiO!lS)ry..y....:.......hhh... Moderator: Jodie Miller
'. . '.' .... Pallel'Joe{rClzier,Kyrsten Thompson, Mike Wassenaar
With elections looming in the fall. this session.wm'~xam;ine,'and sh()wTe.al'<life;:'examRI.~~.;of..,how,_some Minnesota access centers caver local
elections. Find out what works, what does notwork;what'types,of.Policies:are.neces~<3ry,:,'N.h9-shO~ld be included in a candidates forum, decide
if Web streaming is right for you, how to cover. multiple polling and results:,ro,cati(},ns,: and;"rnLls;h, ~ore:
2:30 PM VENDOR EXHIBITS AND REFRESHMENT BREAK
2:45 PM GENERAL SESSION
The 2003 Minnesota Legislature: A Periscope Peek at the Future .................... Moderator: Holly Hansen
Panel: Ann Higgins, Mike Martin, Senator James Metzen, Wy Spano
One-fourth~-maybe more--of the legislators in the 2003 legislative session will be new. Does anybody know what is going to happ~n? Particularly,
does anybody know what will happen to MACTA issues? Perhaps not, but four of the most experienced people around the Minnesota Legislature
will give it a shot.
4:00 PM Reception and Roundtables
4:30 PM Annual Meeting of MACTA Membership
6:00 PM Studio Tours & Dinner (Optional - sign up on registration form)
A great opportunity to tour nearby PEG access facilities (BurnsvilJe/Eagan Community TV & Northern Dakota County TV), examine their capabilities
and how they get the best use of equipment and personnel, plus sharing dinner and networking with access staff and other conference attendees.
Mqil your registrq-tioll by Sep-tember 27 qlld sqve!!!
8:00 AM Roundtables by Topic
Continental Breakfast and Exhibits
I DAY, OCTOBER 11,2002
9:00 AM GENERAL SESSION
What's the Forecast? What Can the Consumer Expect? ................................. Moderator: Wayne Schmidt
Panel: Bill Hanley. Brian lambert. Will Outlaw
As the world of telecommunications changes on a daily basis, what can consumers really expect in the way of services, programs, and products
in their future? The panelists have their fingers on the pulse of consumers and have some interesting perspectives to share with attendees.
10:30AM VENDOR EXHIBITS AND REFRESHMENT BREAK
11 :OOAM CONCURRENT SESSIONS:
1. Batten Down the Hatches: Protecting Your Municipal Interests ..................... Moderator: Diann Kirby
Panel: Michael Bradley. Esq.. Linda Gloor. Tom Grundhoefer
Local governments have both financial and public interests in protecting "their" property. Learn from those who, in some cases, have literally been
in the trenches in administering rfghts-of-way use, ensuring the proper placement of telecom equipment on public property, and the location of
towers on both public and private land.
2. Production Equipment: From Council Chambers to
Production Vans and Everything in Between .............................................................. Moderator: HeidiArnson
Panel: Will Craig. Mark Hotchkiss. Jeffrey Volk
Learn about the latest and greatest trends in production from the digital format debate to how to decide what equipment should go where.
12:15 PM Luncheon & Keynote Address: The FCC
Perspective of Telecom and the Consumer.................................................................. Moderator: Jefflueders
Speaker: K. Dane Snowden. Chief of Consumer & Government Affairs Bureau. FCC
The FCC and local communities hear from consumers on a daily basis about telecommunications services and providers. In many cases, the local
communities have been preempted from taking action on behalf of the consumer. This session will give attendees the opportunity to hear directly
from the Chief of the Consumer and Government Affairs Bureau of the FCC about the ways in which they are working toward ensuring Consumers
get the best service from telecom providers.
1 :45 PM ADJOURN
**NOTE: Program and speakers are subject to change.
----------------------------------------------
MACTA Annuq/ Conference
Please photocopy for additional registrations
Octobe~ 10 - 11, 2002
,
NAME:
CITY/ORGANIZATION;
ADDRESS :"
CITY/STATE!ZJP:
BUSINESS TELEPHONE:
FAX:
E-MAIL
REGISTRATION FEE: MACTAMember? DYES D'NO FirstTimeAttendee? CheckHereD
MACTA MEMBER OR NON-MN NATOA FEES: NON-MEMBER FEES:
o Postmarked by September 27: $27500 0 Postmarked by September 27: $375.00
o Postmarked after September 27: $325,00 0 Postmarked after September 27: $425.00
Studio Tours & Dinner: $20.00 RSVP by 9/30/02 0 Studio Tours & Dinner: $20.00 RSVP by 9/30/02
LTIPLE REGISTRATION DISCOUNT: Register three or more people from the same organization in one payment,
and you may deducl $20 per person from the fee.
PAYMENT:
MAIL TO:
Amount $
o Check Enclosed
D Purchase Order Number:
MACTA. "1711 W. County Road B, Suite 300N, Roseville, MN 55113 FAX: 651.635.0307
SPEAKERS > ~
Heidi Arnson, MACTA Board, Executive Director, North Metro
Telecommunications Commission, Blaine, MN
Mary Benner, Computer Support Director, MN Dept of Labor & Industry,
'S~ paul,MN 'H"';~ " ''',.c,'
MiChael BradleY,"''E,s'q., Creighton, Bradley & Guzzetta, LLC,
Minneapolis, MN
Denise Brady, NATOA President, Department of Telecom & Video
Services, City of San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
Will Craig, CTS-D, Multimedia Systems Consultant, Elert & Associates
Technoiogy Consultants, Stillwater, MN
Joe Frazier, Supervisor, GTN, White Bear Lake, MN
Cress Gackle, Team Leader, New Market Development, Seren
Innovations, Minneapolis, MN
John Gibbs, Esq., Robins, Kapian, Miller & Ciresi, Minneapolis, MN
Linda Gloor, Technical Services Coordinator, City of Burnsville,
Burnsville, MN
Brian Grogan, Esq., Moss & Barnett, PA, Minneapolis, MN
Tom Grundhoefer, General Counsel, League of MN Cities, SI. Paui, MN
Stephen Guzzetta, Esq., Creighton, Bradley & Guzzetta, LLC,
Minneapolis, MN
Bill Hanley, Executive Vice President of Content, Twin Cities Public
Television, SI. Paul, MN
Holly Hansen, MACTA Board, Cabie Communications Officer, City of
SI. Paul, SI. Paul, MN
JoAnn Hanson, Director - Regulatory, Owest Corp, Minneapolis, MN
Adrian Herbst, Esq., Baller Herbst Law Group, PC, Minneapolis, MN
Ann Higgins, IGR Rep, League of MN Cities, SI. Paul, MN
Mark Hotchkiss, Program Manager, Burnsville/Eagan Community
Television, MN
Edward "Ted" Jackson, Managing Director, Senior Research Analyst,
Technology,. US Bancorp Piper Jaffray, Minneapolis, MN
Diann Kirby, Communications Administrator, City of Bloomington,
Bloomington, MN
Brian Lambert, Media Columnist, Pioneer Press, SI. Paul, MN
Jeff Lueders, MACTA President, Cable Coordinator, City of Lakeville,
Lakeville, MN
Mike Martin, Executive Director, MN, Cable Communication
Association, SI. Paul, MN
Senator James Metzen, Minnesota State Senate, SI. Paul. MN
Alan Miller, MACTA Board, Chair, Burnsville/Eagan Community
Television, MN
Jodie Miller, Executive Director, Northern Dakota County Cabie
Commission, Inver Grove Heights, MN
Mark Moore, Cable Coordinator, Appie Valley, Farmington & Rosemount
Cable Commission, Appie Valley, MN
Neil Murray, Television Performer/Producer, Golden Valley, MN
Will Outlaw, Deputy Editor, startribune.com, Minneapolis, MN
Cheryl Pasalic, Program Coordinator, City of SI. Paul, SI. Paui, MN
Bruce Piburn, Major Account Manager, Cisco Systems, Inc.,
Bloomington, MN
Mike Reardon, Communications Specialist, Cities of Burnsville and
Eagan, MN
Tom Robinson, Executive Vice President, CBG Communications, Inc.,
Malvem, PA
Paul Ryan, President, PFR Productions, Burnsville/Eagan Community
Television, MN
Wayne Schmidt, MACTA Board, South Washington County
Telecommunications. Commission, St. Paul Park, MN
K. Dane Snowden, Bureau Chief, Consumer & Governmental Affairs
Bureau FCC, Washington, DC
Wy Spano, MACTA Lobbyist, Spano & Janecek, SI. Paul, MN
Kyrsten Thompson, Production Supervisor, CTV 15, Roseville, MN
Jeffrey VOlk, Integrated Systems Specialist, Alpha Video &Audio, Inc.,
Edina, MN
Robert Vose, Esq., Kennedy & Graven Chartered, Minneapolis, MN
Mike Wassenaar, Executive Director, SPNN, 51. Paul, MN
Cor Wilson, Executive Director, North Suburban Cable Commission!
CTV 15, Roseviil:'j\AN