Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 04-19 CC PACKETCITY OF GEM LAKE Monday CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ri 2004 CALL TO ORDER CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Emeott at'—/: CALL OF THE ROLL MAYOR, 2002 CITY COUNCIL, 2002 OUNCIL, 2002 -ITY COUNCIL, 200 JW-COUNCIL 2004 Paul Emeott Chuck Watson Rick Bosak Pat Igo Rrollic Birkebak CITY CLERK / TREASURER CITY ATTORNEY CITY PROSECUTOR SR. BUILDING OFFICIAL Fritz Magnuson Ll Sarah Cobian Tom Newcome III Doug Meslow Allen Zepper OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE (Attach List) APPROVAL OF MINUTES & AGENDA FOR l A) City Council Minutes for 15 March 2004`'�� B) City Council Agenda For 19 April 2004 / tdERA L ANNOUNCEMENTS STAFF & COMMISSION REPORTS 0 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT-- -4 N cjv- 7L,q� PUBLIC SAFETYa%�✓Z�l.- A t e Statistics 00 G,�f.� �0 .00' �0506. mhzupdate Code Enforcement Letter Bt-Eeuthard Citation ! l G B+�L/,��LiLt�p . So �, r i !t y�'%� S 7 f Ys- �E')'C`�ontract Cities Meeting to PUBLI RKS & UTILITIES E ineer's Estimate To Rebuild Big Fox Road, Little Fox Lane, Tessier Road, Haven Lane Discussion With VH & Tousley Sports Re Illegal Dumping On County E OLD BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT Ae" e °sue'^ T°�`' eL • / 6 `2, 0(—)n A Hillary Farm /McNulty Gonstructioty4p • Z1,q'I�,2. �-. �l_P Z 1) Motion toe nd}�h�e� sixty (60) day rule for co�ion of applications received'by an additional sixty (60) days from May 4"' to,� gr. By approving this motion, the Council will grant the PI nnmg Commissiog adequate additional time to consider revisions to Plan B and present their findings. Motion by G�; Second by—mmo q. ote of those present: Ave . Nay Abstain 0. Letter to McNulty. �) Motion to authorize the City Engineer to implement a feasaflity study of installing sewer along Scheuneman Road from �wl�r�.; � Blue Spruce Estates to Hillary Farm, said study to include, but not be limited to, preliminary design, cost estimates, 5 4,ssessment needs, and financia la tng including repayment of any debt service incurred as a dirTi� result of the plan. Q / �1 Motion by Second by .. ote of those present: Aye Na Abstain Letter to SEH. Gy MBLING CONTRIB FIONS: Thank you letters J91NT- POWERS AGREEMENT: Maplewood, Vadnais Heights, White Bear Lake, Gem Lake, White Bear Township, Mn/DOT, Ramsey County. Resolution No. 2004-02f NEW BUSINESS ORDINANCES %`�` 0 A) (Proposed) Ordinance No. 82, Resolution No. 2004-03 MONTESSORI SCHOOL A) Request For TemporaryStorage Unit �J-C T EASURER'S REPORT CURRENT MONTHS TREASURER'S REPORT / e% I -- CURRENT MONTHS ACCOUNTS PAYABLES YEAR END FINANCIAL STATEMENT OTHER FINANCIAL BUSINESS A I A' 44 -, j L P" �51 Page 1 of 2 pax- 0 i FUTURE MEETINGS & ADJOURNMENT FUTURE MEETINGS A) CITY COUNCIL 1) CONTINUANCE: This April meeting of the City Council shall be continued to Wednesday, May 5`h, an hall be reconvened at 7:00 PM for the sole purpose of hearing findings and recommen ' s of the Planning imissio► regarding Hillary Farms. 2) NEXT MEETING: The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled to be held 7:00 p.i . on 17 May 2004. 3) The next meeting is rescheduled to / / due to an i or ere pu is ed in the appropriate e ' 'on of the White BearWV=�� T: Motion Byte. Second Bye & Emeott Approval a r p.m. Cam-' � w ; cf— NOTES Page 2 of 2 1 6�v, ;fvp/ xc�sg-,9 I CITY OF GEM LAKE MINUTES OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL, 2004 The April, 2004 meeting of the City Council of the City of Gem Lake was called to order by Mayor Emeott on Monday, 19 April 2004, at 7:20 PM in the first floor meeting room of Tousley Ford. Council Members Watson, Birkebak, Igo and Bosak, and Clerk Magnuson were present. Also present were Mr. Hoeschler, Mr. Lindner, Mrs. Robins and Mr. Becicka of the Planning Commission, the McNulty development and legal team and several members of the community. Following Mayor Emeott's request for additions, deletions, or corrections, the following actions were taken: 1) unanimous approval of the City Council Meeting Minutes for 15 March 2004 as presented on motion by Bosak, second by Watson; and, 2) unanimous approval of the City Council Meeting Agenda as amended for 19 April 2004 on motion by Birkebak, second by Bosak. Magnuson then presented General Announcements. Mr. Hoeschler then reported on the activities of the Planning Commission, focusing on the efforts directed to the Hillary Farm development. He recapped plans considered to date and noticed that an additional plan "B-2" has been identified and appears to be very close to a plan workable for the project and the community. Mr. Hoeschler thanked Mrs. Swomley and Mrs Tessier for mobilizing the community to state it's opinions. He also thanked Mr. McNulty for listening to the community and responding in general to the concerns with alternate plans. Mr. Hoeschler identified a list of 12 points that are incorporated herewith as part of his report to the Mayor attached. Mr. Hoeschler also stated his concern over who and how the sewer to the development would be constructed and financed. Finally, Mr. Hoeschler identified Mr. McNulty's willingness to work toward a solution by setting his plans "B", "D" and "G" aside with no Council action at this time while plan "B-2" is considered. Further, Mr. McNulty also consented to a sixty (60) day extension of the "sixty (60) day rule setting decision deadlines on plans "B", "D" and"G" from 04 May 2004 to 03 July 2004. In doing so, Mr. McNulty presumed that the Council would be willing to reconvene on 05 May 2004 to hear findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission. 1 Mr. McNulty was then recognized and recapped each of Plans "B", "D" and "G" and then presented a plan and review of Plan "B-2" and it's nuances. Mr. Watson asked why continue Plans "B", "D" and "G". Mr. Rosow, attorney for McNulty, explained that once a plan is withdrawn, it can not be represented in substantially the same form for at least twelve months. Mr. Watson then asked about house placements and the ability to control same to create visual open space. Mr. McNulty advised that to the extent possible that will be the goal although certain placement limitations can have the added effect of reduction of a given lot's value which might concern him. Mr. McNulty indicated red marked areas are suggested house settings and Mr. Watson asked if they can be mandated. Mr. Watson also asked about fencing restrictions to give the entire project the feeling of open space and it was indicated the topic can be discussed as part of the restrictive covenants. Mr. Igo asked how the driveway to Lot 2 would be created, easement or deed? Mr. McNulty indicated easement but also indicated lot lines can be amended to include it as part of Lot 2 deeded space. Additional general discussion followed. Magnuson reported Crime Statistics from the Ramsey County Sheriff and indicated the report would be held in file for review. Magnuson also reported on the 800 mhz radio system development, noting future meetings. Magnuson confirmed receipt by the Council of the minutes of the Contract Cities meeting. Magnuson presented his letter sent to perpetual violators of junk vehicle restrictions indicating citations will be issued on Saturday, 24 April 2004. Similarly, a citation to Leuthard will be issued on the same date. Motion by Bosak, Second by Watson to extend the sixty (60) day rule for consideration of applications for Plans "B", "D" and "G" received from McNulty Construction for development and subdivision of Hillary Farm by an additional sixty (60) days from May 4`h, 2004 to July 3`d, 2004 was unanimously approved by a vote of 5 Aye, 0 Nay and 0 Abstained. Upon approval by the Council, Mr. Magnuson executed a letter of confirmation and handed same to Mr. Rosow, Mr. McNulty's attorney. Motion by Igo, Second by Birkebak to authorize the City Engineer/SEH, Inc. to initiate a feasability study for placing sewer from the Blue Spruce Estates terminus to a point on or adjacent the Hillary Farm development which will include, but not be limited to, preliminary design, cost estimates, assessment needs and financial planning was unanimously approved by a vote of 5 Aye, 0 Nay and 0 Abstained. McNulty Engineer Anderson was recognized and indicated he would like to be included in the meetings with the City Engineer and staff to facilitate sewer planning as time constraints for McNulty are significant. His participation was welcomed. Ms. Linda Thompson of Kelly and Fawcett law firm was recognized. Kelly and Fawcett are city attorney for both Maplewood and White Bear Township and Ms. Thompson is present to respond to any questions regarding the request for a resolution adopting the Joint Powers Agreement with Maplewood, Vadnais Heights, White Bear Lake, White Bear Township, Ramsey County, MN Commissioner of Transportation and MN Commissioner ofAdministration which would allow transportation of special vehicles along certain possible routes through and over each of the Cities and roadways owned by Ramsey County and State of MN. Mr. Magnuson recapped the JPA, it's origin and history with requests for changes and indicated City Attorney Newcome has reviewed the JPA and recommends approval by the Council for execution by the Mayor and Clerk. Motion by Igo, Second by Birkebak to adopt Resolution No. 2004-02, a copy of which is attached hereto, was unanimously approved by a vote of 5 Aye, 0 Nay and 0 Abstain. Following presentation of a report from Mr. Parotti, the City Engineer, and discussion of methodology and financial burden, Motion by Bosak, Second by Igo to order a feasability study of rebuilding all city streets with an approximate cost of $5,000.00 was approved by a vote of 5 Aye, 0 Nay and 0 Abstain. Magnuson then read, for the record, letters of thanks from those recipients of Charitable Gambling Distributions. Following discussion and comments from both Mr. Becicka and Mr. Hoeschler ofthe Planning Commission, Motion by Birkebak, Second by Igo to adopt Resolution No. 2004-03 enacting Ordinance No. 82 and repealing Ordinance No. 80 was unanimously approved by a vote of 5 Aye, 0 Nay and 0 Abstain. Motion by Igo, Second by Watson to approve temporary use of a storage container on the White Bear Montessori parking lot to facilitate their fund raising auction and a temporary sign for similar purposes was unanimously approved 1 by a vote of 5 Aye, 0 Nay and 0 Abstain. ] Motion by Bosak, second by Watson to approve Accounts Payable for March/April as prepared by Magnuson and totaling $17,261.42, which includes $20,000.00 sewer fund investment, was unanimously approved. Motion by Watson, second by Igo to accept the April Treasurer's Report as prepared by Cobian and indicating a balance in the General Fund of $40,230.92 and in the Sewer Fund of $46,354.67 was unanimously approved. Motion by Watson, Second by Igo to approve the 2003 Unaudited Financial Statement as presented was unanimously approved by a vote of 5 Aye, 0 Nay and 0 Abstain. Motion by Igo, Second by Birkebak to approve expenditure of $125.00 to reimburse Lindner for enrollment in an Environmental Planning Class was approved by a vote of 5 Aye, 0 Nay and 0 Abstain. The next meeting of the Gem Lake City Council is scheduled for 17 May 2004. Councilor Birkebak indicated a scheduling conflict will keep him from attending. There being no further business at 9:15 PM, motion by Bosak, second by Watson to continue the meeting to 05 May 2004 where the sole agenda item will be consideration of Planning Commission recommendations for Hillary Farm development by McNulty Construction was approved by a vote of 5 Aye, 0 Nay and 0 Abstain. The meeting was reconvened on 05 May 2004 at 7:10 PM in the first floor meeting room of Tousley Ford. Council Members Watson, Birkebak, Igo and Bosak, and Clerk Magnuson were present. Also present were Mr. Hoeschler of the Planning Commission, the McNulty development and legal team and members of the community including: Mr. & Mrs. Swomley & their attorney, Mr. & Mrs. Tessier, and Bryan Hansen. Mayor Emeott noted the sole agenda item for this reconvening is consideration of Planning Commission recommendations for subdivision and development of the Hillary Farm. Motion by Bosak, Second by Birkebak to approve the Agenda as presented was unanimously approved. Mr. Hoeschler was recognized. Mr. Hoeschler presented his report of 04 May 2004 in the form of a letter to Mayor Emeott and the Council attached noting that the McNulty plan identified now as Plan B-2 has been reviewed along with an interim feasability plan for installation of sanitary sewer along Scheuneman Road. Following his presentation, Mr. Hoeschler presented the recommendations of the Planning Commission in the form of a written Resolution also attached and recommending the Gem Lake City Council approve the Preliminary Plat of Plan B-2 submitted by McNulty Construction Co. And Hillary Farm, LLC with the conditions as set forth therein and incorporating the Zoning Administrator's and City Engineer's review requirements. Mayor Emeott then called for questions of the developer or the Planning Commission by the Council. Several questions regarding the plat were posed and responded by Mr. Hoeschler and Mr. McNulty's team. Mr. Magnuson was then recognized. Magnuson pronounced that the Application for Plan B-2 has been received and is considered complete. Magnuson then reported on a potential plan for reducing the cost of installing sewer in Scheuneman Road. Mr. Magnuson proposed the City consider accepting the turn back of Scheuneman Road from Highway 61 on the south to it's intersection with Otter Lake Road on the north and waiving or restating realignment concerns for the plan identified historically as the "County Road "F" Extension Realignment.". Should the City consider this, Ramsey County has indicated a willingness to consider restoration of this section of Scheuneman Road to ninety (90%) percent as built condition with possible addition of a bike lane at no cost to the City. This plan would dramatically reduce the cost of sewer construction. Several details need to be worked out but general consensus for Magnuson to proceed with the plan was given. Mr. Magnuson then reported Mr. Newcome's recommendation regarding the sewer project is to hire Special Counsel for the effort. Following discussion with Mr. Magnuson, both agreed Kennedy -Graven would be a good choice as they have worked with us before. Mr. Magnuson then reported on proposed time lines to move the prof ect forward: 1) reschedule the next City Council meeting from May 17`n to May 20 to allow adequate time for preparation of public improvement notices and Plan B-2 review; and, 2) Schedule public hearing for Plan B-2 on May 24`n as no public hearing has been held on this plan and this plan is sufficiently different than Plan B that previous hearings do not apply; and, 3) Schedule a public hearing on City Sanitary Sewer Assessment proposal for May 24`n Mayor Emeott then asked for comments from those present. Mrs. Swomley asked several questions and Mr. Hansen handed out a vague plan for cottage homes and deeding of McNulty land to the public. Dr. Birkebak asked Mr. Hansen to refrain from pursuing this recommendation as it does not fit the Comprehensive Plan or ideology of the community as spoken by members of the community and him personally. Motion by Igo, Second by Watson to seek a change of venue for the May 241n meeting requirements due to potential high attendance was unanimously approved. Motion by Watson, Second by Igo to reschedule the May meeting from May 171n to May 24`n at 7:00 PM was unanimously approved. Motion by Igo, Second by Watson to set a public hearing before the City Council on May 24`n to consider Hillary Farm Plan B-2 as reviewed bythe Planning Commission and in accordance with their recommendations was unanimously approved. Motion by Bosak, Second by Watson to appoint Kennedy -Graven as Special Bond Counsel for proposed Public Improvement Project No. 2004-01, installation of sanitary sewer in Scheuneman Road from Kahl Circle/Gem Lake Hills to 3841 Scheuneman Road was unanimously approved. Motion by Igo, Second by Birkebak to set a public hearing for proposed Public Improvement Project No. 2004-01 and an assessment of benefitted property owners for said project and the assessment attendant thereto. J There being no further business, Motion to adjourn by Birkebak, Second by Watson was unanimously approved. Mayor Emeott declared the proceedings adjourned. AUTHORED: 23 April 2004 & 10 May 2004 APPROVED: 24 May 2004 ATTEST: Frederic C. Mignuso City Clerk J ATTEST: Paint R. Emeott Mayor efile: minutes/2004/166aprm2004.wpd Memo to: Mayor Emeott and Gem Lake City Council From: Jack Hoeschler, Chair of Planning Commission Re: Gem Lake Planning Commission Meeting of May 4, 2004 Date: May 4, 2004 1 The Gem Lake Planning Commission held its regular May meeting on May 4, 2004 at Tousley Ford. All members were present along with Messrs. Magnuson, Emeott, Parotti and Mitchell from SEH, Mr. McNulty and his team, and a number of residents. Mr. Hoeschler announced that he wanted to hear from Mr. Hansen for 10 minutes before the start of the McNulty discussion but Mr. Hansen had not yet arrived and therefore the meeting turned to the Hillary Farm proposal of Mr. McNulty. Mr. Hoeschler explained that this was not a public hearing but everyone would be allowed to be heard and that he anticipated that a formal public hearing would be held later in the month by the City Council to discuss the financing of any sewer plan. He said that while there were several McNulty plans still alive, this evening's focus would be on Plan B-2, a 29 lot sewered plan presented by Mr. McNulty since the last Council meeting. Mr. McNulty briefly described the plan. Mr. Magnuson and Mr. Mitchell then gave an overview of the feasibility study work SEH has been doing on the cost and design of sewer service for the McNulty property. Mr. Magnuson also described preliminary discussions he had had with the County about their willingness to fund the reconstruction of Scheuneman Road should the City be willing to take it back as a City street. The conclusion of all of this was that the sewer would best be run down the middle of the street from Kahl Circle to the south entry of Hillary Farm. Mr. Hoeschler explained that the numbers appear to mean that the Scheuneman Road property owners might be looking at a deferred assessment of no more than $8,000 to have sewer service in the road in front of their properties. All of this is subject to further refinement by the engineers and other city consultants but it looks like it would be quite feasible to provide sewer service to both Hillary Farm and the Scheunemann Road neighbors at a cost all could afford. The details will be left to the Council to decide after it holds a public hearing sometime later in May. The discussion then turned to the details of Plan B-2. Mr. Parotti described the result of his review of the plans presented and stated that he felt certain that he and the developer's engineer could work out any details. He described concerns about the drainage of detention pond 60P into Gem Lake and some concerns about the drainage l of pond 1 OP onto the golf course, but felt that these issues could probably be resolved after a walk on the property. He also suggested that the City would want a 20 foot wide road rather than the 18 foot road proposed. Mr. Emeott described the results of his review of the plans and pointed out that the north road connection to Scheuneman Road should be relocated about 50 feet south to avoid headlights into the houses across the street. He also suggested that some more curbing might be needed to protect the wetlands. He also reminded the developer that they will be responsible for capping the well at the caretaker's house and properly removing the septic systems when sewer is available. He also said the island should not be built upon. Finally, he reminded the developer that he needs to deal with the Rudisil drainfield easement that burdens Lot 20. The discussion was then opened to the floor. Mrs. Swomley made two strong points. First, she spoke against down - zoning any lots to a R-2 classification because that would open other problems such as the prospect that those over 2 acres might be later subdivided. The Chairman stated that that danger had been recognized and that any motion to recommend would not be for down -zoning but rather for variances from the strict requirements for an R-1 zone while keeping that as the overall zoning classification for all but the small lot on Scheuneman (Lot 29) which would be rezoned to R-3. She also objected strongly to diluting the R-1 minimum lot size of 3 acres. She felt that that created a bad precedent for other properties. She felt that allowing lots as small as 1.80, 1.85, and 1.87 acres was a far cry from 3 acres. The average size of the proposed R-2 lots is only 2.15 acres. She felt that this was doing too much violence to our large lot philosophy and character just to get some sewer service. The Chairman responded that the main question was not what the underlying zoning would be but rather whether the total number of 4 extra lots was too liberal a payment for the sewer provided. A number of people spoke in favor of the sewered plan with 29 lots. Mr. Becicka stated that he wanted to make it easy for the developer to provide sewer. Mrs. Robins expressed concern about where the houses would be located on the plan. She indicated that she felt the City should be concerned about that and should negotiate site approval. The Chairman stated that we could do that if we adopted a PUD ordinance. Mr. Becicka then moved and Mr. Wippich seconded the following motion: Resolved, that the Planning Commission recommends to the Gem Lake City Council that it approve McNulty Plan B-2 for Hillary Farm upon the following understandings and agreements and subject to the following conditions: 1. Preliminary approval will be given using existing codes by granting variances from R-1 zoning requirements (except for lot 29 which will be rezoned to R-3) on the grounds of hardship caused by the cost of sewer and other amenities required of the developer with the understanding that a new PUD ordinance will be enacted before the final plat is submitted and approved so that the agreements, variances, conditions and restrictions set forth below and approved by the City can be adopted as part of a PUD plan and agreement for the development. 2. The developer will agree to incorporate wherever appropriate the conditions, restrictions, and agreements required and approved by the City into its recorded Restrictions, Reservations and Covenants that will bind subsequent owners in the development. After some discussion which also involved counsel to Mr. McNulty and on his suggestion, the following friendly amendment to the motion was added: 3. Such other conditions as the City Council may choose to impose from the following list or as it otherwise deems appropriate. Restrictions and Conditions ReQardinp. Any Hillary Farm Plat 1) All interior wetlands should be protected by a 25 foot uncut, unmanicured and unfertilized buffer with permanent monuments delineating the boundary. 2) All scenic easements shown on the plat will be maintained by the affected lot owners for the benefit of their neighbors both within and without Hillary Farm. 3) The road crossing between the estate house and Gem Lake should be depressed so that the road itself cannot be seen either from the patio in front of the estate house or from across the lake. This restriction will not screen cars that may be traveling on the road. 4) No structure shall be allowed on the island adjacent to Hillary Farm mainland. 5) No access to the lake shall be granted to any nonriparian lot in the Hillary Farm addition. 6) Concrete surmountable curbs shall be required along the road in the areas in which drainage from the road can be expected to flow into interior wetlands so that such drainage is conducted first to settling ponds. 7) The scenic easement between the estate house and Gem Lake should be at least 100 feet wide. The scenic easements at the rear of lots 22,23,24,25,27,and 28 shall be at least 100 feet deep on each lot. 8) Restrictions should be placed on certain lots so that the houses to be built on those lots must be located as follows: a) Lots abutting the golf course should not allow houses to be built in the north third of those lots; b) Lots 22-28 should require their houses to be located in the buildable 60% of the lot closest to the road that serves those lots; c) Lot 7 should require the location of the house in the northly half of the lot and at least 150 feet back from the lake. d) Lot 6 should require the location of the house at least 150 feet back from the northerly line of the lot. 9) All utilities serving any lot will be buried. No metal outbuildings or metal siding will be allowed. 10) The access easement serving Lot 2 shall be located so as to allow a buffer line of trees along its easterly side. Such a buffer shall be planted by the developer from the tree bank created as described below. 11) A tree bank will be created based upon the trees removed in the development in excess of the amount allowed by the City tree ordinance and the location of the plantings from the tree bank will be approved by the City. 12) No chemical fertilizer will be allowed to be used within 100 feet of the lake. 13) Requirements listed in City Engineer's report. 14) Requirements listed in Zoning Administrator's report. 15) Restrictive covenants and home owner's association rules as approved by the Planning Commission and the City Attorney and with a requirement that they cannot be changed without approval by the City Council. 16) Entry monuments at each entry shall be allowed as submitted with subtle lighting as approved by the Zoning Administrator. The language of these conditions had been prepared by Mr. Hoeschler from the previous resolution of the Planning Commission and from further discussions with various members and other interested parties. Mr. Hoeschler emphasized his concern that the placement of the houses on certain lots was critical to the overall environmental impact of the development on the unique parcel that Hillary Farm occupied. He said that he thought it would be naive of the City to approve a bare plat with only normal setbacks. That is why he felt it very advisable to adopt a PUD ordinance and formally approve the Hillary Farm development under the terms of such an ordinance. After further discussion, Mr. Becicka's motion as amended passed unanimously. Mr. Hoeschler then moved that the City consider through the June and July meetings of the Planning Commission a PUD ordinance which could then provide the framework for the final approval of the Hillary Farm project and the restrictions that will be put on it. Mr. Lindner seconded the motion. Mr. Hoeschler indicated that he would like to use the PUD method so that there would be no debate whether it is legitimate for the City to concern itself with issues like site plan approval regarding the lots. During the discussion Mr. McNulty said that he did not feel that a PUD ordinance would be required for Hillary Farm because he intended to incorporate into the Reservations, Restrictions and Conditions the substance of the City's conditions. After further discussion, the motion passed unanimously. It was decided that the Planning Commission would hold its June meeting on Monday evening, June 7 (rather than June 1) when it would hold a working session to analyze various PUD language options. It will then hold a public hearing on July 6 after which it will make its recommendation to the Council so that there will be no delay in the Hillary Farm platting process. As a footnote to these minutes, the following is a statement of philosophy which Mr. Hoeschler drafted and read to the meeting and which he stated that he hoped Mr. McNulty would incorporate into the preamble of his RR&C documentation. Statement of Development Philosophy and Design Aesthetic for Hillary Farm The developer, designers, contractors and residents of Hillary Farm will endeavor to maintain and complement the special environment and sense of place that is so evident both around the lake and in the woods, pastures and meadows that mark its inland areas. Population density will be kept low so that people will join the natural environment with a minimum of impact. We will endeavor to "lie lightly upon the land". Design and construction decisions will seek to preserve the overall feeling of place, a feeling of community in which the whole is more important and more dominant than its parts. This concept of the whole will be used to link buildings and nature into an organized and organic ensemble, not just a group of pretty or impressive houses. Structures will use natural materials in colors that blend in with rather than stand out from the natural landscape. Wherever possible, structures will be sited in such a way that they connect and nestle with the trees and taller elements of the natural landscape and look out onto and share the open areas and vistas with their neighbors. The undeveloped, back woods feel of the lake shore will be fostered and maintained by avoiding any trimming or removal of trees, bushes and groves that would serve to expose structures when viewed from across the lake during the summer. More aggressive trimming of shore land zone trees and bushes will be allowed where the views are to and from an undeveloped and undevelopable opposite shore. Memo to: Mayor Emeott and Gem Lake City Council From: Jack Hoeschler, Chair of Planning Commission Re: Recommended Restrictions Regarding Hillary Farm Date: May 5, 2004 CC: Jim McNulty, Planning Commission, John Parotti, Fritz Magnuson After last night's meeting I spoke with Jim McNulty and reviewed the list of restrictions recommended to the Council by the Planning Commission. We reviewed each one and attempted to develop language that was mutually acceptable. With a few exceptions, I believe that the following list is substantially acceptable to Jim. He is reviewing a few matters with his engineers and still wants to think about the island as well. I am sending this to everyone prior to this evening's meeting so that you will be able to have your own copy. Note that the list that was included with my minutes inadvertently left off a few items at the end that the Planning Commission had actually approved. In addition, I have included a few more items at the end from the letter that Jim previously sent to the City. It is anticipated that this list, as modified by the Council, will be a significant part of any resolution approving the plan that will be adopted at the end of May. Restrictions and Conditions Repardin2 Any Hillary Farm Plat 1. All interior wetlands should be protected by a 25 foot uncut, unmanicured and unfertilized buffer with permanent monuments delineating the boundary. 2. All scenic easements shown on the plat will be maintained by the affected lot owners and will not be released except with written permission of the City and the HOA. 3. The road crossing between the estate house and Gem Lake should be built as described in the plans or otherwise depressed so that the road itself cannot be seen from across the lake. This restriction will not screen cars that may be traveling on the road. 4. No structure shall be allowed on the island adjacent to Hillary Farm mainland. 5. No access to the lake shall be granted to any non -riparian lot in the Hillary Farm addition. 6. Concrete surmountable curbs shall be required along the road in the areas in which drainage from the road can be expected to flow into interior wetlands so that such drainage is conducted first to settling ponds. 7. No metal siding or metal accessory buildings will be allowed. 8. The location of all structures on the lots shall be subject to site plan review and approval by the City. 9. All utilities serving any lot will be buried. 10. The access easement serving Lot 2 shall be located so as to allow a buffer line of trees along its easterly side. Such a buffer may be supplemented by trees from the tree bank created as described below. 11. A tree bank will be created based upon the trees removed in the development in excess of the amount allowed by the City tree ordinance and the location of the plantings from the tree bank will be approved by the City. 12. No phosphorous fertilizer will be allowed to be used within 100 feet of the lake. 13. Requirements listed in City Engineer's report. 14. Requirements listed in Zoning Administrator's report. 15. Restrictive covenants and home owner's association rules as approved by the City and with a requirement } that they cannot be changed without approval by the City Council. v 16. Entry monuments at each entry shall be allowed as submitted with subtle lighting as approved by the Zoning Administrator. 17. The lots covered by note 5 on Sheet 6 shall be 2-7 rather than 9-13. 18. The internal road shall be 20 feet wide with a subgrade extending 4 feet on either side wherever practical to provide support for cars pulled onto the grass shoulder. 19. Outlet structures at all detention ponds will be substantially covered on their sides by ground so as not to be obvious. 20. Hours of work shall be lam to 7pm, Monday through Saturday, with exceptions to be allowed under special circumstances by the zoning administrator. 21. The barn may be remodeled and used as a sales office and storage facility during the period of sales activity. 22. Building permits (but not certificates of occupancy) may be granted to the developer in advance of completion of sewer and road work. Any construction done by developer prior to recording of the final plat will be at the risk of the developer. 23. Final plat shall include a sewer easement for possible extension to serve property to the northwest at a location along a lot line to be approved by the city engineer. 24. Developer shall install a 4 foot wide blacktopped trail adjacent to the main roadway at a location to be determined by developer. 25. On the final plat developer shall dedicate to the City a sewer easement in form acceptable to the City once the sewer is complete. All warranties regarding the sewer shall be transferred to the City upon transfer of title to the sewer. J FINALLY H PRIVATE LAND PRESERVE, REAL OPEN SPACE, LAKE VIEWS And LESS TRAFFIC FOR GEM LAKE RESIDENTS ONLY 1. Thousands of added dollars upon sale for majority of Gem Lake home owners, plus use and enjoyment until sale, by receiving private ownership and use of Real open space preserve for current residents, unlike 3 acre lots by which current residents get no open space; 2. Permanent Retreat for current residents to walk, gaze, read in Private Open Space Preserve (as at Lake Minnetonka and Pebble Beach); 3. Private property right to be received by DEED to all Gem Lake home owners from current sole owner Mr. McNulty; 4. Gem Lake homeowners to pay nothing now or later; 5. To make it happen, McNulty could cluster scenic, cottage homes, largely unseen from Scheunemann Rd, for sale to current Gem Lake residents and retiring empty nesters desiring such comfort; 6. LESS TRAFFIC / FAR FEWER TEENAGE DRIVERS Traffic noise and impact less than with 3 acre lots since many cottage owners would be retired, or empty nesters, or snowbirds, or all Three. (possible 55 yr and older permanent resident requirement) 7. Cottage homes designed so current residents could remain in community as they grow older and less mobile; 8. ALL of above depends on persuading Mc Nulty, with adequate cottage home approvals, so his investment remains reasonable W. /�11^4PC4 Memo to: Mayor Emeott and Gem Lake City Council From: Jack Hoeschler, Chair of Planning Commission Re: Gem Lake Planning Commission Meeting of May 4, 2004 Date: May 4, 2004 The Gem Lake Planning Commission held its regular May meeting on May 4, 2004 at Tousley Ford. All members were present along with Messrs. M �nuson, Emeott, Parotti and Mitchell from SEH, Mr. McNulty and his team, and a n tuber of residents. Mr. Hoeschler announced that he wanted to hear from Mr. Hansen for 10 minutes before the start of the McNulty discussion but Mr. Hansen had not yet arrived and therefore the meeting turned to the Hillary Fann proposal of Mr. McNulty. Mr. Hoeschler explained that this was not a public hearing but everyone would be allowed to be heard and that he anticipated that a formal public hearing would be held later in the month by the City Council to discuss the financing of any sewer plan. He said that while there were several McNulty plans still alive, this evening's focus would be on Plan B-2, a 29 lot sewered plan presented by Mr. McNulty since the last Council meeting. Mr. McNulty briefly described the plan. Mr. Magnuson and Mr. Mitchell then gave an overview of the feasibility study work SEH has been doing on the cost and design of sewer service for the McNulty property. Mr. Magnuson also described preliminary discussions he had had with the County about their willingness to fund the reconstruction of Scheuneman Road should the City be willing to take it back as a City street. The conclusion of all of this was that the sewer would best be run down the middle of the street from Kahl Circle to the south entry of Hillary Farm. Mr. Hoeschler explained that the numbers appear to mean that the Scheuneman Road property owners might be looking at a deferred assessment of no more than $8,000 to have sewer service in the road in front of their properties. All of this is subject to further refinement by the engineers and other city consultants but it looks like it would be quite feasible to provide sewer service to both Hillary Farm and the Scheunemann Road neighbors at a cost all could afford. The details will be left to the Council to decide after it holds a public hearing sometime later in May. The discussion then turned to the details of Plan B-2. Mr. Parotti described the result of his review of the plans presented and stated that he felt certain that he and the developer's engineer could work out any details. He described concerns about the drainage of detention pond 60P into Gem Lake and some concerns about the drainage of pond lOP onto the golf course, but felt that these issues could probably be resolved after a walk on the property. He also suggested that the City would want a 20 foot wide road rather than the 18 foot road proposed. Mr. Emeott described the results of his review of the plans and pointed out that the north road connection to Scheuneman Road should be relocated about 50 feet south to avoid headlights into the houses across the street. He also suggested that some more curbing might be needed to protect the wetlands. He also reminded the developer that they will be responsible for capping the well at the caretaker's house and properly removing the septic systems when sewer is available. He also said the island should not be built upon. Finally, he reminded the developer that he needs to deal with the Rudisil drainfield easement that burdens Lot 20. The discussion was then opened to the floor. Mrs. Swomley made two strong points. First, she spoke against down -zoning any lots to a R-2 classification because that would open other problems such as the prospect that those over 2 acres might be later subdivided. The Chairman stated that that danger had been recognized and that any motion to recommend would not be for down -zoning but rather for variances from the strict requirements for an R-1 zone while keeping that as the overall zoning classification for all but the small lot on Scheuneman (Lot 29) which would be rezoned to R-3. She also objected strongly to diluting the R-1 minimum lot size of 3 acres. She felt that that created a bad precedent for other properties. She felt that allowing lots as small as 1.80, 1.85, and 1.87 acres was a far cry from 3 acres. The average size of the proposed R-2 lots is only 2.15 acres. She felt that this was doing too much violence to our large lot philosophy and character just to get some sewer service. The Chairman responded that the main question was not what the underlying zoning would be but rather whether the total number of 4 extra lots was too liberal a payment for the sewer provided. A number of people spoke in favor of the sewered plan with 29 lots. Mr. Becicka stated that he wanted to make it easy for the developer to provide sewer. Mrs. Robins expressed concern about where the houses would be located on the plan. She indicated that she felt the City should be concerned about that and should negotiate site approval. The Chairman stated that we could do that if we adopted a PUD ordinance. Mr. Becicka then moved and Mr. Wippich seconded the following motion: Resolved, that the Planning Commission recommends to the Gem Lake City Council that it approve McNulty Plan B-2 for Hillary Farm upon the following understandings and agreements and subject to the following conditions: 1. Preliminary approval will be given using existing codes by granting variances from R-1 zoning requirements (except for lot 29 which will be rezoned to R-3) on the grounds of hardship caused by the cost of sewer and other amenities required of the developer with the understanding that a new PUD ordinance will be enacted before the final plat is submitted and approved so that the agreements, variances, conditions and restrictions set forth below and approved by the City can be adopted as part of a PUD plan and agreement for the development. 2. The developer will agree to incorporate wherever appropriate the conditions, restrictions, and agreements required and approved by the City into its recorded Restrictions, Reservations and Covenants that will bind subsequent owners in the development. After some discussion which also involved counsel to Mr. McNulty and on his suggestion, the following friendly amendment to the motion was added: 3. Such other conditions as the City Council may choose to impose from the following list or as it otherwise deems appropriate. Restrictions and Conditions Regarding AU Hillary Farm Plat 1) All interior wetlands should b protected by a 25 foot uncut, unmanicured and unfertilized buffer with permanent monuments delineating the boundary. 2) All scenic easements shown on the plat will be maintained by the affected lot owners for the benefit of their neighbors both within and without Hillary Farm. 3) The road crossing between the estate house and Gem Lake should be depressed so that the road itself cannot be seen either from the patio in front of the estate house or from across the lake. This restriction will not screen cars that may be traveling on the road. �4) No structure shall be allowed on the island adjacent to Hillary Farm mainland. 5) No access to the lake shall be granted to any nonriparian lot in the Hillary Farm addition. 6( � Concrete surmountable curbs shall be required along the road in the areas in 1�Lwhich drainage from the road can be expected to flow into interior wetlands so that such drainage is conducted first to settling ponds. 7) The scenic easement between the estate house and Gem Lake should be at least 100 feet wide. The scenic easements at the rear of lots 22,23,24,25,27,and 28 shall be at least 100 feet deep on each lot. �t( Restrictions should be placed on certain lots so that the houses to be built on those lots must be located as follows: a) Lots abutting the golf course should not allow houses to be built in the north third of those lots; b) Lots 22-28 should require their houses to be located in the buildable 60% of the lot closest to the road that serves those lots; c) Lot 7 should require the location of the house in the northly half of the lot and at least 150 feet back from the lake. d) Lot 6 should require the location of the house at least 150 feet back from the northerly line of the lot. 9) All utilities serving any lot will be buried. No metal outbuildings or metal siding will be allowed. J 10) The access easement serving Lot 2 shall be located so as to allow a buffer line of trees along its easterly side. Such a buffer shall be planted by the developer from the tree bank created as described below. 11) A tree bank will be created based upon the trees removed in the development in excess of the amount allowed by the City tree ordinance and the location of the plantings from the tree bank will be approved by the City. 12) No chemical fertilizer will be allowed to be used within 100 feet of the lake. 13) Requirements listed in City Engineer's report. 14) Requirements listed in Zoning Administrator's report. 15) Restrictive covenants and home owner's association rules as approved by the Planning Commission and the City Attorney and with a requirement that they cannot be changed without approval by the City Council. 16) Entry monuments at each entry shall be allowed as submitted with subtle lighting as approved by the Zoning Administrator. The language of these conditions had been prepared by Mr. Hoeschler from the previous resolution of the Planning Commission and from further discussions with various members and other interested parties. Mr. Hoeschler emphasized his concern that the placement of the houses on certain lots was critical to the overall environmental impact of the development on the unique parcel that Hillary Farm occupied. He said that he thought it would be naive of the City to approve a bare plat with only normal setbacks. That is why he felt it very advisable to adopt a PUD ordinance and formally approve the Hillary Farm development under the terms of such an ordinance. After further discussion, Mr. Becicka's motion as amended passed unanimously. Mr. Hoeschler then moved that the City consider through the June and July meetings of the Planning Commission a PUD ordinance which could then provide the framework for the final approval of the Hillary Farm project and the restrictions that will be put on it. Mr. Lindner seconded the motion. Mr. Hoeschler indicated that he would like to use the PUD method so that there would be no debate whether it is legitimate for the City to concern itself with issues like site plan approval regarding the lots. During the discussion Mr. McNulty said that he did not feel that a PUD ordinance would be required for Hillary Fann because he intended to incorporate into the Reservations, Restrictions and Conditions the substance of the City's conditions. After further discussion, the motion passed unanimously. It was decided that the Planning Commission would hold its June meeting on Monday evening, June 7 (rather than June 1) when it would hold a working session to analyze R various PUD language options. It will then hold a public hearing on July 6 after which it will make its recommendation to the Council so that there will be no delay in the Hillary Farm platting process. As a footnote to these minutes, the following is a statement of philosophy which Mr. Hoeschler drafted and read to the meeting and which he stated that he hoped Mr. McNulty would incorporate into the preamble of his RR&C documentation. Statement of Development Philosophy and Desis,n Aesthetic for Hillary Farm The developer, designers, contractors and residents of Hillary Farm will endeavor to maintain and complement the special environment and sense of place that is so evident both around the lake and in the woods, pastures and meadows that mark its inland areas. Population density will be kept low so that people will join the natural environment with a minimum of impact. We will endeavor to "lie lightly upon the Ian&". Design and construction decisions will seek to preserve the overall feeling of place, a feeling of community in which the whole is more important and more dominant than its parts. This concept of the whole will be used to link buildings and nature into an organized and organic ensemble, not just a group of pretty or impressive houses. Structures will use natural materials in colors that blend in with rather than stand out from the natural landscape. Wherever possible, structures will be sited in such a way that they connect and nestle with the trees and taller elements of the natural landscape and look out onto and share the open areas and vistas with their neighbors. The undeveloped, back woods feel of the lake shore will be fostered and maintained by avoiding any trimming or removal of trees, bushes and groves that would serve to expose structures when viewed from across the lake during the summer. More aggressive trimming of shore land zone trees and bushes will be allowed where the views are to and from an undeveloped and undevelopable opposite shore. Resolved, that the Planning Commission recommends to the Gem Lake City Council that it approve McNulty Plan B-2 for Hillary Fann upon the following understandings and agreements and subject to the following conditions: General Review and Approval Procedure and Philosoply 1. Preliminary approval will be given using existing codes by granting variances from R-1 zoning requirements (except for lot 29 which will be rezoned to R-3) on the grounds of hardship caused by the cost of sewer and other amenities required of the developer with the understanding that a new PUD ordinance will be enacted before the final plat is submitted and approved so that the agreements, variances, conditions and restrictions set forth below and approved by the City can be adopted as part of a PUD plan and agreement for the development. 2. The developer will agree to incorporate wherever appropriate the conditions, restrictions, and agreements required and approved by the City into its recorded Restrictions, Reservations and Covenants that will bind subsequent owners in the development. 3. All other plans submitted by the developer shall be deemed denied on the grounds that they do not meet the City's planning and zoning requirements or otherwise need variances that do not meet the requirements of state law and city ordinances. 4. Preliminary resolutions will be formally adopted at a subsequent meeting after the details of formal findings and specific conditions and other language necessary to support the resolutions can be reviewed and drafted by the City Attorney. Statement of Development Philosophy and Design Aesthetic for Hillary Farm The developer, designers, contractors and residents of Hillary Farm will endeavor to maintain and complement the special environment and sense of place that is so evident both around the lake and in the woods, pastures and meadows that mark its inland areas. Population density will be kept low so that people will join the natural enviromment with a minimum of impact. We will endeavor to "lie lightly upon the land". Design and construction decisions will seek to preserve the overall feeling of place, a feeling of community in which the whole is more important and more dominant than its parts. This concept of the whole will be used to link buildings and nature into an organized and organic ensemble, not just a group of pretty or impressive houses. Structures will use natural materials in colors that blend in with rather than stand out from the natural landscape. Wherever possible, structures will be sited in such a way that they connect and nestle with the trees and taller elements of the natural landscape and look out onto and share the open areas and vistas with their neighbors. The undeveloped, back woods feel of the lake shore will be fostered and maintained by avoiding any trimming or removal of trees, bushes and groves that would serve to J expose structures when viewed from across the lake during the summer. More aggressive trimming of shore land zone trees and bushes will be allowed where the views are to and from an undeveloped and undevelopable opposite shore. Restrictions and Conditions Regarding Any Hillary Farm Plat 1) All interior wetlands should be protected by a 25 foot uncut, unmanicured and unfertilized buffer with permanent monuments delineating the boundary. 2) All scenic easements shown on the plat will be maintained by the affected lot owners for the benefit of their neighbors both within and without Hillary Farm. 3) The road crossing between the estate house and Gem Lake should be depressed so that the road itself cannot be seen either from the patio in front of the estate house or from across the lake. This restriction will not screen cars that may be traveling on the road. 4) No structure shall be allowed on the island adjacent to Hillary Farm mainland. 5) No access to the lake shall be granted to any nonriparian lot in the Hillary Farm addition. 6) Concrete surmountable curbs shall be required along the road in the areas in which drainage from the road can be expected to flow into interior wetlands so that such drainage is conducted first to settling ponds. 7) The scenic easement between the estate house and Gem Lake should be at least 100 feet wide. The scenic easements at the rear of lots 22,23,24,25,27,and 28 shall be at least 100 feet deep on each lot. 8) Restrictions should be placed on certain lots so that the houses to be built on those lots must be located as follows: a) Lots abutting the golf course should not allow houses to be built in the north third of those lots; b) Lots 22-28 should require their houses to be located in the buildable 60% of the lot closest to the road that serves those lots; c) Lot 7 should require the location of the house in the northly half of the lot and at least 150 feet back from the lake. d) Lot 6 should require the location of the house at least 150 feet back from the northerly line of the lot. J 9) All utilities serving any lot will be buried. No metal outbuildings or metal siding will be allowed. 10) The access easement serving Lot 2 shall be located so as to allow a buffer line of trees along its easterly side. Such a buffer shall be planted by the developer from the tree bank created as described below. 11) A tree bank will be created based upon the trees removed in the development in excess of the amount allowed by the City tree ordinance and the location of the plantings from the tree bank will be approved by the City. 12) No chemical fertilizer will be allowed to be used within 100 feet of the lake. 13) Requirements listed in City Engineer's report. 14) Requirements listed in Zoning Administrator's report. 15) Restrictive covenants and home owner's association rules as approved by the Planning Commission and the City Attorney and with a requirement that they cannot be changed without approval by the City Council. 16) Entry monuments at each entry shall be allowed as submitted with subtle lighting as approved by the Zoning Administrator. J Memo to: Mayor Emeott and Gem Lake City Council From: Jack Hoeschler, Chair of Planning Commission Re: Recommended Restrictions Regarding Hillary Farm Date: May 5, 2004 CC: Jim McNulty, Planning Commission, John Parotti, Fritz Magnuson After last night's meeting I spoke with Jim McNulty and reviewed the list of restrictions recommended to the Council by the Planning Commission. We reviewed each one and attempted to develop language that was mutually acceptable. With a few exceptions, I believe that the following list is substantially acceptable to Jim. He is reviewing a few matters with his engineers and still wants to think about the island as well. I am sending this to everyone prior to this evening's meeting so that you will be able to have your own copy. Note that the list that was included with my minutes inadvertently left off a few items at the end that the Planning Commission had actually approved. In addition, I have included a few more items at the end from the letter that Jim previously sent to the City. It is anticipated that this list, as modified by the Council, will be a significant part of any resolution approving the plan that will be adopted at the end of May. Restrictions and Conditions Regarding, Any Hillary Farm Plat 1) All interior wetlands should be protected by a 25 foot uncut, unmanicured and unfertilized buffer with permanent monuments delineating the boundary. 2) All scenic easements shown on the plat will be maintained by the affected lot owners and will not be released except with written permission of the City and the HOA. 3) The road crossing between the estate house and Gem Lake should be built as described in the plans or otherwise depressed so that the road itself cannot be seen from across the lake. This restriction will not screen cars that may be traveling on the road. 4) No structure shall be allowed on the island adjacent to Hillary Farm mainland. 5) No access to the lake shall be granted to any non -riparian lot in the Hillary Farm addition. 6) Concrete surmountable curbs shall be required along the road in the areas in which drainage from the road can be expected to flow into interior wetlands so that such drainage is conducted first to settling ponds. 7) No metal siding or metal accessory buildings will be allowed. 8) The location of all structures on the lots shall be subject to site plan review and approval by the City. 9) All utilities serving any lot will be buried. 10) The access easement serving Lot 2 shall be located so as to allow a buffer line of trees along its easterly side. Such a buffer may be supplemented by trees from the tree bank created as described below. 11) A tree bank will be created based upon the trees removed in the development in excess of the amount allowed by the City tree ordinance and the location of the plantings from the tree bank will be approved by the City. 12) No phosphorous fertilizer will be allowed to be used within 100 feet of the lake. 13) Requirements listed in City Engineer's report. 14) Requirements listed in Zoning Administrator's report. 15) Restrictive covenants and home owner's association rules as approved by the City and with a requirement that they cannot be changed without approval by the City Council. 16) Entry monuments at each entry shall be allowed as submitted with subtle lighting as approved by the Zoning Administrator. 17) The lots covered by note 5 on Sheet 6 shall be 2-7 rather than 9-13. 18) The internal road shall be 20 feet wide with a subgrade extending 4 feet on either side wherever practical to provide support for cars pulled onto the grass shoulder. 19) Outlet structures at all detention ponds will be substantially covered on their sides by ground so as not to be obvious. 20) Hours of work shall be lam to 7pm, Monday through Saturday, with exceptions to be allowed under special circumstances by the zoning administrator. 21) The barn maybe remodeled and used as a sales office and storage facility during the period of sales activity. 22) Building permits (but not certificates of occupancy) may be granted to the developer in advance of completion of sewer and road work. Any construction done by developer prior to recording of the final plat will be at the risk of the developer. 23) Final plat shall include a sewer easement for possible extension to serve property to the northwest at a location along a lot line to be approved by the city engineer. 24) Developer shall install a 4 foot wide blacktopped trail adjacent to the main roadway at a location to be determined by developer. 25) On the final plat developer shall dedicate to the City a sewer easement in form acceptable to the City once the sewer is complete. All warranties regarding the sewer shall be transferred to the City upon transfer of title to the sewer. ID J Memo to: Mayor Emeott Cc to: City Council, Planning Commission, City Clerk, City Attorney From: Jack Hoeschler Date: April 7, 2004 Re: Gem Lake Planning Commission Meeting of April 6, 2004 The Gem Lake Planning Commission met at 7pm on April 6, 2004 at Tousley Ford for its regular monthly meeting and for a public hearing regarding the development proposals for Hillary Farm. All members of the Commission were present along with the two co -zoning administrators, the City Engineer, the developer's team and a very large (standing room only) group of concerned citizens. The following summarizes the items considered and the actions taken. Executive Summary After a full public hearing at which many people spoke and at which a petition signed by over 125 residents (urging that we stick to the 3 acre minimum lot size in the development) was described and received, the Commission unanimously recommended to the Council that all current Hillary Farm proposals be rejected. In addition, it unanimously recommended that before the Council considers any Hillary Farm plat that does not contain public sewer, an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) be required to review the potentially significant environmental impacts of individual septic treatment systems (ISTS) on the lake and inland wetlands on the property. Finally, it recommended a list of conditions described at length below, which should be added to any Hillary Farm preliminary plat approval resolution. Public Hearing Gretchen Swomley introduced and delivered to the Commission a petition signed by more than 125 residents [there are reportedly 13 5 names but I have not verified them all], which she reported represented 97% of the people approached, which stated: I would like to urge the Gem Lake Planning Commission and City Council to stick to the three -acre minimum rule for the Hillary Farm housing development. Mr. McNulty then described the three plans that were under consideration: Plan G: 7 lots at 3 acres; 12 lots at 1 acre; 1 lot at 36,000 SF; 11 townhouse (two units each) lots at 36,000 SF; permanent conservation easement of 13.3 acres; sewer provided; Plan D: 7 lots at 3 acres; 26 lots at 1 acre; 1 lot at 36,000 SF; permanent conservation easement of 12.2 acres; sewer provided; Plan B: 24 lots at 3 acres; 1 lot at 36,000 SF; sewer not provided. The attendance of the public at the meeting was the most that anyone could remember and there was barely standing room throughout the entire meeting. It appeared that most in attendance had signed the petition but in the course of their comments a number of additional concerns were stated. The meeting was very cordial and reflected the spirit of concern and cooperation that is part of the unique character of Gem Lake. Some of the additional concerns and comments are summarized below. Traffic on Scheunemann Road was one area of real concern. The number of dogs killed by cars was commented upon. A number of the speakers were also concerned about the need for sewer on the Hillary Farm project and on Sheunemann Road adjacent. There were questions about the cost of sewer, now or in the future. The chairman warned the attendees that while a big development like Hillary Farm could be expected to bear a significant portion of the cost of sewer to the area, the neighbors should not assume that this will be a "free lunch" and that they will not be asked to contribute to the cost of a valuable service to them. It was made clear that no final decision had yet been made regarding sewer, where it might run, and how the cost would be borne by lands served. Several attendees expressed concern about assessments but others spoke in favor of doing sewer now as it would have to come eventually. There were a number of questions about open space issues, whether the general public could have access to the open space proposed on various plans (generally not), how the open space could be protected for perpetuity, whether provision could be made for near neighbors to use the trails depicted, and the quality difference between the open space contained in a J back or front yard on a three acre lot versus the open space of a commonly owned and dedicated area. There was a suggestion that part of the property be dedicated to the public as a pocket park. It was explained that Gem Lake does not have a park dedication policy or requirement and that we have previously felt that privately controlled trails informally open to neighbors was the preferred solution in smaller developments. A number spoke in favor of design guidelines and restrictions and the chairman explained that our ordinance does not contain design review rights but that we would expect to work with the developer on a mutually acceptable set of restrictive covenants and a design control scheme that the developer is able to impose in connection with our approval of the plat. Lighting issues were also raised. After about an hour and a half of public comment and questions to the developer and the city, the public hearing was formally closed. Resolution Regarding Plan G Mr. Becicka moved, Mrs. Robins seconded and the Commission unanimously passed the following resolution recommending rejection of Plan G: I move that the Planning Commission recommend to the Gem Lake City Council rejection of McNulty Plan G for Hillary Farm on the grounds that it violates our Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code, is too dense a development, and requires too many variances for which no hardship justification can be or has been shown. Resolution Regarding Plan D Mr. Becicka moved, Mrs. Robins seconded and the Commission unanimously passed the following resolution recommending rejection of Plan D: I move that the Planning Commission recommend to the Gem Lake City Council rejection of McNulty Plan D for Hillary Farm on the grounds that it violates our Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code, is too dense a development, and requires too many variances for which no hardship justification can be or has been shown. J Resolution Regarding Plan B Mr. Wippich moved, Mrs. Robins seconded and the Planning Commission unanimously passed the following resolution recommending rejection of Plan B: I move that the Planning Commission recommend to the Gem Lake City Council rejection of McNulty Plan B for Hillary Farm on the grounds that it requires variances for which no hardship justification can be or has been shown. Prior to the vote on this resolution, the chairman asked Mr. McNulty to provide his views and arguments as to why there was a hardship sufficient to justify the variances requested (36,000 SF area of one lot; 150' rather than 200' setback for ISTS for one lot). Mr. McNulty stated that he was requesting either a variance or a rezoning of the small lot along Scheunemann Road because the configuration of the land does not allow for another reasonable use of that land and because its use as a 36,000 SF lot is consistent with the size of lots on either side of it even though it is connected to the larger Bemis parcel on its back side. He argued that connecting this property to an otherwise qualifying 3 acre lot, while possible, was not the best use of the land. Mr. McNulty described the Gardner parcel (where the ISTS setback variance was being requested) as a landlocked parcel, the development of which would not be possible unless it were attached to the larger Bemis parcel and that development of that parcel is not possible without a variance. The chairman suggested that simply moving the lot lines on the plat would allow the Gardner parcel to be expanded so that there would be room for the ISTS and he alluded to the rule that the hardship cannot be self imposed by the applicant. He also indicated that in each case a 3 acre minimum zoning did not mean that each 3 acre area was developable. During the discussion it was agreed that if the plat were served by public sewer, the need for the ISTS variance would go away and a rezoning of the 36,000 lot could be envisioned under all of the applicable circumstances. In the course of the discussion Mr. McNulty proposed to amend orally his J application in order to delete the 36,000 SF lot and to delete the lot that would require the ISTS variance. The chairman ruled that the motion was on the plat as formally presented and that he would not accept an oral amendment but that Mr. McNulty could present a new proposal along those lines that would be reviewed and acted upon in the time allowed by the statute. During the course of the discussions regarding these various motions it was clear that the members of the Commission were very concerned about the environmental issues raised by the septic systems near the lake and the interior wetlands. Several stated clearly that they felt that public sewer would solve a lot of their concerns. In addition, several expressed a lack of enthusiasm for the long narrow lots in the east half of Plan B. Resolution Recommending EAW Because the City Council does not necessarily have to follow our recommendations for rejection of the various plans and because of our concern about the potentially serious environmental issues raised by any plan that does not provide for public sewer, Mr. Lindner moved, Mrs. Robins seconded and the Commission unanimously passed the following resolution recommending an EAW before any unsewered plan is considered: I move that the Planning Commission join with VLAWMO and the City Engineer in recommending to the Gem Lake City Council that no plan be approved for the development of Hillary Farm which does not require public sanitary sewer unless and until an Environmental Assessment Worksheet is prepared and reviewed which addresses the potentially significant environmental effects of individual septic treatment systems on Gem Lake and the interior wetlands within Hillary Farm. During the discussion it was made clear that an EAW would not be required if the developer were to agree to providing sewer. Resolution Regarding Further Restrictions and Conditions The chairman moved, Mr. Lindner seconded and the Commission unanimously passed a resolution recommending to the City Council that any J plat approved for Hillary Farm contain the following additional requirements: 1) All interior wetlands should be protected by a 25 foot uncut, uninanicured and unfertilized buffer with permanent monuments delineating the boundary. 2) Any ISTM must maintain a 25 foot setback from any interior wetland and a 200 foot setback from Gem Lake. 3) The road crossing between the estate house and Gem Lake should be depressed so that the road itself cannot be seen either from the patio in front of the estate house or from across the lake. This restriction will not screen cars that may be traveling on the road. 4) No structure shall be allowed on the island adjacent to Hillary Farm mainland. 5) No access to the lake shall be granted to any nonriparian lot in the Hillary Farm addition. 6) Concrete surmountable curbs shall be required along the road in the areas in which drainage from the road can be expected to flow into interior wetlands so that such drainage is conducted first to settling ponds. 7) The scenic easement between the estate house and Gem Lake should be at least 100 feet wide. 8) Restrictions should be placed on certain lots so that the houses to be built on those lots must be located as follows: a) lots abutting the golf course should not allow houses to be built in the north half of those lots; b) lots 17-24 should require their houses to be located in the buildable half of the lot closest to the road that serves those lots; c) lot 7 should require the location of the house in the northeast quarter of the lot. 9) All utilities serving any lot will be buried and all lights used in the development must be designed so that they do not show a point of light source to viewers standing off the property. 10) Requirements listed in City Engineer's report. 11) Requirements listed in Zoning Administrator's report. J 12) Restrictive covenants, homeowner's association rules and a developer's agreement as approved by the City Attorney. 13) Construction activities shall be limited to the hours lam to 7pm, Monday through Saturday with the proviso that the City Clerk or Building Inspector or Zoning Administrators may grant special relief from these limits for good cause shown over specifically limited time periods. Resolution Regarding Sign Ordinance Variance Mr. McNulty asked whether we would consider whatever type of variance, if any, would be required for the entry signage and landscaping that he proposed at the two entries to the development. There was discussion of whether the proposed boulder and fence entry feature was merely landscaping that would not require a permit or a variance. There was also discussion of the fact that the sign ordinance requirements may only apply to the letters and graphics on the boulder and that they may not need a variance. There was also a discussion of the fact that the entry monument is proposed to be lighted from below and such lighting is not be allowed in a residential district. After further discussion and without it being clear who actually moved and seconded the motion to approve, it became clear that two members were in favor of granting whatever variances may be required, two members were opposed, and one member was undecided. Therefore the matter was deemed to be referred to the City Council without recommendation. The Chairman thanked everyone for coming and for being actively involved in this important project. Because of the lateness of the hour he failed to make further remarks that he had intended to do and which are hereafter included for the record. This is one of the finest development parcels left in the twin cities. The McNulty organization is one of the best developers in the twin cities in the estimation of the Chairman. This is the most important development that we will be asked to consider in the history of Gem Lake. We need to make sure that we have all done our very best by this project. I believe that our collective, concentrated concerns and efforts can result in a better project than any one of us might do on our own. I want to thank everyone for their hard work and - continuing efforts and look forward to an award winning result of which we can all be proud. Ape) l I ���or MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE JURISDICTIONS THAT CONTRACT WITH RAMSEY COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT FOR POLICE SERVICES APRIL 15, 2004 The meeting was called to order at 8:07 a.m. The following members were present: ➢ George Altendorfer, Ramsey County Sheriff's Department ➢ Tim Dunleavy, City of North Oaks ➢ Joel Hanson, City of Little Canada ➢ John Luey, Ramsey County Sheriff's Department ➢ Joe Paget, Ramsey County Sheriff's Department ➢ Jan Reagan, White Bear Township ➢ Mike Salter, Ramsey County Sheriff's Department ➢ Terry Schwerm, City of Shoreview ➢ Bill Short, White Bear Township ➢ Gerry Urban, City of Vadnais Heights ➢ Michelle Wolfe, City of Arden Hills APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved as submitted. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Minutes of March 18, 2004, were approved as submitted. CRIME PREVENTION REPORT — NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH & OTHER ArTIVITIFS Deputy Dan Ruettimann updated the Group on the focus areas within the Crime Prevention Department. He reported that his current focus, Neighborhood Watch, has 115 organized watch groups, and 8 pending. He reported that 73 Block Captains participated in a recent Annual Meeting that he hosted, at which time he reviewed the Sheriff's Department resources, provided a terrorism awareness presentation, distributed new Neighborhood Watch guides (information on how to start and maintain Neighborhood Watch Groups), and he presented hats to Block Captains to be worn for identification during National Night Out gatherings. Deputy Ruettimann reported that he has been encouraging organization of business watches, providing businesses with information on crime prevention education such as burglary follow-up, premise surveys, check fraud, shoplifting, tobacco compliance, parking lot and store safety, identity theft, theft from auto, Ij Operation Identification, etc. Minutes Sheriff Contract Group Meeting April 15, 2004 Deputy Ruettimann reported that there are currently 23 multi -housing complexes actively participating in the Crime -Free Multi -Housing Program. He explained the steps for participation as follows: Phase 1 - manager training (8 hours); Phase 2 - premise surveys; and Phase 3 - resident crime prevention education. He reported that Knox Boxes (deputies have keys) are still being installed in entrances at various complexes. Deputy Ruettimann reported on burglary follow-ups, stating that 8 of 8 residential requests, and 6 of 6 commercial requests for premise surveys have been completed. Deputy Ruettimann reported on current problem solving resources to assist residents, businesses, multi -housing complexes, etc, with conflict resolution on quality of life issues. He explained that the individuals or groups involved are visited independently, and a plan of action is developed for resolution. He reported that the patrol deputies are informed with regard to the issues in their patrol area, and they are requested to submit progress reports. He stated that CAO's also visit the area and monitor progress. He stated that since January, 2004, he has been involved with problem solving assistance at Arden Manor and Oak Avenue in Arden Hills; Woodgate Drive in Vadnais Heights; and Finch Court, in White Bear Township. Deputy Ruettimann reported on a new internet based Neighborhood & Business Watch signup tool, called "Citizen Observer". He reported on his goals, which include crime prevention tips of the month, crime mapping by community, and highlighting crime prevention focus areas. Deputy Ruettimann stated that he fields an average of 7-10 phone calls and 5-7 e-mails per day. He also designs and works on all of the crime prevention literature, does most of the mailings, copies materials, and maintains his own record keeping system. He noted that there are 83,000 residents, 997 businesses and 70 multi -housing projects, combined, in the contract communities. He stated that he borrows dedicated clerical staff from other duties, and that he uses volunteers when he can for record keeping, noting that volunteer consistency can become an issue. He reported that he has researched Crime Prevention Departments in other communities, for comparison, and he found that the City of Brooklyn Park was the most comparable (also has 83,000 residents). He reported that Brooklyn Park provides the same focus areas as he does, for which they have three full-time officers, and they share a full-time clerk. Deputy Ruettimann noted that he is beginning to plan for National Night Out, and stated his appreciation for input / ideas for this year's event. Urban asked if there was still a meeting requirement for active Neighborhood Watch Groups. Deputy Ruettimann reported that he asks for participation in two meetings per year, however, he does not remove the Neighborhood Watch signs 2 Minutes Sheriff Contract Group Meeting April 15, 2004 if they don't meet that meeting standard. He stated that he sees value in keeping the Watch Groups, even if there are only two or three active participants. He stated that he feels a need for more face to face time with the Block Captains. He suggested additional training time, and a monthly meeting topic. Urban suggested using the internet to distribute information, and that meetings be spread out during the year. Deputy Ruettimann noted that he has moved in this direction through the "Citizen Observer" Program. Altendorfer reported that it is recommended that the Group move forward to provide a new Clerk position to assist Deputy Ruettimann. He stated that a temporary part-time position would cost the Group approximately $6,000.00. Paget commended Deputy Ruettimann for the exceptional job he has done in making community contact. He noted that Deputy Ruettimann has been involved in other Department projects, and that he currently provides training to neighboring police agencies on Crime Free Multi -Housing. He stated that Deputy Ruettimann has done an excellent job in the Crime Prevention Department since he began the position, noting that he has created new brochures, and recruited, organized, and maintained new Block Watch Groups. Paget stated that he was exceptionally pleased with Deputy Ruettimann's work and accomplishments. There was discussion with regard to the status of the current budget. Altendorfer stated that it was on track for the year, noting that $15,000.00 of the $25,000.00 reserve account has been applied toward the purchase of the portable speed board and new speed trailer. He suggested that the rest of the funds be dedicated to the Crime Prevention Unit for clerical help and to purchase a new power point projector. He noted that there is only one projector for the entire county and, even though there is a plan to purchase a new one, there is a need for one in the Crime Prevention Department. He stated that he is asking for a minimum grade projector, at a cost of $2,000.00 - $3,000.00. Urban stated concern about the increased cost of gas, feeling that it is an area of the budget to watch. Altendorfer noted that this part of the budget that they have no control over. Altendorfer forecasted that the Group may be faced with additional overtime (in Investigations) for a couple of cases this year. Hanson questioned if $6,000.00 was enough to fund the six month part-time position that is being requested, noting that it would not be sufficient for a 20 hour per week assignment, if the pay rate for Clerk 1 is $10.31 per hour. He stated he thought it would make sense to support the Crime Prevention Department with a clerical position, and that the position should be looked at as long term. He suggested that the Sheriff's Department look for consistency and a computer 3 ..J Minutes Sheriff Contract Group Meeting April 15, 2004 proficient employee. Altendorfer noted that in the past they have offered part- time employees a permanent full-time position, if everything works out. Hanson moved to approve $10,000.00 for the Crime Prevention Department as requested, and to incorporate a Y2 time position in the 2005 budget. Urban seconded. Ayes all. TRAFFIC DEPUTY — QUARTERLY REPORT Tim Entner, Traffic Deputy, presented the First Quarter Traffic Statistic Report, which included statistics on the total number of traffic stops, citations, warnings and charges, and other information such as the driver's age group and sex. He stated that he can't say enough good things about the impact and effectiveness of the new portable speed board and speed cart. He suggested that each community consider purchasing their own portable speed boards to be placed on signs, noting that they are not much work to set up. Altendorfer explained that if each community purchases their own portable boards, their Public Works Departments should be required to manage them (so Deputy Entner does not get over -involved with their placement, etc.). Deputy Entner reported that the portable boards can be run on small or large batteries, or hard wired. He noted that larger portable boards are also available. Altendorfer reported that other types of portable speed boards are available, such as those that constantly flash the speed limit (without the radar equipment). Hanson asked if there would be a price advantage if several speed boards are purchased at one time. Deputy Entner will check on this, and also on the cost of the boards that just flash the posted speed limit. Altendorfer stated that he will follow up with a media release / photos on the new technology. Deputy Entner reported that they received an additional $8,000.00 grant for the Safe & Sober Program (in addition to the $45,000.00 grant previously received). He reported on the safe and sober mobilizations (100 hours each) that will be held in the Contract Communities this summer month, through September. Paget reported that June 10, 2004, will be "Brown Day", when four teams of four uniformed employees in unmarked vehicles will target speeders, stop sign & seat belt offenders. Wolfe asked if there would be additional effort with regard to graffiti this summer. Paget explained that they will be doing "knock and talks" to encourage residents to call in suspicious activity in areas where graffiti has been noted. He also noted that the school liaison reviews and monitors these situations. He stated that he 4 J Minutes Sheriff Contract Group Meeting April 15, 2004 has five volunteers who have been concentrating on graffiti, and that they watch problem areas, equipping themselves with a camera to identify the offenders. It was noted that there is a product on the market that basically wipes off graffiti. Urban noted the importance of quick removal of graffiti. PARK WATCH PROGRAM - UPDATE Paget reported that Deputy Ron Valento has been working on the Park Program, "knock and talk", and that he recently created a networking program for managers at mobile home parks. He stated that Deputy Valento has been doing an excellent job in this area, comparing him to a school liaison for mobile home parks. He stated his goal to help alleviate nuisance calls to the deputies. He reported that the park managers have been receptive to the program, and it has been working good, and the mobile home communities like having marked squad presence. He stated that they also address traffic and speeding complaints, and recommend stop sign replacement. He presented a map of one of the mobile estates, reporting that maps have been made of all the mobile home parks, with a focus on problem areas. Paget noted that Deputy Ruettimann has also been contacted by one of the managers from a mobile home park, which shows that the networking is working. It was requested that each community be advised of the various meetings that the Sheriff's Department holds in their communities. 2005 BUDGET Altendorfer reported that there are no budget issues right now, however he did note the overtime issue that he pointed out earlier. Luey stated that there may be an issue with liability insurance increases. Urban requested a periodic update. Schwerm noted that most communities will be finalizing their budgets over the next couple of months. Urban noted concern with the " Unweave the Weave Project", which he stated will most likely cause a lot of additional traffic on local streets in several of the contract communities. He stated that he thinks this should be discussed as a group, noting that the project will take 3-4 years to complete. He reviewed three possible options as follows: 1) hire current weight enforcement employee to work on traffic enforcement — approximate $6,000.00 cost; 2) overtime — two three hours additional extension of shifts, based on five days a week — approximate $62,400.00 cost; 3) hire additional traffic deputy - approximate 5 Minutes Sheriff Contract Group Meeting April 15, 2004 $96,000.00 cost - per year. It was agreed that discussion on this matter will be placed on next month's agenda. Hanson noted the remote possibility of obtaining special legislation, stating Little Canada's intention to pursue the matter. 800 MHZ -UPDATE Luey distributed information on funding and time lines for the communication system project. He reported that a Federal Homeland Security Grant will provide $6 million for equipment and services to develop a County Interoperable Communication System, and that the deadline for using these funds is September 28, 2004. He explained that it is proposed that these funds can be used for equipment, services, project management and engineering, but they may not be used for construction. He explained that the funds do not require consolidated dispatch, but one project activity will be to look at the possibility of reorganizing dispatch operations. There is also a $3.4 million Federal Homeland Security supplemental allocation through the State Department of Public Safety for subscriber units and related items (warranties, spare parts, etc.), that may not be used for anything else, and must be spent by January, 2005. Metropolitan Radio Board funds are anticipated (up to 50% of infrastructure and console costs may be awarded to local jurisdictions), but the actual amount is not certain (they do not have sufficient funds for this at the current time). Only 800 MHz equipment and installation can be included in this. The current Metropolitan Radio Board policy is to support 38% of infrastructure costs and nothing for consoles. In their most recent capital budget, Ramsey County would receive approximately $4 million. If full funding is available, Ramsey County would receive approximately $6 million. Maplewood and White Bear Lake have allocations under the current budget. These are reimbursement funds and the actual costs of the project could affect the total reimbursement. Luey reported that they are looking at a June 30, 2004 deadline for local government approvals, and to decide on the consolidation issue. Luey reiterated his feelings that he is not in favor of dispatch center consolidation, stating the need for another center if ones goes down, and concern about level of service standards. He reported that St. Paul dispatchers answer twice the number of calls as the County's dispatchers. He also cited the relationship between the dispatch center and those they serve. He reported that location is very important, noting that the downtown center is on the airport path. He also noted that there might be costs associated with consolidation and the expected level of service. Luey stressed the importance of each community's City Council / Town Board, to contact their County Commissioners, to provide input with regard to dispatch center consolidation. 0 Minutes Sheriff Contract Group Meeting April 15, 2004 Altendorfer stated concern about the level other centers are upgraded to, noting that White Bear Lake and Maplewood are not built physically or technologically to handle the situation of taking over if another center went down, and that only the County has the capacity to handle St. Paul's center if they go down. He noted that 2,000 square feet has been pre -planned for a center at the new patrol center. Wolfe stated that she did not think it was right for other communities to pay for the additional costs for St. Paul to consolidate. It was stated that St. Paul's Dispatch Center is currently understaffed by at least 10 employees. Schwerm stated that he felt that if a community wanted to operate their own center, they should bear the cost. Altendorfer stated that the Sheriff's Department's official position on the dispatch centers is that the current four dispatch centers remain as they are. OTHERISSUES Short noted that the County Board is planning to make a decision on the suburban court facility location, and has asked for each community's input on four possible cites. Hanson noted that his city council is opposed to the Taco John's site. It was noted that the proposed site on White Bear Avenue and Frost Street, is only Y2 mile from the city of St. Paul. Altendorfer stated the Sheriff Department's position is that it be a centrally located facility. Schwerm stated that the special events permit information that he got from the League of Minnesota Cities did not supply much information. Reagan will provide Schwerm with a copy of the Township's Special Events Policy. There was discussion with regard to hazardous methane waste, and making the responsible parties pay for clean-up. Urban will provide a sample ordinance at the next meeting. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:06 a.m. The next regular meeting will be held on MAY 20, 2004, at 8:00 A.M., at the CITY OF SHOREVIEW COUNCIL CHAMBERS. Respectfully submitted, Jan Reagan Recording Secretary JAR/ 7 _-�k SEH MEMORANDUM TO: Frtiz Magnuson a FROM: John Parotti DATE: April 6, 2004 ; RE: Street Improvement Project SEH No. A-GEMLK0401.00 In response to your request, I have reviewed information assembled last August pertaining to a possible street improvement project for Big Fox Road and Little Fox lane. At that time, SEH had provided preliminary opinion of cost to be between $117,900 and $153,500 for construction. I have recently reviewed bids received for a similar project to be constructed in the City of Lakeland this year. While the opinion of cost we provided last year was very preliminary, the bid prices for the Lakeland project are consistent with those numbers. The Lakeland project will resurface approximately 0.77 miles of rural section streets. The low bid averaged $187,400 per mile and the average of all bids received was $211,150 per mile. The following is a table showing how the construction costs might look based on $200,000 per mile. Based on our recent conversation, I have also added Tessier Road and Haven Lane to the streets we evaluated last year. Street Name Length Opinion of Probable Cosf1l Linear Feet Miles Big Fox Road 2,037 0.39 $77,159.09 Little Fox Lane 1,222 0.23 $46,287.88 Tessier Road 677 0.13 $25,643.94 Haven Lane 555 0.11 $21,022.73 ,Total 4,491 0.85 $170,113.64 Based on $200,000 per mule An additional 25% is typically added for engineering, legal and administration costs. The actual cost will likely vary some from these numbers based on what type of improvements are implemented, the bidding climate at the time the project is ready for bids, and the cost of materials at that time. x:lfjlgemIM0Q1001DumsV=rw streeis.doc Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 3535 Vadnais Center Drive, St. Paul, MN 55110-5196 SEH is an equal opportunity employer 1 www.sehine.com 1 651.490.2000 1 800.325.2055 1 651.490.2150 fax =SEN August 6, 2003 Mr. Fritz Magnuson City Clerk City of Gem Lake 1369 County Road E East Gem Lake, MN 55110-5231 Dear Fritz: 3535 Vadnais Center Drive, St. Paul, MN 55110-5196 651.490.2000 651.490.2150 FAX architecture engineering environmental transportation RE: City of Gem Lake Big Fox / Little Fox Repaving SEH No. A-GEMLK0401.00 At your request I have taken a look at Big Fox Road and Little Fox Lane with respect to a project that would address the deteriorating pavement. At the time of our last conversation, you had mentioned that you had a contractor look at the project area and you received a bid in the $40,000 range. I have taken a look at the project area, reviewed recent, similar projects and have the following to assist in your consideration of the project. 1. If the project is to receive any portion of funding through special assessments, the project process must include a Feasibility Report, public hearing, and follow other applicable requirements of Minnesota Statute, Chapter 429. 2. Soil borings must be taken and geotechnical evaluation written to evaluate existing pavement depths and subsurface soil conditions. 3. Pavement condition evaluation should be done to determine the appropriate measures to be taken to provide long-term, cost effective solutions. 4. Field survey should be conducted to properly evaluate crown in the street section and drainage patterns. It is important to fully understand existing drainage patterns, especially on streets without storm sewer as overlay projects can have effects on existing drainage patterns. If the drainage patterns are not understood and properly planned for, the project could have adverse effects on drainage resulting in ponding or localized flooding. 5. Depending on the results of the field survey, it may be necessary to consider limited storm sewer installation. I realize that item 5 is not consistent with how Gem Lake has approached street construction in the past, and it may be that construction of storm sewer could be cost prohibitive. However, storm sewer does contribute to longevity of pavement, results in reduced long-term maintenance costs, and should at least be considered. We have driven the project area and made a preliminary assessment of two possible solutions to address the current pavement conditions. Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Your Trusted Resource Equal Opportunity Employer Mr. Fritz Magnuson August 6, 2003 Page 2 1. Pulverizing and Repaving — This option is the more aggressive of the two approaches considered. It involves grinding the existing pavement and base material together, leaving it in place and using it as base for the new pavement surface. The streets would then receive 31/2" of new bituminous pavement and shoulder restoration as necessary. This would provide a pavement with a design life of a new street. With regular maintenance, we could expect to see 30 years before the next reconstruct. Our opinion of probable cost for this option is $153,500. 2. Overlay with Localized Subgrade Repairs — This option removes and replaces areas where the pavement has failed, grinds out cracks and fills them with rubberized crack sealant, and constructs a 2" overlay. This option could extend the pavement life 5 to 8 years. We would also expect to see "reflection cracking" through the overlay. "Reflection cracking" occurs when cracks in existing pavement "reflect" through the new surface. Standard crack repair will result in "reflection cracking" within just a few years. A crack filling project will often be necessary within the first 2 years to prevent premature deterioration. Our opinion of probable cost for this option is $117,900. (Storm sewer costs have not been included in the above analysis) We could also look at the cost of a seal coat, but that would do nothing to address the structure of the pavement and we could expect the need for further maintenance or a reconstruction within the next 5 years. Regardless of the method chosen, the $40,000 cost received by the contractor you talked to does not appear to be inclusive of all items necessary to assure the City a good, long-term solution. I have also enclosed a copy of a chart that demonstrates typical pavement life cycle and how various types of maintenance efforts effect longevity. As always, don't hesitate to call with any questions. Sincerely, SHORT ELUOTT HENDRICKSON INC. ty Engineer Enclosure x:Vl�c�nDc`co®non�big fox little fox.doc L IJ V J ♦a W E W ca a. li ;! m U � IC � ' g m for f6 U ' E c U E �`u tmJ [6 — w d C :3 f6 I (6' U m d U Q (D I Q O' F- Q 'j ,f 3 (IOd) xapul 4118no juawaned M. O LO 0 v W LC O N CrJ G1 p1 Q U .V m U m U � W m Nc m �a m a m E � C m L � C t U (A - J Telephone: ( 651) 426 - 6443 �� �lapnuno� Ci/y C/ei,� Mr. Jim McNulty McNULTY CONSTRUCTION 400 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55401 REF: Sixty (60) Day Rule Extension Dear Mr. McNulty, CITY OF GEM LAKE Office of the City Clerk 1369 County Road "E" East Gem Lake, MN 55110-5231 Email: gemlakecity@aol.com you/&,,OR �/ayor Facsimile: (651) 426 - 6444 &1121G 6o01;4 c givarllmr 19 April 2004 By means of this correspondence and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, be advised that the Gem Lake City Council did, at it's regular meeting on this day, vote in the majority to extend the sixty (60) day rule by an additional sixty (60) days. Based upon your earliest submission of Plan `B" and notification by my office on 05 March 2004 that the application was considered complete, the original sixty (60) days would expire on 04 May 2004. By means of this extension, the period during which a decision must be reached is extended to 03 July 2004. By means of your correspondence received at my office today via facsimile and email, it is our understanding that you consent to this extension. Regards, CITY OF GEM J Frederic C. us n City Clerk cc: City Attorney Newcome Planning Chairman Hoeschler J efile: HillaryFarm\jmcnulty040419A-60Day.wpd Page 1 of 1 Telephone: ( 651 ) 426 - 6443 T"I& .;/oynuso1Z Cry C/ei/r CITY OF GEM LAKE office of the City Clerk 1369 County Road "E" East Gem Lake, MN 55110-5231 Email: gemlakecity@aol.com )d.%t5meolf 9%/oyoi DATE: 14 April 2004 FROM: Fritz Magnuson TO: Gem Lake Business Residents RE: Junk Vehicles Gentlemen, Facsimile: ( 651 ) 426 - 6444 [10l06 C&i?lz /%w, Over the past 3 years we have attempted to work with you to abate what has become an ongoing problem - JUNK VEHICLES. During Summer, 2003 we inspected all lots in the business district and were able to abate most of the problem. However, a few have chosen to challenge the rules or simply ignore them. Hence, you have left us no choice but to cite and prosecute the offenders. On Saturday, April 24", we will perform a city wide inspection, gather digital photographic evidence for our prosecutor, and will issue citations for all violations identified. Once citations are issued, you will be granted until 5:00 pm on Monday, April 26`h to abate the issue. After that time, citations and evidence will be filed with the City Prosecutor and you will be summoned to district court. While this is not the course of action we would have preferred, your continued violation has left us little as an alternative. In anticipation of your compliance with Gem Lake City ordinances, we remain Yours Truly, CITY OF GEM LAKE F. C. "Fritz" nuson City Clerk & Code Enforcement cc: Mayor & Council City Prosecutor j Page 1 of 1 CITY OF GEM LAKE RESOLUTION NO.2004-02 19 APRIL 2004 WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has proposed to rebuild County Road D along a line which includes, but is not limited to, a portion of the railroad bed and tracks owned by Burlington Northern Railroad south of Buerkle Road; and WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has proposed transporting major electrical equipment needed at the Xcel Energy power substation along an alternate route through the Cities of Vadnais I leights, Gem Lake. White Bear lake and White Bear Township along roads owned and maintained by said Cities as well as Ramsey County and the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, a Joint Powers Agreement has been drafted and presented to all parties which Agreement has been amended to the satisfaction of all the parties and which provides for such alternate transportation; and WHEREAS, the Gem Lake City Attorney has reviewed said Joint Powers Agreement and recommended approval by the City Council. RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Gem Lake does approve execution of the Joint Powers Agreement drafted by the City of Maplewood by and between the City of Maplewood, City of Vadnais Heights, the City of Gem Lake, the City of White Bear Lake, White Bear Township, Ramsey County, the Minnesota Commissioner of Transportation, and the Minnesota Commissioner of Administration. The foregoing Resolution was offered by Council Member Igo and was supported by Council Member Birkebak and was declared adopted based upon the following vote: NAME EMEOTT WATSON BIRKEBAK IGO BOSAK VOTE Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye ATTEST I, Frederic C. Magnuson, the duly qualified City Clerk of the City of Gem Lake, County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and accurate representation of action taken by the City Council of the City of Gem Lake on the date first written. Frederic C. Magnuson, City Clerk J Date Certified Copy e-file: resolution\2004\no2004-02 1 J EM Kimley-Horn M" and Associates, Inc. Memorandum To: Tim Benetti/City of Vadnais Heights Mark Burch/City of White Bear Lake Fritz Magnuson/City of Gem Lake Bill Short/White Bear Township Ken Haider/Ramsey County From: Jon Horn Date: June 30, 2004 Subject: Joint Powers Agreement for Xcel Energy Haul Route County Road D Realignment City of Maplewood Project 02-07 ■ suite 345N 2550 University Avenue West St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Enclosed is your copy of the fully executed Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) for the Xcel Energy Transformer Haul Route. Thank you for your assistance in the review and approval of the JPA. Please let either me (651-643-0406) or Chuck Ahl at the City of Maplewood (651-249-2402) know if you have any questions or you need any additional information. Copy: R. Charles Ahl/City of Maplewood Dave Callahan/Xcel Energy File 160500003.3.002/2.1 ■ TEL 651 645 4197 FAX 651 645 5116 9 (o l 7& JOINT -POWERS AGREEMENT Cities of Maplewood, Vadnais Heights, Gem Lake, and White Bear Lake White Bear Township Ramsey County Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) Establishing the Xcel Energy Transformer Haul Route County Road D Realignment (Hazelwood Street to TH 61) City of Maplewood Project 02-07 THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this Q f6- day of �, 2004, among the City of Maplewood, City of Vadnais Heights, City of Gem Lake, City of White Bear Lake, White Bear Township, Ramsey County, and the State of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of Transportation (MN/DOT), all being governmental units of the State of Minnesota, pursuant to the authority contained in Minnesota Statutes Sections 471.59 and 398A.04, subdivision 9. I RECITALS WHEREAS, the parties to this Agreement are authorized to enter into agreements to exercise jointly the governmental powers and functions each has individually; WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood is proposing to complete the County Road D Realignment (Hazelwood Street to TH 61), City Project 02-07 ("Project"). The Project includes the reconstruction and realignment of County Road D between Hazelwood Street and TH 61. The proposed improvements are further detailed in the attached Figure 1, County Road D Realignment (Council Approved Alignment 5-12-03); WHEREAS, the Project will require the removal of a portion of the existing railroad track in the area south of I-694. It is the City of Maplewood's understanding, based upon information and belief, that the existing railroad track is owned by Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) which also has a lease agreement with Minnesota Commercial Railroad for a portion of the line; WHEREAS, the portion of the existing railroad track to be removed currently serves only the Xcel Energy substation site along the west side of the railroad south of existing County Road D. Rail access is provided to the substation site for the delivery of transformer units in the event of the need for the installation of additional transformers or the replacement of failed transformers; March 29, 2004 WHEREAS, Xcel Energy has expressed a possible interest in abandoning its use of the railroad track and access to the site if an alternative roadway access can be established for the hauling of transformers. The hauling of the transformers would require a specialty vehicle due to the size and weight of the transformers. The weight of the largest transformer exceeds 200 tons. Attached Figure 2 provides an example of the tractor trailer combination that would be required to transport the transformers; WHEREAS, a proposed transformer haul route has been established to access existing BNSF and Canadian Pacific Rail System (CPRS) tracks north of the existing Xcel Energy substation site. Attached Figure 3 illustrates this proposed haul route; WHEREAS, the use of the proposed haul route will be scheduled to avoid periods of temporary roadway weight restrictions (typically occurring sometime between February I" and May 30th); and WHEREAS, such communities wish to collaboratively plan for the transformer haul route. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and benefits that each party shall derive herefrom, the parties agree as follows: ARTICLE I. PURPOSE. The purpose of the parties entering into this Agreement is to accommodate the hauling of transformers by Xcel Energy on their roadways in the event a new or replacement transformer is needed. ARTICLE II. METHOD. The method of accomplishing the purpose of this Agreement is the establishment of a haul route approved in advance by the parties so that Xcel Energy can utilize it in the event of requiring a new or replacement transformer. The parties agree to the use of the haul route by Xcel Energy to transport new or replacement transformers to the existing substation along the south side of County Road D east of TH 61 in the City of Maplewood. The parties to this Agreement agree to approve any required permits for the use of the temporary haul route. The haul route is generally described as follows: The Xcel Energy substation site to/from County Road D. County Road D to/from TH 61. TH 61 to/from the eastbound TH 61/I-694 ramp. The construction of a temporary crossover of I-694 to/from the eastbound TH 61/I- 694 ramp to/from the westbound I-694/TH 61 ramp. TH 61 to/from Buerkle Road. Then either: JBuerkle Road to/from the BNSF tracks. Loading/unloading could occur along March 29, 2004 Ism Cem Buerkle Road in this area. TH 61 to/from Scheuneman Road. The construction of a cross -over of TH 61 to/from Scheuneman Road. Scheuneman Road to/from Hoffman Road. Hoffman Road to/from Otter Lake Road. Otter Lake Road to/from the BNSF tracks. Loading/unloading could occur using an existing driveway in this area. TH 61 to/from Scheuneman Road. The construction of a cross -over of TH 61 to/from Scheuneman Road. Scheuneman Road to/from Hoffinan Road. Hoffman Road to/from TH 61. TH 61 to/from Buffalo Street. Buffalo Street to/from Hugo Avenue. Hugo Avenue to/from either the BNSF or the CPRS tracks. Site work will be necessary at this location to construct a temporary roadway and loading area on White Bear Township park property or BNSF/CPRS right-of-way. Modifications in the haul route described above may be necessary to provide the most feasible and cost effective route to existing railroad access at the time of delivery of a new or replacement transformer. Any modification of the haul route described above will require the approval of the agency(ies) with jurisdiction over the affected roadways. The agency(ies) shall not unreasonably withhold approval. All parties to this Agreement will be given 30 days notice prior to the use of the haul route for the transport of transformers. The haul route will not be used during periods of temporary roadway weight restrictions. ARTICLE III. Notwithstanding the aforementioned haul route utilizing the BNSF route (also known as the Northeast Diagonal Corridor) the City of White Bear Lake recognizes that the Northeast Diagonal Corridor has been designated by the Metropolitan Council as a busway in their 2020 Transit Plan. The City's support of this agreement is done with the express understanding that the use of the Northeast Diagonal Corridor as a busway should take precedence over its use as a haul route. The City further recommends that the Canadian Pacific Rail System alternative outlined in this agreement should be considered the preferred long range alternative for the Xcel transformer haul route. ARTICLE IV. COSTS. The parties to this Agreement shall not be responsible for any costs associated with the use of the haul route by Xcel Energy. Xcel Energy shall be responsible for the costs to construct March 29, 2004 any temporary crossovers, for any temporary roadway/site improvements, and for the subsequent removal (as necessary) of the crossovers and temporary roadway/site improvements. Xcel Energy shall be responsible for all costs to repair or replace (if necessary) any roadway damaged as a result of utilizing the haul route. ARTICLE V. COMMITMENT TO XCEL ENERGY. This Agreement is being entered to persuade Xcel Energy to withdraw its objection to the abandonment and removal of the BNSF railroad tracks between Beam Avenue and Bald Eagle. Xcel Energy will not object to such railroad abandonment if it is assured that the haul routes identified in Article II will be available for Xcel Energy's use. Xcel Energy is a third party beneficiary of this Agreement and the haul routes identified will be kept available as long as Xcel Energy's electric substation (Kohlman Lake Substation) remains in operation. ARTICLE VI. INDEMNIFICATION. Each party shall be responsible for its own acts and omissions and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law. MN/DOT's liability is governed by Minnesota Statute Section 3.736 and other applicable law. Liability of the other parties is governed by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466 and other applicable law. Neither the procuring of insurance or any other provision of this paragraph shall be construed as or operate as a waiver of any party's statutory or common ^� law immunities or limitations on liability. It is agreed that, except as specifically provided by the execution of this Agreement, neither party relinquishes any rights or powers possessed by it and neither party is relieved of any responsibility, duty or obligation imposed on it by law or regulation. ARTICLE VII EFFECTIVE DATE/1'ERMINATION. This Agreement shall be effective on the date last signed by the parties hereto, including all State officials as required by Minnesota Statutes Section 16C.05. This Agreement shall terminate upon the occurrence of any one of the following events: A) In the event that the substation is no longer operational; or B) When necessitated by operation of law or as a result of a decision by a court of competent jurisdiction. Termination shall not discharge any liability incurred by the parties during the term of this Agreement. ARTICLE VIII. AMENDMENTS. This Agreement may be amended only in a writing signed by the same parties who signed this Agreement or their successors in office. ARTICLE IX. DATA PRACTICES. J The parties to this Agreement agree to comply with the Minnesota Data Practices Act and March 29, 2004 all other state and federal laws relating to data privacy or confidentiality. The parties to this Agreement will immediately report to each other any requests from third parties for information relating to this Agreement. The parties to this Agreement agree to promptly respond to each other's inquiries concerning data requests. ARTICLE X. AUDITS. The books, records and accounting practices and procedures of each party relevant to this Agreement will be subject to inspection by MN/DOT auditors, and the State Auditor or Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six years. ARTICLE XI. EXHIBITS. All figures attached hereto as exhibits are incorporated into and considered a part of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their respective duly authorized representatives. CITY OF MAPLEWOOD CITY OF VADNAIS HEIGHTS By: 4-r�(�4 By: d�aJg) 4 Name: Robert Cardinal Name: S Title: Mayor Title: MauoK Date: �— - d , 200r Date: ( , 20 By: �liLdreGy�_ By: Name: Richard Fursman Name: Title: City Manager Title: C ` v�a Date: /y%G _ 20W Date: 6U21LV 7 0 , 200!Y CITY OF GEM LAKE CITY O �J►{HI JEAR LAKE By: Name: /ct • Nam Title:Title: Date: y /10 200�% Date: 5 p ,200 By: -By. O"L ',Zt Name: Mov Name: ¢.v�- Title: I Ark Title: v-- Date: y — D — , 20W Date: , 20W 0� March 29, 2004 WHITE BEAR TOWNSHIP By: Name: 9{j6W';- J 46WWROof Title: i" lk"A0 WAsf? — Date: tjV4V 1 , 20Q44 By: Name: WiW NU4 F 4dVi<r- Title: 6w—y.- Date: tM9i Iq , 200P COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION By: Name: Title: t &-�- CAs �t Date: (v%7 — 200W C B N T D RAMSEY COUNTY Title: CHAIR .,ii-sionerS Date00. iV Name: Title: i�f��'�,,�^ and Date: iQ l S J , 20YY J March 29, 2004 CITY OF GEM LAKE RESOLUTION NO.2004-03 19 April 2004 i WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 80 An Interim Ordinance Adopting A Moratorium For The Purpose O Protecting The Planning Process And The Health, Safety And Welfare Of The Citizens Of Gem Lake By Restricting And Prohibiting Sexually Oriented Businesses on the 21' day of October 2002 and extended said Ordinance to the 19" day of April, 2004 by means of Resolution No. 2003-07 adopted on the 27`h day of October 2003; and WHEREAS, the Gem Lake Planning Commission has presented Findings that indicate adoption of a permanent ordinance are in the best interests of the community and it's property owners; and WHEREAS, the Gem Lake Planning Commission has presented for City Council consideration (Proposed) Ordinance No. 82, An Ordinance Repealing Ordinance No. 80 And Providing For The Location, Regulation, Licensing, Operation And Inspection Of Adult Uses And Sexually Oriented Businesses In The City Of Gem Lake And Penalties For Violation Of Said Regulation; and WHEREAS, the Gem Lake City Attorney has reviewed said (Proposed) Ordinance No. 82 as to form and content and recommended adoption and implementation. RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Gem Lake does by this Resolution order adoption of Ordinance No. 82 as presented with said Ordinance No 82 to be made effective and placed in full force and effect on 12:01 AM on 01 May 2004 following publication of it's summary in the Legal Notices Section of the White Bear Press on 28 April 2004; and FURTHER RESOLVED, that Ordinance No. 80 shall remain in full force and effect until it is repealed by Ordinance No. 82 at 12:01 AM on 01 May 2004. The foregoing Resolution was offered by Council Member Birkebak and was supported by Council Member Igo and was declared adopted based upon the following vote: NAME EMEOTT L WATSON BIRKEBAK ICAO BOSAK VOTE Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye ATTEST I, Frederic C. Magnuson, the duly qualified City Clerk of the City of Gem Lake, County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and accurate representation of action taken by the City Council of the City .,f i': -n T aka on the riate first written_ Frederic C. Magnuson, City Clerk J Certif ieb CoPB Date 'IS *,Xd2004 e-file: resolution\2004\no2004-03 TREASURER'S REPORT SEWER FUND CHECKING 2004 CITY OF GEM LAKE OF GEM LAKE SEWER FUND C H 04 Jan START 41,873.66 .� County Road "E" East CHECKING K 46354.67 -2709.30 7190.31 9899.61 Gem Lake, MN 55110-5231 I N BANK BALANCE DEBIT CREDrr 46354.67 BALANCE TRAM TRAN CHECKS TO DEPOSUS FROM PAYMENT FOR DATE 18-Mar-04 # SP2035 M litan Council Current User Charges: A 2004 3 (879.93 45212.89 45212.89 26-Mar-04 1 CAFE CRAVINGS TOTAL PAYMENT 3 198.00 45410.891 45410.89 26-Mar-04 2 TNT SALES TOTAL PAYMENT 3 66.00 45476.89 45476.99 26-Mar-04 THE TRIKE SHOP TOTAL PAYMENT 3 750.00 46226.89 46226.89 26-Mar-04E�:d4PODS Tire & Wheel 3rd 2003 Sewer Fees/Commercial 3 120.00 46346.89 46346.89 31-Mar-04 I 1 I Premier Bank Interest Paid This Period 3 1 7.78 46354.67 46354.67 j Run Date: 04/12/2004 at 11:15:01 AM E-File: PSFCheck04.123 Page I GENERAL FUND CHECKING 2004 CITY OF GEM LAKE TREASURER'S REPORT OF GEM LAKE ICgrnty Road "E" Gem Lake, MN 55110.5231 East GENERAL FUND CHECKING C H K I 01-Jan-04 START 40046.22 79047.60 38799.871 40,230.92 BANK -56154.60 17153.22 -39001.38 41147.63 TRAN DATE TRAN # CHECKS TO DEPOSITS FROM PAYMENT FOR N DEBIT CREDIT BALANCE BALANCE 25-Mar-04 P6373 Association for Nonsmokers -Minnesota 2004 North Suburban Tobacco Compli== 3 (61.50 57,252.28 56,150.87 29-Mar-04 GP6374 International Code Council (1CC) 2004 Governmental Member Dues 3 100.00 57.152.28 56,050.87 19-Mar-04 P6375 CITY OF WHITE BEAR LAKE TOTAL CLAIM 3 (1,101.41 56,050.87 54,949.46 19-Mar-04 IGP6376 E-Z Recycling, Inc. Curbside Recycling: March 2004 3 (281.30 55,769.57 54,668.16 19-Mar-04 P6377 Xcel Energy Street Lighting: February 2004 3 (60.60 55,708.97 54,607.56 22-Mar-04 3P6378 Ramsey County Law Enforcement: March 2004 3 (1,325.19 54,383.78 53,282.37 24 Mar-04 P6379 PAUL R. EMEOTT TOTAL CLAIM 3 (532.25 53,851.53 52,750.12 18-Mar-04 3P6380 Ricbard Bosak 1st Qtr'04 Salary ($200.00-12.40ss-2.90mm) 3 (18430; 53,666.83 52,565.42 15-Mar-04 GP6381 Patrick Igo 1st Qtr'04 Salary ($200.00-12.40ss-2.90mm) (184.70 53,482.13 52,565.42 17-Mar-04 3P6382 ROLAND BIRKEBAK TOTAL CLAIM 3 (204.70 53,277.43 52,360.72 17-Mar-04 GP6383 Chuck Watson 1st Qtr'04 Salary ($200.00-12.40ss-2.90mm) 3 (184.70 53,092.73 52,176.02 16-Mar-04 GP6384 Sarah Cobian Ist Qtr'04 Salary ($650.00-40.30ss-9.43mm) 3 (600.27 52,492.46 51,575.75 17-Mar-04 ZP6385 Fritz Mapuson 1st Qtr'04 Salary ($750.0046.50ss-10.88mm) 3 692.62 51,799.84 50,883.13 18-Mar-04 GP6386 LEONARD,OBRIEN,SPENCER,O TOTAL CLAIM 3 (387.50 51412.34 50 19-Mar-04 P6387 SEH, INC. TOTAL CLAIM 3 (5,310.40 46,101.94 45,185.23 ,5.3 19-Mar-04 3P6388 Meslow & Olson, PLLC Court Trial For Thoa Moua 3 90.00 46,011.94 45,095.23 17-Mar-04 3P6389 MAGNUSON & ASSOCIATES, LLC TOTAL CLAIM 3 4,514.65 41,497.29 40,580.58 24 Mar-04 390 PAUL R EMEOTT TOTAL CLAIM 3 (565.00 40,932.29 40,015.58 29-Mar-04 P6391 Richard Bosak S 2004 NewsletterWriting/P in Co 3 (326.69 40,605.60 39,688.89 26-Mar-04 1 State of Minnesota Traffic Fines: February 2004 3 100.50 40,706.10 39,789.39 26-Mar-04 21 FIREPLACE PROFESSIONALS TOTAL PAYMENT 1 3 252.001 40,958.101 40,041.39 26-Mar-04 3 Nelson Marine Interim Use PermitApplieation #2004-01) 1 3 150.001 41,108.101 40,191.39 31-Mar-04 1 Premier Bank Interest Paid This Period 1 3 1 1 39.531 41,147.631 40,230.92 0 Run Date: 04/12/2004 at 11:3530 AM E-File: PGFCheck04.123 Page 1 of 1 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE JURISDICTIONS THAT CONTRACT WITH RAMSEY COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT FOR POLICE SERVICES MARCH 18, 2004 The meeting was called to order at 8:05 a.m. The following members were present: ➢ George Altendorfer, Ramsey County Sheriff's Department ➢ Roland Birkebak, City of Gem Lake ➢ Tim Dunleavy, City of North Oaks ➢ Joel Hanson, City of Little Canada ➢ Jim March, City of North Oaks ➢ Jan Reagan, White Bear Township ➢ Mike Salter, Ramsey County Sheriff's Department ➢ Terry Schwerm, City of Shoreview ➢ Bill Short, White Bear Township ➢ Gerry Urban, City of Vadnais Heights ➢ Michelle Wolfe, City of Arden Hills Ty Sheridan was introduced at the new Day Shift Sergeant. Salter reported that Sergeant Sheridan was the Acting Sergeant in the Courts Division for 1-1/2 years, prior to that he worked on patrol, and he served on the SERT Team for ten years. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved as submitted. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Minutes of February 19, 2004, were approved, with a correction to page 4, "Other Items", to state that Tim Entner has been recognized by Bob O'Brien, Safe and Sober, for his efforts in terms of traffic enforcement. SAFE & SOBER RECOGNITION FOR DEPUTY TIM ENTNER Bob O'Brien presented Deputy Tim Entner with a plaque in recognition for his efforts in traffic enforcement. Mr. O'Brien commended Deputy Entner for his dedication and work throughout the community, both on and off duty, stating that he is an inspiration to those he works with and those he serves. It was also noted that Deputy Entner received the "Officer of the Year" Award in 2002, from the Ramsey County Sheriff's Department. .j J Minutes Sheriff Contract Group Meeting March 18, 2004 REPORT ON OVERTIME. RESPONSE TIMES. ETC. Altendorfer distributed the response time reports, explaining that there are reasons why some of the calls are longer, in terms of response times (emergency calls vs. non -priority). He also noted geographic issues, and difficulty in finding addresses in the City of North Oaks. Upon request, Altendorfer agreed to provide a report to include all of the Contract Communities and to break it down by shift. Salter explained that "previous complaint" calls are most commonly follow-ups on theft cases (i.e., time is usually needed to provide paperwork to document the value of the property). March noted that the North Oaks City Council Members will vote on adding a deputy at their April Meeting. REPORT / DISCUSSION REGARDING 2003 CONTRACT RECONCILIATION Altendorfer reported that the revenue from insurance dividends was good this year due to the stock market, which had been under estimated. He explained that $25,000.00 has been placed in an equipment reserve account. He suggested that it be used for the purchase of traffic enforcement equipment, and for a projector for the Crime Prevention Department. Deputy Entner recommended the purchase of one portable speed board and one new speed cart. He stated that the speed carts are more suitable to leave in the same location for one week, and that the speed boards will be good to use in the winter. He reported the speed cart, which is smaller than the old carts, can also be spun around to face in either direction. He stated that the cost for the cart will not exceed $8,000.00, which includes shipping. Altendorfer reported that the cost of a portable speed board is $4,000.00, and that there will be additional costs associated with it, when attached to a vehicle. He stated that it is planned to attach it to an older squad car valued at approximately $3,000.00. Entner explained that the portable board can be battery operated or hard wired, and can be mounted with a trailer hitch or with suction cups. Urban stated his interest in post mounting of the portable board. Entner noted that our Public Works Department would need to set up the post mounted boards. 6 Minutes Sheriff Contract Group Meeting March 18, 2004 Sergeant Joe Paget stated that it will not be an issue to get the speed carts out for use, noting that the Community Affairs Officers have been assigned to this d uty. Schwerm noted that the Group wants to be assured that the speed board and the speed carts are well utilized, and not just set up based on a call for service. Hanson asked Deputy Entner to provide recommendations for areas for pole mountings throughout each community. Entner noted that it will require two public works employees to pole mount the speed board. Paget recommended observing the speed boards that are mounted and hard wired on Snelling Avenue. Schwerm stated that he felt that it made sense to locate the portable speed boards in areas where the speed limit drops. Urban noted that the speed drops from 50 m.p.h. to 40 m.p.h. on Highway 96 when entering into Vadnais Heights. Short moved to acquire a new speed cart and a portable speed board as presented at today's meeting. Hanson seconded. Ayes all. ARDEN HILLS POLICE SERVICE UPDATE It was reported that Arden Hills has decided to continue their police services through the Ramsey County Sheriff's Department. Wolfe reported on Arden Hills' commitment to enhance communications with the Sheriff's Department. 800 MHZ UPDATE Altendorfer reported that Undersheriff Luey is in attendance at an 800 MHz Meeting this morning. It was noted that the Governor has discussed putting a hold on the 800 MHz grant for a couple of years. There was discussion with regard to new technology. Altendorfer stated that the equipment needs updating, noting that he has no doubt that there will always be new technology, however, he felt that we should move forward now. Urban noted that the Group depends on the Sheriff's Department to make prudent purchases when necessary. ' 3 Minutes Sheriff Contract Group Meeting March 18, 2004 OTHER ITEMS I•- Altendorfer reported that Mounds View School District will no longer be funding the DARE Program. Salter explained that Mounds View plans to use DARE funds to finance their closed circuit cameras. Altendorfer noted that the DARE Program is still funded by Vadnais Heights and White Bear Township. He stated that with regard to the request to be more community oriented, he feels that there is no better link than the DARE Program, and he thinks that the Program should be revitalized, versus put to rest. Hanson stated that he still feels that the DARE Program must be reinforced in the Middle Schools for effectiveness. Urban suggested other ways of communication, i.e. visits to grade schools by the deputies, so that there is regular contact with the schools, not just when there are law enforcement issues. CRIME PREVENTION Altendorfer suggested that a solution to becoming more visible in the community is to hire a part time temporary employee in the Crime Prevention Office, to handle the paperwork for Deputy Ruettimann. He estimated an approximate $12,000.00 cost for one year for this additional resource. He explained that there are a lot of reports that must be generated that that he would like to prepare more documents, such as brochures and door hangers. Schwerm suggested someone trained and talented in communications and graphics: Altendorfer explained that he is looking for the right person for consistency. Hanson noted that a lot is expected from the Crime Prevention Position and that he would rather have Deputy Ruettimann devote his time to where it will be the most effective. He stated that he feels it is a good idea to make this department stronger. Altendorfer noted that it could really use an additional Crime Prevention Officer. Wolf asked if the Sheriff's Department has applied for or received any Block Watch Grants, which could be used to fund a part-time position to specifically work with the Watch Programs. She agreed to call Salter with the name of a contact person for the grants. Schwerm will place Crime Prevention Update on the April Agenda and Altendorfer will put together a job description for the part-time temporary employee. 4 Minutes Sheriff Contract Group Meeting March 18, 2004 TASERS Salter reported that the Sheriff's Department does not currently use taser guns, noting their decision to use less than lethal sock rounds instead. He cited an approximate cost of $400 - $500 for each taser unit, and the ongoing training expense, which would have to be built into the budget. Altendorfer mentioned a recent death associated with the use of tasers. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:43 a.m. The next regular meeting will be held on APRIL 15, 2004, at 8:00 A.M.. at the CITY OF SHOREVIEW COUNCIL CHAMBERS. Respectfully submitted, Jan Reagan Recording Secretary JAR/ J 5 Office of the State Auditor City Financial Reporting Form Cities Reporting Using the Cash Basis of Accounting , .. ITO.. � . �ort.t: nu.voR •.� xC013�,.��o- Government Information Division 525 Park Street, Suite 500 Saint Paul, Minnesota 55103 Phone: (651) 282-6114/Fax: (651) 282-2391 E-mail: gid@osa.state.mn.us Web site: www.auditor.state.mn.us City of: Gem Lake For the Year Ended December 31, 2003 Please complete this form per Minn. Stat. Sec. 6.74 and return it with the city's financial statement by March 31st. NOTE: THIS FORM SHOULD AGREE WITH THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT TOTALS. This report has been prepared from the records of the city and includes, to the best of my knowledge, all transactions for all funds of lire city for the year ended December 31, 2003. indirau: date, (Ar rAcu oaaaVANCE) Q "'Please cileck if the duties of clerk and treasurer are combined per Minn. Stat. 412.591 Subd. 2. ifchaup in _ 92tus during'003: Name Phone# E-mail Address City Clerk: Frederic C. Magnuson (651) 426-6443 gemlakecity( aol.corn Clerk's Signature: Date: Treasurer: Sarah B. Cobian (651) 426-6443 Mayor: Paul R. Emeott (651) 426-6040 Signature of Date: Mayor ar 7reasureP: Council Audit Firm: N/A Audit Firm contact: Expected Date to Complete Audit: Please check if change of address. City Phonc# City E-mail Address City Mailing 1369 Country Road E East (651) 426-6443 _ clemlakecityaaol.com Address: Gem Lake, MN 55110-5231 City Fax# (651)426-6444 • The mayor or the treasurces signature is required •• Per Minn Stal. 412.591 Subd. 2, your city is required to have an audit if the duties of clerk and treasurer are combined and total revenue of all city funds exceed S100,000. If revenues do not exceed S100,000, your city is required to have an audit once within every five-year period Do total revcoues ofall funds fthe No city exceed5100.000? Cheek— ••ycs 6 X City of Gem Lake .ounty of Ramsey City -owned Enterprise Funds: Check those that apply. 0 Water N Sewer Refuse EjLiquor Hospital = Nursing ❑ Electric nOther Home Date Reviewed Class Audit Firm Auditor's Opinion Net Tax Levy Special Assessment Levy Local Gov't Aid Res. MV Credit Ag. MV Credit MH MV Credit PERA SECTION I: REVENUES Include all governmental funds, expendable trust funds and component units. Exclude enterprise funds. Amount (round to nearest dollar) TAXES (31000) 1 115,954 1 Property Taxes..................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 2 Tax Increments (TIF)..................... ...................................................................................................................................................... Cable TV 3 2,061 3 Franchise Taxes - (fee from private sector only) e.g. ......................................................................................................... 4 4 Local Sales Taxes................................................................................................................................................................................. 5 5 Hotel/Motel Taxes .................. ............................................................................................................................................................. 6 2,189 6 Gambling Tax.............................................................................................................................. 7 7 Gravel Tax........................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS (36100) (include delinquent charges)................................................................................................... 9 21,133 9 LICENSES AND PERMITS (32000)................................................................................................................................................. INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES (33000) FEDERAL - Community Development Block Grants (CDBG,SCDPG 10 include Entitlements CFDA#14.218,14.219,14.228).................................................................................................. 10 l 1 I - Other Federal Grants...................................................................................................................................................... 1 12 12 STATE - Local Government Aid(LGA)............................................................................................................................................ 13 - Residential Market Value Credit (including manufactured home).................................................................................. 13 14 -Agricultural Market Value Credit...................................................................................................................................... 14 15 - Taconite Homestead Credit............................................................................................................................................... 15 16 -Taconite Aids...........................................................................................................................................I.......................... 16 17 - PERA Aid........................................................................................................................................................................... 18 - Highways (State Aid Street)............................................................................................................................................... 19 19 - Other State Grants and Aids(police, tire-----------•••-•---------------------------•••-•............•••••.............. 20 COUNTY Highways.............................................................................................:.......................................................................... 20 21 820 21 - Other County Grants...................................................................................................................................................... 22 22 LOCAL UNITS - IRRRB Grants........................................................................................................................................................ 23 23 Other Local Units Grants........................................................................................................................................ CHARGES FOR SERVICES (34000) 24 24 General Government include auto registration, filing fees------•••••••••-••..........................................•••••.• 25 Police and Fire Contracts .............. .............................................................................................................................................. 25 26 26 Other Public Safety (include ambulance)............................................................................................................................................. _ 27 Streets and Highways ............ ............................. ................................................................................................................................ .. 27 28 28 Garbage, Recycling and Other Refuse (enterprise fund accounting preferred) .......................................... ......................_................. 29 30 Libraries................................................................................................................................................................................................ Parks and Recreation (include city hall rent, community center, park dedication fees)..................................................................... 29 30 31 Airports (include hangar rent)............................................................................................................................................................... 31 32 32 Transit.............................................................................................................................--......................I...............--... 33 33 Cemetery (include plot sales) ...................................................................... 34 425 34 Other Service Charges (include S.A.C., rents) ................... .................................. ............................................................................... 35 3,416 35 FINES AND FORFEITS (35000)............................................_........................................ MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES (36200) 36 5,266 36 Interest Earnings (checking, savings and investments)................................................................................................................... 156 37 All Other Revenue (identify) Miscellaneous 37 38 TOTAL REVENUES (should equal total on financial statement)...................................................................................................... 38 151,420 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES 39 162,052 39 Investments - Sold or matured (CDs., savings withdrawals, etc.)...................................................................................................... 40 40 Borrowing Bonds Issued (net proceeds)........................................................................................................................................... 41 41 - Other Long-term Debt.................................................................................................................................................... 42 42 Short-term Debt ...............................................................--........................................................ 43 43 Other Financing Sources (Include Interfund Debt).......................................................................................................................... 44 5,445 Operating Transfers from Enterprise Funds and Internal Service Funds............................................................................................ Operating Transfers from Governmental Funds (should equal line 53 on page 2 ............................................ 45 46 TOTAL REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (add lines 3845)............................................................................ 46 318,917 u SECTION II: EXPENDITURES Include all governmental funds, cxpendabic trust funds and component units. Exclude enterprise funds (liquor, water, sewer, etc.) Amount r- 'TRAL GOVEIMMENT (41000) 1 (round to nearest dollar) 5,598 x1ayorand Council ........................--......................---......--........------------..............---........---..................----....... 2 Administration and Finance clerk/treasurer, deputy clerk,etc.......................................................... I .......... I............. 2 6,028 3 Other General Government (city hall, elections, assessing, audit, legal, etc.) .............................................................................................. 3 55,106 4 General Government - Capital Outlay ........................................................................................................... 4 PUBLIC SAFETY (42000) 5 Police - Current Expenditures (include police relief, forfeiture fund)......................................................................................................... 5 60,951 6 -Capital Outlay ............................................... »............................................. _....».»....... ............... ................................. .................... 6 7 " 7 Ambulance - Current Expenditures include rescuesquad, 1 st responders) ................................................•••....••.............. 8 - Capital Outlay............................................................................................................................................................................ 8 9 " 13,099 9 Fire - Current Expenditures (include fire relief) .......................................................................................................................................... 10 " 10 - Capital Outlay....................................................................................................................................................................................... i I Other Protection - Current Expenditures (include building inspection, flood control)................................................................................ 11 27,978 12 - Capital Outlay ............... ..... .................................................................................................................................... 12 " STREETS AND HIGHWAYS (43100) 13 23,641 13 Street Maintenance and Storm Sewers (include street cleaning)................................................................................................................. 14 Snow and Ice Removal .................................................................................................................................................................. 14 15 15 Street Engineering.............................................................................................................................................................. 16 727 16 Street Lighting............................................................................................................................................................................................. 17 Street Construction - Capital Outlay (include bridges, sidewalks and storm sewers).................................................................................. 17 " 18 Street - Other Capital Outlay (buildings and equipment).............................................................................................................................. 18 " SANITATION (EXCLUDE SEWER) (43200) 19 19 Garbage and Other Refuse Collection and Disposal (enterprise fund accountingreferred 20 Other Sanitation - Current Expenditures (weed & pest control, recycling).................................................................................................. 20 3,657 21 Sanitation - Capital Outlay............................................................................................................................................................................ 21 " HEALTH (44100) 22 22 Current Expenditures..................................................................................................................................................................................... 23 " 23 Capital Outla.................................................................................................................................................................. CULTURE AND RECREATION (45000) 24 Libraries - Current Expenditures................................................................................................................................................................... 24 25 r 25 -Capital Outlay................................................................................................................................................................................ ............... 26 Parks and Recreation - Current Expenditures (include community center, Cable'f\').............................................................. ... 26 Capital Outlay ............................................................................ .......... 27 " ►_ USING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPN1ENT (46300-46500) 28 Housing and Urban Redevelopment - Current Expenditures....................................................................................................................... 28 Capital Outla ............................ 29 30 " 30 Economic Development -Current Expenditures (include business loans)................................................................................................... 31 - Capital Outlay......................................................................................................................................................... 31 _ F CONSERVATION OF NATURAL. RESOURCES 32 Current Expenditures..................................................................................................................................................................................... ................. 32 33 33 Capital Outlay............................................................................................................................................. .. .............................. MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES (46600-49200) 34 Airports - Current Expenditures.........................................................._........................».........................................................»................... 34 35 R 35 - Capital Outla......................................................................................................... 36 36 Transit - Current Expenditures....................................................................................................................................................................... 37 37 - Capital Outlay................................................................................................................................................................................... 38 38 Cemetery - Current Expenditures................................................................................................................................................................... 39 39 - Capital Outlay ...................................................... ........................................................................................................................ 40 40 Pension Contribution (if not allocated)......................................................................................................................................................... 41 1,963 41 Insurance (if not allocated)........................................................................................................................................................... 42 6,472 42 All Other - Current Expenditures ................................ ................................................................... ................................ _............................. 43 43 - Capital Outlay (ONLY items not classified elsewhere)..............................................................................................................1 44 Capital Project Fund Outlay for Enterprise Funds (water, sewer, etc.)......................................................................................................... 44 DEBT SERVICE (47000- 47500) 45 45 Principal Payments on Bonds ..................................................................................................................................................................... 46 46 Principal Payments on Other Long-term Debt and Short-term Debt........................................................................................................... 47 Interest and Fiscal Charges............................................................................................................................................................................ 47 48 TOTAL EXPENDITURES (should equal total on financial statement)...................................................................................................... 48 205,220 OTHER FINANCING USES 49 Investments - Purchased (CDs., savings deposits, etc.)................................................................................................................................ 49 50 166,915 50 Principal Payments - Refunded [fond (payment to escrow agent) .......................................... _.»................................................................ 51 OtherFinancing Uses (Include. Interfu ) to Enterprise Funds and Internal Service Funds.......................................................................................................... 52 Operating Transfers 53 53 Operating Transfers to Governmental Funds should equal line 45 on page 1.............................................................................. 54 TOTAL EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES (add lines 48-53)..................................................................................... 54 372,135 .2. SECTION III: ENTERPRISE FUNDS - Operating Statement Water. Sewer. Refuse. Liquor. Hospital. Nursing Home. Electric, Gas Utilities, Golf, etc. - Include operations of all enterprise funds and related component units. SPECIFY FUND NAME. WATER SEWER REFUSE 1 OPERATING REVENUES 31,689 2 OPERATING EXPENSES 11,402 3 OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) 20,287 4 NON -OPERATING REVENUES (inumest,graots.property taxes,assessments, ete ) 5,090 5 NON -OPERATING EXPENSES (interest, etc.) 6 NET INCOME (LOSS) -Before Transfers 25,377 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 7 Taxes (exclude special assessments) 8 Federal Grants 9 State Grants (include MV Credits) 10 County Grants I Local Grants I I Operating Transfers In from Other Funds 12 Operating Transfers Out to Other Funds 13 Capital Outlay during die Year 14 Interfund Debt Borrowed 5,445 15 lnterfund Debt Paid 16 Borrowing- Bonds Issued (nct proceeds) 17 interest Paid and Fiscal Charges 18 Debt Paid - Bonds 19 - Other Long -tern) Debt 20 Outstanding Bonded Debt - End of Year 21 Outstanding Other Loup Tenn Debt - End of Yr 22 Depreciation (included ut operaling statement) 980 SPECIFY FUND NAME: *LIQUOR Internal Service 1 OPERATING REVENUES 2 - Cost of Sales ... 3 - Gross Profit 4 OPERATING EXPENSES 5 OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) 6 NON -OPERATING REVENUES (interest. grants, property taxes. assesntents, etc) 7 NON -OPERATING EXPENSES (interest, etc.) 8 NET INCOME(LOSS)-BeforeTransfers ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 9 Taxes (exclude special assessments) 10 Federal Grants 11 State Grants (include MV Credits) 12 County Grants / Local Grants 13 Operating Transfers In from Other Funds 14 Operating Transfers Out to Other Funds 15 Capital Outlay during die Year 16 Interfund Debt Borrowed 17 Interfmid Debt Paid 18 Borrowing - Bonds Issued (net proceeds) 19 Interest Paid and Fiscal Charges 20 Debt Paid - Bonds 21 - Other Long -tern[ Debt 22 Outstanding Bonded Debt- End of Year 23 Outstanding Other Lung -Tenn Debt - End of Yr 24 Depreciation (included iu operating stalcntcuQ -TYPE OF LIQUOR STORE: OFF SALE ONLY LJ ON AND OFF SALE NUMBER OF LIQUOR STORES OPERATED BY THE CITY: IF DISCONTINUED LIQUOR OPERATIONS. INDICATE EFFECTIVE DATE: 3- SECTION III: ENTERPRISE FUNDS - Operating Statement FUND NAME: TING REVENUES FSPECIFY TING EXPENSES TING INCOME (LOSS) 4 NON -OPERATING REVENUES (interest, grants. property tares, assessments, etc) 5 NON -OPERATING EXPENSES (interest. etc.) 6 NET INCOME (LOSS) - Before Transfers ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 7 Taxes (exclude special assessments) 8 Federal Grants 9 State Grants (include M V Credits) 10 County Grants / Local Grants I 1 Operating Transfers In from Other Funds 12 Operating Transfers Out to Other Funds 13 Capital Outlay during the Year 14 Interfutd Debt Borrowed 15 luterfund Debt Paid 16 Borrowing - Bonds Issued (net proceeds) 17 Interest Paid and Fiscal Charges 18 Debt Paid - Bonds 19 - Other Long -terns Debt 20 Outstanding Bonded Debt - End of Year 21 Outstanding Other Long -Tent Debt - End of Yr 22 Depreciation (included in operating statcnx:nt) SPECIFY FUND NAME: 1 OPERATING REVENUES 2 OPERATING EXPENSES 3 OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) NON -OPERATING REVENUES (inierest, grants, property 4 taxes. assessments, etc) 5 NON -OPERATING EXPENSES (interest. etc.) 6 NET INCOME (LOSS) -Before Transfers ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 7 Taxes (exclude special assessments) 8 Federal Grants 9 State Grants (include MV Credits) 10 County Grants / Local Grants 11 Operating Transfers In front Other Funds 12 Operating Transfers Out to Other Funds 13 Capital Outlay during the Year 14 Intcrfund Debt Borrowed 15 Interfutd Debt Paid 16 Borrowing - Bonds Issued (net proceeds) 17 Interest Paid and Fiscal Charges 18 Debt Paid - Bonds 19 - Other Long-term Debt 20 Outstanding Bonded Debt - End of Year 21 Outstanding Other Long-Temt Debt - End ofYr 22 Depreciation (included in operating statement) -4- SECTION IV: DEBT STATEMENT - ALL FUNDS 1 �J OF BONDS BEGINNING OF YEAR ISSUED DURING THE YEAR PAID_ _DURING THE YEAR _ END OF YEAR I 2 TYPE _ 'Ge eml Obligation G.O. Tax Increment 3 Revenuc 'lax Increment a G.O. Special Assessment i G.O. Revenue (G.O.backed) 6 Revenue 7 Other -ldcntify(NI SAH.cic.) 8 1'O"1'AL BONDEU DENT 0 0 _-- 0 — 0 9 e un mo on s me u c m c I statement -lines 1-7) OTHER LONG-TERM DEBT 10 Installment Purchase Contracts 11 Certificates of Indebtedness 12 Notes (PFA) 13 Other Long-term Debt 14 1 TOTAL OTHER LONG TERM DEBT 0 0 0: 0 151 SHORT-TERM DEBT 0 0 _ _ 0 0 16 IN'rGRFUND DEBT _ _— Q 0 _ 0 0 SECTION V: CASH AND INVESTMENTS - ALL FUNDS - — General Fund Special Revenue Funds Total All Governmental Funds 1 Clerk's Cash Balance -End of Ycar (exclude investments) 120,922 2 Federal Securities (T-bills, etc.) 3 Other Investments (Savin , CDs, etc.) 4 Total Cash and Investments 37Q,837 SECTION VI: PERSONNEL EXPENDITURES - ALL FUNDS Salaries, wages and city officers' per diem (also included in Section Il and III) of all regular, temporary and part-time employee 10.800' SECTION VIf -JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT Ifyour city participates in one or more joint powers agreement, please identify below: - PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT PARTICIPATING GOVERN51ENTALUNITS maw.dinR.P_ YES NO p ORGANTLA'I'ION 1 Cit • of White Bear Lake Fire protection 2 x 2 City of Vadnais Heights Sewer nushinp 2 x 3 City of Vadnais Heights Snow plowing 2 x 4 City of Vadnais Heights Clty water 2 x 5 Ramsey County Police protection several x 6 7 8 IO — SECTION VIII - SPECIAL DISTRICTS If your city is a member of a special district, please identify below: TYPE OF DISTRICT GOVERNING BODIES OF 0RGANIG.%TION I 1 VLAWMO Vadnais Heights, Gem Lake, White Bear Townshi 1, White Bear Lake, North 2 Oaks, St. Paul, Shoreview, Little Cananda 3 4 115 -5- SECTION IX: EMPLOYEE SALARY AND BENEFITS GOVERNMENTAL FUND EMPLOYEES 3ENERAL GOVERNMENT (Administration) 1 Number of Full-time Employees....................................................................................................................... 1 2 Number of Part-time Employees....................................................................................................................... 2 7 3 Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to General Government Employees...................................................... 3 10,800 4 Total Amount of Benefits for General Government Employees........................................................................ 4 POLICE DEPARTMENT 5 Number of Full-time Employees....................................................................................................................... 5 6 Number of Part-time Employees....................................................................................................................... 6 7 Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to Police Department Employees.......................................................... 7 8 Total Amount of Benefits for Police Department Employees........................................................................... 8 FIRE DEPARTMENT 9 Number of Full-time Employees.........................................................................»............................................. 9 10 Number of Part-time Employees....................................................................................................................... 10 11 Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to Fire Department Employees............................................................. 11 12 Total Amount of Benefits for Fire Department Employees............................................................................... 12 STREET DEPARTMENT 13 Number of Full-time Employees........................................................................................................................ 13 14 Number of Part-time Employees....................................................................................................................... 14 15 Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to Street Department Employees.......................................................... 15 16 Total Amount of Benefits for Street Department Employees............................................................................ 16 SANITATION DEPARTMENT 17 Number of Full-time Employees........................................................................................................................ 17 18 Number of Part-time Employees....................................................................................................................... 18 19 Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to Sanitation Department Employees ................................................... 19 20 Total Amount of Benefits for Sanitation Department Employees..................................................................... 20 LIBRARY 21 Number of Full-time Employees........................................................................................................................ 21 22 Number of Part-time Employees....................................................................................................................... 22 23 Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to Library Employees........................................................................... 23 24 Total Amount of Benefits for Library Employees............................................................................................. 24 PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT 25 Number of Full-time Employees....................................................................................................................... 25 26 Number of Part -lime Employees....................................................................................................................... 26 27 Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to Park and Recreation Employees....................................................... 27 28 Total Amount of Benefits for Park and Recreation Employees......................................................................... 28 ALL OTHER GOVERNMENTAL FUND EMPLOYEES 29 Number of Full -lime Employees........................................................................................................................ 29 30 Number of Part-time Employees....................................................................................................................... 30 31 Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to All Other Governmental Fund Employees ........................................ 31 32 Total Amount of Benefits for All Other Governmental Fund Employees......................................................... 32 TOTAL GOVERNMENTAL FUND EMPLOYEES 33 Number of Full-time Employees........................................................................................................................ 33 34 Number of Part-time Employees....................................................................................................................... 34 35 Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to All Governmental Fund Employees .................................................. 35 36 Total Amount of Benefits for All Governmental Fund Employees................................................................... 36 ENTERPRISE FUND EMPLOYEES 37 Number of roll -rime Employees........................................................................................................................ 37 38 Number of Part-time Employees....................................................................................................................... 38 39 Total Amount of Salaries/Wages Paid to Park and Recreation Employees....................................................... 39 40 Total Amount of Benefits for Park and Recreation Employees......................................................................... 40 POST -RETIREMENT BENEFITS 41 Number of Retired Employees Receiving Post -Retirement Benefits................................................................. 41 42 Total Amount of Post -Retirement Benefits Paid............................................................................................... 42 Benefits include employer contributions for insurance, deferred compensation, and retirement benefits, including P.E.R.A. and F.I.C.A. -6- SECTION X: Unique Circumstances and Other Comments Please indicate anything unique to your city or any extraordinary circumstances that occurred which may -7- CITY OF GEM LAKE 2003 Unaudited Financial Statement 31 December 2003 CLASSIFICATION OF ACCOUNT $ Total % Total GENERAL FUND SUMMARY CASH ON HAND JANUARY 1st $132,266 100.0% All Receipts (Detail Below) 281,806 100.0% All Disbursements (Details Below) 335,024 100.0% CASH ON HAND DECEMBER 31 st $79,048 100.0% GENERAL FUND RECEIPTS State of Minnesota $0 0.0% Ramsey County 116,774 41.4 % Interest & Dividends 4,494 1.6 % Licenses 5,450 1.9% Permits & Inspections 15,683 5.6% Legal 3,416 1.2% Franchise Fees 2.061 0.7% Miscellaneous 6,335 2 2% Fund Transfers 127,594 45.3% TOTAL GENERAL FUND RECEIPTS $281,806 100.0% GENERAL FUND DISBURSEMENTS Public Safety Law Enforcement $60,426 18.0 % Fire & Paramedic 13,099 3.9 % Prosecution 1,516 0.5% Code Enforcement 2,454 0.7 % Salaries 11.626 3.5 % Zoning& Inspection Services 28,349 8.5% Public Works 24,368 7.3% Membership Dues 2.031 0.6% General Operations 6,582 2.0% Banking 50 0.0% Insurance 1,913 0.6% Outside Services 30,675 9.2% Curbside Recycling 3,657 1.1 % Miscellaneous 3,956 1.2% Planning & Engineering 16.969 5.1% Elections 1.541 0.5% Fund Transfers 125,814 37.6% TOTAL GENERAL FUND DISBURSEMENTS $335,024 100.0% PARKS & PLAYGROUNDS FUND SUMMARY �. CASH ON HAND JANUARY I st $0 100.0% Receipts Transfer From Parks & Playgrounds Investment Fund 39,903 100.0% Interest Certificate Of Deposit 1,197 100.0% Disbursements Transfer To Parks & Playgrounds Investment Fund 41,101 100.0% CASH ON HAND DECEMBER 31 st $0 100.0% SEWER FUND SUMMARY CASH ON HAND JANUARY I st $26,705 100.0% Total Receipts (Detail Below) 234,957 100.0% Total Disbursements (Detail Below) 219,789 100.0% CASH ON HAND DECEMBER 31 st $41.874 100.0% SEWER FUND RECEIPTS Sewer User Charges Residential Sewer User Charges $2,928 1.2% Commercial Sewer User Charges 26.082 11.1% Interest 6,090 2.6 % Miscellaneous 1,875 0.8% Fund Transfers 197,982 84.3% TOTAL SEWER FUND RECEIPTS $234,957 100.0% SEWER FUND DISBURSEMENTS Metropolitan Council Environmental Services $9,958 4.5% General & Administrative 74 0.0% Maintenance & Repairs 0 0.0% Development 0 0.0% Miscellaneous 0 0.0% Fund Transfers 209,757 95.4 % TOTAL SEWER FUND DISBURSEMENTS $219,789 100.0% CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH ON HAND GENERALFUND Premier Bank Account: Checking $79,048 16.1 % Premier Bank Investments: Certificates Of Deposit 125,814 25.6% SEWERFUND Premier Bank Account: Checking 41,874 8.5% Premier Bank Investments: Certificates Of Deposit 203,922 41.5% ` PARKS & PLAYGROUNDS FUNDS Premier Bank Investments: Certificates OFDeposit 41,101 8.4% TOTAL CASH ON HAND DECEMBER 31 st, 2002 $491,758 100.0% Total Cash On Hand December 31 st, 2001 519,006 2002 INCREASE / (DECREASE) IN TOTAL CASH ON HAND ($27,248) [ � a|IA d < _ S § / / © m �2 , _ \_ O � t b § Q k 2 � . / \ / \ \ \ 7 / - § P. _ 0 7a 7 Q C o � JE I _ y W 'u � E U � :J —JLo U � � � I M O 0 F- 2 N � U U iQ C Q U I C CIO o U r.- J� C U j 64 N 0 i` M M O O O a1 N 00 O O O O N CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 O M 00 00 [� N N [— N M Q o In t` i c., 00rn 000000 oo � � kn o or�o l000 r- [- N � N, 0000 d o O I I I I - I i lol_ s9 o cq o N I I I I r. i i _ o00 0000 0 �o O o O Oooloo00 o0oo 00 O O O O N o0 \O N O l� 1 ,-• �O 1 i N i i II I v i O N p N U a a U p ad i IIcd .b i e I aEi N Oo C �- cd C > ai Q api I L � cls o �' > o o E o o o E_ a fJ. U cona��i cn c� c"i C7 W W CID .2OODUOZUaU O O O O O O O O O O O O O o o O O O. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N M 0 0 -- O O O M M O �--� '--�--� �" N N N O �-^ N M - — --N N N N `O O O O O CD O N O N O N O N O N O N O M O M O M O m O M CD M O M O M O O Cl CD O O CD O O O O O O O rI N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N It ►] P. w I ml� �L Q U 00 i o M EH Cl O\ O O O O O O O ^' 00 O O O o° m � �O � M �• 0 O M n 00 I EV V4 1 01 7 OC14 O O 0 0 0 0 0 1° N ^ C� 00 Y1 a, O O O 00 00 N Gn 1 N vi M N� �n N ~ I M 69 M fI N N I IIIjjII _ 1 � I Q I I o E� � � F' b .� C� F-•� � � s. w w w w C7 n b Li b •� a F� —aL av�Uwv d> v)O � v�UOwF E F HBO sww�j CD O O O O O O O O O O_ O O O �n �O [l- oo O CD O O_ O N O M"t Cl O 01 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O• O Q 9G :��?� p1 0 '. O '. O— N M 7 Q1 O— N m 'n W) Wn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'n Cl to 0 W) Cl kn 0 Vl 0 - 0 �O 0 �O 0 [� 0 l� 0 0o 0 m 0 oo 0 00 oo o0 01 01 0 0 0 0 0 C> 0 01 0 01 0 N .� N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 6N d• w O U w po Ir �. W cd O � � fV _ — n a � (i 2 LC U c� c tn z0 N � O U U Q O O U C I O U Q J � M I 00 00 N [� M O H OI O r OD O N d' CD 00 >o 00 OMp N I O1 N � I .. . M O� O : O O a1 O1 D1 O \O O vl O L O I O 00 O> � [- V'1 In ON M O 00 M (V N m � b4 00 0 n n o 0 o n rn rn rn O> o o O o O O N 00 h O� C N N N N I O I I o 1 < N O p M v1 N .U. U > C/) N E u O ^' � �... vi • n Cd > N O U V] N 'b cd cd U O O E E. rn iC W-0-0-0 N N 6J U - y C :D v1 U [7 .� .U,, •.O. N U U U E E E E C Q U �' 7 oil O °' U U U �- cd �- ❑ U U C o U o o a� v a� a> �, x > U U a> t/i I .'' a _ _ u C 1 — a ObC 4° V P-i �Q �Q p"' .� p '" 44� C G W C W O a+/� i. 'U 'V w C i C y U ..C.. _ .E O!f cd >= CIl °� C bq .- U .b Z C C Z C C U cd C O .ro U i OIl b C ro w U U aUi o 0 0 0 U g' c. E' aUi cni I° a 3 3 U a U UUUU� a iw a �w N°aramx`wv, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O1 0 0 0 0 0 '. 0 N 0 M 0 0 0 O o O N o O oY o• N O1 o O O O I O I O O O CI O �--� D\ O N N N N O> N O M ^-� M 01 M d' 7 0•--�--� �--� ^-� r' N N N M w I M M M O • O O O O O O O N O N O N C. N O N O N O N O N O N C. N O N O N N O O N O M M M M O O O O M M M O O O O CD O M M M O M O M O M O M M M M M M M M K1 M M M M M M r M I M M M M M M M M M HL 1 4, O d' N Cd G. V. 00 Q W F V] WU O 3 F5 N •� Q o r` 00 I I �I � I U ea o z N ;J U Q r'1 z c w U o � I � ✓I Q C'J N Q L G � •� � 4 a u N ci tt" O O O O O O O C N M t— Oo 00 0o Oo a .�,• j p cn cn O O CD O ri cn n O O C V Q O •--0 0 ;- N M �t CD CDO N M M M M M M O O N N N N N N N N N N M' d' vi v'� vi In In vi vi vi vi W) vi vi O O O O O O O O O O O O O M M M M M M M M M M M M M PL. P. U d ee r: C=) N •� � I � N �7y PZ F--I V � I,l � M � N 0 U U d �- 0 il. I V] d U U O cd R C v .0 o Gam, C x Q�flc.�d °add i O O Cl O O C) O N M v1 O\ CD �--� N d• In r Wn U p U In In In O O O O O O O O M M M M M M M M I I O I I I I I I 0 0 0 0 O o0;0 n O I M i I y o U w N N p bQ ai bA O g❑ A C II. W ¢ O U C..y v °WC70.1� �cnWa� OHO O O O O O O O O N O N O, 0 0 0 0 0 N M T O O O O O O O O O O M M M M M M M M I M i M I 9 P. w of CD -of V = of I IV�9 n 4q O v1 C c w l� 00 eA •c / I - f- - st •--� N ` 00 O 3 vi 'n 0 � ^O U � a M O - O N w O n c �s j U � 00 j I I �D w N Q N Q Cd w w wF H�IO 00 00 00 00101 0 0 0 o rn M M M M M w 0 ctxo P., hE P. P. on U O O O O 6A I II O 49 O � I � � �- o i M 69 O O 49 �I d it i � 01 O O 6A I� li. i i I i ,I b � w b a c w I S 3 'C r. = w C, cli w � .. w gip. W d 0 3 .91 �� d Y w AN x N Q C7 z E a E E 3 ch �z ¢, y O O O O O N O O x o Nwwww �? � HHH x7 H pUQwHE F OQ U yIUwFF-E O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N M N M NM O O M O O O= '--� N_ M �--� O N O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O t O r O r C n 4-i O 00 N Cd po O O O O O O O � .'� O O O O O t� 00 W O Oj 6R 1 N O O N 64 - ' co G� I I 1 N N n rq I y N M � N N i A i I F 01 7� am ~ > O 011 CC i V 94 O OON d vv cd `7 � s p DD O O E O 00 °°x04 .� N x U M cd a0i U sC, O Q p Mx N x �z U N U Cn 'b x 00 G' V5 V'1 U x •� .� U U C N U 7 cOd V] i cOd U �. O V f N O Ca M] y [` N 04 Z � M - O N •� " 1p M N 00 M 44 O x U V] cq O 00 M Z U Ell] `O o0 M In p �O 1p y y V] d- 5 U i� U •� U U V] >-,' [� l0 N N G' N >~N N O U C yy rn N _r O y •�- � .b � N C% N O p Cn i". M M N . In V] M M Q�U U G M1 C U O E O ate.+ �� O M N 00 M O M M G VUi 'yb. >•, C U N 00 M C >~ •d• V] 0 v 00 V) O V] N �o N N N M O s`n. O M N cd N cd +�--' Ocl,G CL �� � � � wx i'bCa a �.., U s.• �.• T U y a cd U �. O >x I cd cd cd E•v �U C U N O 3 �rzC7a¢a .� 0C4Q�6c7 O >~ C N .� -C,6d x :aH�Ca y cd J>93�U3W O 00 O � O M� O O O1 O � O r O 00 O B O Cl O O O E) O O N M O O. O• O O O O O O O 00 1.O M O N O M O N O M O N O ^-� O V') O O O •--� O h O O ON O O O •--� �� 0 0 ^•--O O O O ---� •--� -� N N O N •--� �--� O O O O N N •--� ^-� '•-� N N N N N M N 0 0 j,--.•. ,--.-. ,--� .-. I I O O .--i O O O O r. O O .--i O — O O .--� ,-. — O O O O O .-. O — O O N O N N O O O O O O O O In n In In In In W') O v) O Wn O In O W') O In O V') O v) Vn kn v-, W)(v) In W) v) I, In wn In In in in In In in In In V s - - 't ++ U E 7 67 � Q GC M N .F •�, i h c ��To/ Q l N � U ea o z N � U U Q O z O Q U Y cr O c o U TT jIII III. I III� II I I I 'd �i a I � �j � O O 'p I � 7 � U ,� •p '� -p � O N p C � � �, r. � !--• �-•. G 'C ,L C � V] Ci � Rai O W O x x cd cd cd cd cC cd U cd �Qp U �O M N Cd N � N z n^ O O h w O O AO C� 7 In � �n W 44"-" W W M N G 7 M ai O O U O U N M R: cC N x x x x x x M U .� �p F-� U U U ~ O In h 00 00 00 ON 2 U M !' N �o 00 O U --. O m M W U O G vi h M Mq M V'1 f+1 Vl Myy V'1 Myy •C t+�'� N U O vi M M M a nw 'E•E<yf. Ien M O � a U v ai U `M.. Q o�E Ala �w U aC as 3 o o ��a ca =o rr � Z I F w O O O O O O O O O O _O O N O M O r O In O �O O l— O 00 O O O� O O ^-� O N O M O 7 O In O \,O C h d \O [� 00 0 0 0 0 Q\ 0 M ^' N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M c+ N N N N N N N Cl N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O Cl O N O N C,4 O O N O N O N O N O N O N O N C O O O O In In In V1 O In O In In In in In In Vl In In In v . . . . . . In . . . M N p in w I W 0 00 I O1 I O N I Cl In O O M vI 4-r I O co I I U •b •p ,n ,� p O U eol N CN OOcr" a U.� xl o N C O N O O O O O O O o0 T 0 0 0 0 C) t^7 en U M M O N M O � '� •O N N M 0 00 N1 0 0 In 0 0 O I in.V'1 w �n V1 Vl Vl In Vl `CD £ 2 \ioq \ � a " cccg / C4 > CD m oo E / A a � tj ® co� \_ \ Ir ~\ \ § 2 § ml/ S a m �7 \5 w � ` d b § Q k s m \ _ _ / k � 'III / _ 5 \ \ k 3 \ \ R./ e / �§ k® © o \ z 3 = / ~ `) 4 u 2 [ / \4,O\0 \\$ In� \ \ % \ / \ \/�}/eRo \ \ / E@@\/@/@/ - { n c 2 m c m� r c / ) 7 / E CD E / k - § P. ME= 2.9 4t I N D0 O O n � O 00 0 O 0 IO M CD 69 IJ p N O O 00 O O O O O W� O O O iN 00 C)m O O O 00 H O N i I 6R �- 00 O d• O O O O O O O O O M 00 O O O N I vi � I N N O N O O O N N N m N 00 M !, N � c, O, O N O C, O O O C:)O Cl O N it N M N 00 N 69 II I I I I � z C7 w N G1 C6 yy c o ( C ova <Q Ub3 o �C7cgav�w � c DOQ ° L) C _ > � °0 4vO [-° r° [° Eo W o s4+ w❑ 4+ w ch .zU�C7�l 0 0 Cl 0< 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 0 0 o O O o 0 00 O O 00 O_ C, O 00 C, C, 0rq 0 O_ ,-� N_ M �_ O� 00 C) CD O_ C) O O� 00 -- N N N O N M O O M O m O O d' O d' O O O O O C) O CD C) O O QII O O O O O �° rlllll i u CITY OF GEM LAKE 2003 Unaudited Financial Statement "B" City Account # CLASSIFICATION OF ACC:OUN"I I Descri Lion & Sub -Accounts 2003 Actual Cash Only) L),:w 15 I Detail% I Summ $ I Summ A10 �00�000 V — _ — - — GENERAL FUND SUMMARY _ _ _ _ _ Ol.600 CASH HAND JANUARY 1st _ $132,266 101.100 All RecelPts (Detail Below) 155,993 211 101.200 All Disbursements (Details Below) _ $79,9.048 103.000 CASH ON HAND DECEMBER 31st 1 _ _ $7d8 File Updated: 03/25/2004 at 01:05:53 PM Page I of 12 Efile: SummaryFina1B.123 CITY OF GEM LAKE 2003 Unaudited Financial Statement "B" City Account # CLASSIFICATION OF ACCOUNT I Description & Sub -Accounts 2003 Actual Cash Only) Detail$ I Detail% I Summ $ Summ A/o GENERAL FUND RECEIPTS -- --- _ 101.000 I State of Minnesota J_ _ _ � __201.100 Homestead & Agricultural Credit Aid 201.200 Local Government Aid - - -_ - $0 0 _� .0%- 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 _ 0.0% + 201.900 � Miscellaneous State Aid 2_02.000 Ramsey County 202.100 ' Property Tax Collections 202.110 Delinquent Pro Taxes 202.120 Petitions & Abatements 116,774 74.90 _ 5,769 3.7% 4,272 -2.7% 20_2.130 Fiscal Dispari Taxes Commercial Pro 5,238 3.4% 202.140 Current Year Property Tax 109 219 70.0% 202.200 Special Assessments 202.300 County Grants _ 202.310_ Score_ Wee elfin Grant 820 _ _ 0.5% _ 202.900 Miscellaneous 0 0.0% 203.000 Interest Dividends 8291 0.5% _& 203.100 Interest 203.110 Savings Certificates _ _ 203.120 Checking Account 404 0.3% 203.190 Miscellaneous Interest 203.200 Dividends _ 203.210 Insurance Policy Dividends 203.290 Miscellaneous Dividends 425 _ 0.3% - 0.0% 0 204.000 ' Licenses 5,450 3.5% _ 204.100 _On -Sale & Special On -Sale Liquor 204.200 Off Sale Liquor 204.300 Cigarette �04.400 Charitable Gambling _04.500 Occupancy Permits 204.600 1 Non-Intoxicatin Li. uor 204.600 Contractor Licenses 205.000 , Permits & Inspections 205.100 i Construction & Remodeling Permits 4 000 2.6% 0 0.0% 750 0.5% 100 0.1% _ 0.0% 0.4% 0 600 15,683 10.1 % - 205.1 10 Grading Permits 0 0.0% �5.1% 205.120 Building Permits 8,017 205.130 Electrical Permits 0 205.140 Heating Permits 819 205.150 Plumbing Permits 761 MO.5 205.160 DemolitionPermits 400 205.170 Plan Review 205,180 Sign Permits_ 205.200 Commercial Inspections 192 400 205.210 Fire Inspection Fees _ 205.300 Residentiallnspections 205.310 Septic Inspection 205.400 Land Use Permits & RelatedMatters 205.410 Variances 205.420 Interim Use Permits 205.430 Special Use Permits 205.440 Subdivisions 205.490 Other Land Use Matters 205.900 Miscellaneous Permits & Plan Review 206.000 Legal 206.100 Fines & Forfeitures 4,644 0 150 150r 3.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% _ _ 3.416 2.2% 2.2% 150 0 0 3,416 �1 File Updated: 03/25/2004 at 01:05:53 PM Page 2 of 12 Efile: SummaryFina1B.123 CITY OF GEM LAKE 2003 Unaudited Financial Statement "B" City Account q CLASSIFICATION OF ACCOUN l' Description & Sub -Accounts 24JU3 Actual Cash Only) Details I Detail%!o I Summ $ I Sunun io —`j07.000 Franchise Fees )07.100 Cable TV Franchise Fees 208.000 Miscellaneous 2_08.100 Refunds & Reimbursements 208.200 Charges tor Services 208.300 Sales Taxes 208._400 ! Charitable Gambling Volun!! y Contribution 208._900 ' Other_ Miscellaneous 209.000 'Fund Transfers 209.100 Transfer From Sewer Fund 209.200 Transfer From General Fund Investments 209.300 Transfer From Sewer Fund Investments 209.400 Transfer From Parks & Playground Fund 299.000 TOTAL GENERAL FUND RECEIPTS j 2,061 1.3% 2,061 _ 1.3% 6 335 4.1% 2.6% 0.1% 1.4% --- 0.0% I _ 5,445 3.5% 3.5% 3,992 126 2,189 28 5,445 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 155.993 100.0% $155,993 _ 100.0% File Updated: 03/25/2004 at 01:05:53 PM Page 3 of 12 Efile: SummaryFina1B.123 CITY OF GEM LAKE 2003 Unaudited Financial Statement "B" Citv Account # CLASSIFICATION OF ACCOUNT 1 Description & Sub -Accounts 2003 Actual Cash Only) Deta+il5 I Detail% I Summ $ I Summary% �00,000 GENERAL FUND DISEURSEMENTS_ _ i01.000 Public Safety 301.100 Law Enforcement 301.110 Ramsey County Law Enforcement Services 301.190 Law Enforcement Other 301.200 Fire & Paramedic 301.2 10' White Bear Lake Fire & Paramedic Services 301.220 White Bear Lake Fire Marshall Services 301.290 Fire & Paramedic Other 301,300 Prosecution 301,310 City Prosecutor_ _ 301,390 PI-0 SeCLltlon Other _ 301.400 Code Enforcement 301.410 Code_ Enforcement Officer 301.490 Code Enforcement Other 302.000 Salaries 302.100 Elected Officials 302.110 Mayor: Paul Emeott 302.120 Council Member: Rick Bosak 302.130 _Council Member: Pat Igo 302.140 Council Member: Roland Birkebak 302.150 Council Member: Chuck Watson 302.200 City Staff 302.210 Treasurer 302.220 City_Clerk 302.300 Internal Revenue Service 302.310 Medicare/Medicaid 2.90%) N302.320 Social SecurityContributionff 2.40%) 02.390 Miscellaneous IRS 303.000 Zoning & Inspection Services 303.100 Building Inspector M Permiq 303.200 Building Official Plan Review(75% Plans) 303.300 Heating Inspector (750XoPermits) 303.400 Plumbing Inspector (75%_Permits) 303.500 Electrical Inspections (800/oPermits/Paidl2/30/O2,Accountcd2003) 3_03,600 Septic Inspector ($25/System) 303.700 Zoning Administrator 303.800 Permit Surcharges To State of MN _ 303.810 Building Permits 303.820 Heating Permits _ 303.830 Plumbing Permits 303.840 Electrical Permits _ 303.890 Miscellaneous Permit Surcharges _ 303.900 Miscellaneous _ 304.000 Public Works 304.100 Street Sweeping 304.200 Snowplowing 304.300 Street Repairs 304.400 Street Lighting 304.500 Utility & Pedestriamn Way Improvements j 5L, L_ 26.5% 5.0831 2.4% 9,895 4.7% 3,204 1.5% 0 0.0% 0.7% 0 0.0% M454 1.2% 0 0.0% 50,426 28.9% 13,099 6.3% i 1,516 �O7 2i5-4 1.2% 11,626 I 5.6% 1,847 0.9% 1 1 739 0.4% 739 0.4% 739 0.4% - 739 0.4% 401 1.1% _ 7701 1.3% 313 0.1% - 0.6% 1 0.0% __ 28,349 13.6% 0.6% 0.4% 0.7% 0.3% _ 0.0% 1,339 0 1,170 925 1,540 704 0 6,643 3.2% I 45 0.0% 1 0.0% 1 0.0% 0, 0.0% (25) -0.0% 3501 0.2% 600 0.3% 0 0.0% 3,116 _ 1.5% 727 0.3% 19,925 9.5% 11.6% File Updated: 03/25/2004 at 01:05:53 PM Page 4 of 12 Efile: SummaryFina1B.123 0 CITY OF GEM LAKE 2003 Unaudited Financial Statement "B" City CLASSIFICATION OF ACCOUN C 2003 Actual Cash Only)_ Account ri Descri tion & Sub -Accounts 1 lail� Detail% Summ $ Summ �305.000 General & Administrative 305.100 Membership Dues 305.1 10 Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Assn. 305.120 League of Minnesota Cities _ 305.130 Ramsey County League of Local Governments 305.140 Int'l. Conference Building Officials (ICBO) 305.150 Municipal Clerks & Finance Officers Association 305.160 ' Ramsey County GIS User Fee 305.200 General Operations 305.210 Publishing & Printing 305.211 Legal Publications 305.212 Other Publishing &Printing _ 305.220 Stationary & Supplies _ 305.230 Communications 305.231 Equipment Purchases & Maintenance 305.232 Telephone Services 305.233 Internet Access _ 305.234 Web Site Development & Maintenance 305.239 Other Communications ^ _ 305.300 Banking _ _ 305.400 Insurance_ 305.410 LMCIT Worker's Compensation Insurance - 305.420 LMCIT Municipal Liability Insurance 305.430 Dishonesty Bonds For Treasurer & Mayor/Clerk 305.440 City Council Personal Accident Policy 305.450 Accident Plan For Volunteers 305.490 Insurance Other �05.500 Outside Services 305.510 Administrator 305.520 Assistant Clerk 305.530 Accountants/Auditors 305.540 City Attorney 305.550 Special Counsel 305.590 Miscellaneous Outside Services 305.600 Curbside Recycling 305.610 Recycling Collection 305.620 Recycling Education & Promotion 305-900 Miscellaneous 305.910 Intergovernmental Meetings _ 305.920 Subscriptions 305.930 Equipmen-t_Purchases 305.940 Charitable Gambling Contribution Distribution 305.950 New City Hall Project_ - - 305.990 Unlocated Differences 305.990 Other Miscellaneous _ 306.000 Planning & Engineering _ 306.100 Planning Commission Direct Expenses _~306.110 306.120 Indirect Expenses 306.200 Engineering _ 306.210 General Engineering Services 306.220 Billable En_gineerin�r, Services 306.290 Miscellaneous Engineering Services _ 307.000 Elections J07.100 Salaries -Election Judges &B allot Counters File Updated: 03/25/2004 at 01:05:53 PM Page 5 of 12 1,331 420 121 85 35 39 525 0 3,338 525 1,570 383 240 0 50 48,863 23.4% 0.6% 0.2% 0.1% i 0.0% L 0.0%° 1 0.0%1 I 0.3% ~ _ 0.0% 1.6% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% _ 94 0.0% _ 1,092 _ 0.5% 170 __ 0.1% _327 _ 0.2% _ 150 0.1% 801 0.0% 17,193 8.2% 3.1% 1.2% 1.6% 0.0% 6,590 2,500 3,290 0 1,102 0.5% 3,657 1.7% 0 0.0% 435 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% _ 0.0% 20 _ 0 800 0 405 0.2% 296 0.1% 0 -0 0.0% --- 0.0% ,721 4.2% 1249 3.9% 01 0.0% I_ 16,969 8.1 % 1,541 0.7% J Efile: SummaryFina1B.123 CITY OF GEM LAKE 2003 Unaudited Financial Statement "B" Cin Account # CLASSIFICATION OF ACCOUN 1 I Description & Sub -Accounts 2003 Actual Cash Only) ocnul$ I Detail% I Summa $ I SummanA,o —)07.200 E__quipment & Training_ _ 1,498 0. 307.300 Publishing & Printing 3 0.00%% 307.900 Miscellaneous Election 0 0.0% 308.000 Fund Transfers 0 0.0% 308.100 Transfer To Sewer Fund 0 0.0% 308.200 Transfer To Operating Reserve Fund 308.300 Miscellaneous Transfers jl�l 0.0% 399.000 TOTAL GENERAL FUND DISBURSEMENTS $209 100.0% $209,211 100.0% File Updated: 03/25/2004 at 01:05:53 PM Page 6 of 12 Efile: SummaryFinalB.123 CITY OF GEM LAKE 2003 Unaudited Financial Statement "B" City CLASSIFICATION OF ACCOUN"I 1 2003 Actual Cash Only) %ca011111 # I Dcscri tion & Sub -Accounts Detail$ Detail% Summ $ Summ /o 100.000 - - — - — — — PARKS & PLAYGROUNDS FUND SUMMARY 101.000 CASH ON -HAND JANUARY 1 st 702._000 Receipts 702 100 Contributions _ 702.200 Fund Transfers _ — 702.210 702.220 702.230 702.230 702.300 702.300 703.000 703.100 703.110 703.120 _ 703.130 703.200 704.000 Transfer From General Fund Transfer From Sewer Fund Transfer From Engineering Fund Transfer From Parks & Playgrounds Investment Fund Interest _ Certificate Of Deposit Disbursements _ Fund Transfers_ Transfer To General Fund Transfer To_Sew er Fund Transfer To Parks & Playprround_s Investment Fund Other Disbursements CASH ON I IAND DECEMBER 31 st 39.903 1,197 _ 41,101 $0 j File Updated: 03/25/2004 at 01:05:53 PM Page 7 of 12 Efile: SummaryFina1B.123 CITY OF GEM LAKE 2003 Unaudited Financial Statement "B" Citq AcCOLIMJ CLASSIFICATION OF ACCOUNT' Descri tips & Sub -Accounts -(,, , Actual Cash Only) I1 71811 I )cuiil°,o I Su S I Summ % --100,00o - 401.000 CASH ON HAND JANUARY 1st 402.000 ' Total Receipts (Detail Below) 403.000 Total Disbursements (Detail Below) 404.000 CASH ON HAND DECEMBER 31st -0 J SEWERFUNI)'�!• I $26,705 31,036 15,867 - — = 41,8�4 File Updated: 03/25/2004 at 01:05:53 PM Page 8 of 12 Efile: SummaryFinalB.123 CITY OF GEM LAKE 2003 Unaudited Financial Statement "B" Cite CLASSIFICATION OF ACCOUNT 2003 Actual Cash Only) Account # I Description & Sub -Accounts Detail$ I Detail% I Summ $ I Summ % p.000 _ _ - _ _ - - - - -WER FUND RECEIPTS - - 501.000 Sewer User Charges _ I 501.100 Residential Sewer User Charges _ 2,928 501.100 Richard Hansen (3704 Scheuneman Rd) 501.080 Gerner/Arnco (3642B Scheuneman Rd) 501.060 Lorraine BirkelanjjQj42 Hoffman Rd) _ - 501.030 Allen Drummond Residence (1599 Cty Rd E) 501.020 Phyllis Berry (3524 N Hwy 61) 501.150 Joe Cherrier (501.16/3802-3804 Scheuneman Rd) 501.120 Ruth Luh (3781 Scheuneman Rd) _ 501.130 Dr. R.T. Donahue (3791 Scheuneman Rd) 501.220 K_nut_Skjerseth (3836 Scheuneman Rd) 501.210 Gertrude Hannah (3825 Scheuneman Rd) 501.050 Matt _Flynn _(3540 Hoffman Rd) _ 501.200 John _Hurt (3824 Scheuneman Rd) 501.180 Dave Hanson 3812 Scheuneman Rd) 501.140 Dr. T_olomeo Ong (3801 Scheuneman Rd) 501.010 Peter Oswald (3516 N Hwy 61) 501.070 Mike Gerner (3636 Scheuneman Rd) 501.040 Richard Hansen (3538 Hoffman Rd) 501.090 Henry Leuthard 0660 Scheuneman Rd) 501.230 Mrs. S. Kuchenmeister (4141 Scheuneman Rd) 501.240 Lloyd LaBore (4144 Scheuneman 501.190 Tim Draine (3815 Scheuneman Rd)_-_ 501.170 Steven & Penny Shepherd (3809 Scheuneman Rom_ 501.110 Dick Lindholm (3748 Scheuneman Rd) 501.250 Larry Weber (4036 Scheuneman Road_)_ '301.260 Vacant (4038 Scheuneman Road) - DO 1.270 Vacant (4040 Scheuneman_ Road)___ 501.280 Vacant(4042 Scheuneman Road) 501.290 William Kahl (4044 Scheuneman Road) 501.300 Vacant (4046 Scheuneman Road) 501.200 Commercial Sewer User Charges - 26,082 502.010 Waldoch Custom Center (3588 Hw261) 502.020 Barnett Chrysler Plymouth (3610 N Hwy 61)_ 502.030 AMC Jeep Renault of WBL (3700 N Hwy 61 502.040 Nelson Marine (3800 N Hwy 61)_ _ 502.060 Tousle), Ford (1491=502.050&1493 Cty Rd E) 502.070 Flanagan (1567 E t Rd E) 502.080 Hoffman Corner Car Wash (1577 Cty Rd E)) 502.090 Hoffman Corner Oil (502.090-502.120: 1_58_1 Ct_y Rd E) 502.130 Cafe _Cravitt 1600 E Cty Rd E) 502,140 Drummond Business Center(502.140-502.180: 1601 E Cty Rd E 502,190 F & L Auto_Sales C 55 Hoffman Road A 502.200 White Bear Floral (3550 Hoffinan Rd) 502.210 Country Lounge (3590 Hoffman Rd) 502.220 DLW Properties 3579 Hoffman R _. 502.230 DLW Properties (3581 Hoffman 502.240 DLW Properties Q85 Hoffman Rd) 502.250 DLW_ Properties_(3587_HoffmanjtAd 502.260 DLW Properties (3591 Hoffman Rd) 502.270 DLW Properties (3595 Hoffman Rd) _ 502.280 Gerner/Rhino Linings (3630 Scheuneman _ 502.290 Gerner/Pods (3634 Scheuneman Rd) 02.300 Gerner/Arnco (3642 Scheuneman Rd) - 9.4% 84.0% v9,010 93.5% File Updated: 03/25/2004 at 01:05:53 PM Page 9 of 12 Efile: SummaryFina1B.123 CITY OF GEM LAKE 2003 Unaudited Financial Statement "B" City CLASSIFICA'IiON OF ACCOI �?\ i 2003 Actual Cash Only) Account j Description & Sub -Accounts 1rr il5 Detail% I Summ $ I Summary% )02.310 Hoss Performance (3696A Scheuneman Rd) —_ 502,320 Dans_Ailing Auto (369613 Scheuneman Rd) 502.3_30_ AM -PM Auto Repair (3696C Scheuneman Rd) 502.340 Trike Shop #A/Classic Tool (3734 Scheuneman Rd)_-_ 502.350 Trike Shop #B(3736 Scheuneman Rd) 502.360 Trike Shop #C_(3738 Scheuneman Rd _ 502.370 Trike Shop #D (3740 Scheuneman Rd) _ _ - _ 502.380 Trike Shop #E (3742 Scheuneman Rd _502.390 Trike Shop_#F (3746 Scheuneman Rd) 503.000 Interest _ r 150 0.5% 503.100 Interest On Checking Account 150 0.5% 503.200 Interest On Savi_ gs Certificates _ _ - 504.000 Miscellaneous _ 1,875 504.100 Sewer Access Charges- _ 504.110 Municipal SAC Charge cQ $ 600 600 1.9% 1 504.120 Met Council SAC Charge @ $ 1,275 1,275 4.1% 504.130 Municipal SAC Administrative Surcharge 504.200 Met Council Dividend 505.000 Sewer Development _ _ _ _ 0 _ 505.100 _ Developer Contribution / Investment 505.200 Met Council SAC Credits 506.000 Fund Transfers i 506.100 Transfer From Sewer Investment FundFund _ I 506.200 Transfer From General Fund 0 _0.0% 506.300 Transfer From Parks & Playground Fund 0 0.0% 599.000 TOTAL SEWER FUND RECEIPTS $31.036 _ _ _ j00.0% $31,036 _ 100.0% --I I File Updated: 03/25/2004 at 01:05:53 PM Page 10 of 12 Efile: SummaryFinalB.123 CITY OF GEM LAKE 2003 Unaudited Financial Statement "B" City CLASSIFICATION OF ACCOUNT 1 2003 Actual Cash Only) Account # I Description & Sub -Accounts Detail$ I Detail% I Summary$ I Summar % S_FWFR.fUND DISBURSEMENTS -- 601.000 Metropolitan Council Environmental Services _ ( $9,958 62.8% 601.100 Current User Charges 9,958 62.8% 601.200 Metropolitan SAC Charge @ $ 1,275 0 0.0%I 602.000 General & Administrative _ 1 1 74 0.5% 602.100 Billin&Expenses - _ 74 0.5% 602.200 Bankin 0 t 0.0% 602.300 --- - Miscellaneous — — - 0'1 0.0% 0 0.0% 603.000 Maintenance & Repairs _ 603.100 Inspection Services _ 0 0.0% 603.200 Flushing, Maintenance & Repairs 0 0.0% 604.000 Development_ `- 604.100 Sewer Development 604.110 Municipal SAC Credits 604.120 Metropolitan SAC Credits 6_04.130 Developer Contribution / Investment 604.140 Sewer Fund Contribution / Investment _ 604.190 Other Development 605.000 Miscellaneous 606.000 Fund Transfers 606.100 Transfer To General Fund 606.200 Transfer To Engineering Fund 606.300 Transfer To Parks & Playground Fund 606.400 Transfer To Sewer Investment Fund 699.000 TOTAL SEWER FUND DISBURSEMENTS 0 0 - _ 0 0 0 5,835 0 0 _ $15,867 0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% _ 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 5,835 36.8% 36.8% 0.0% 0.0% f _ 0.0% 100.0% $15,867 100.0% File Updated: 03/25/2004 at 01:05:53 PM Page I I of 12 Efile: SummaryFinalB.123 Cith Account q t D, i G S: 1 P T T 2 CITY OF GEM LAKE 2003 Unaudited Financial Statement "B" CLASSIFICATION OF ACCOUNT & Sub -Accounts I ��tailti 2003 Actual (Cash - - -- — _)NSOLID-.-AIED S 1 A I MrN )1 CASH UN` ?NERALFUND 1_IAN r 'remier Bank Account: Checking- 'remier Bank Investments: Certificates Of Deposit ?WER FUND — — 'remier Bank Account: Checking 'remier Bank Investments: Certificates Of Deposit _ kRKS &_PLAYGROUNDS FUNDS — 'remier Bank Investments: Certificates Of Deposit DTAL CASH ON HAND DECEMBER 31 st, 2002 _ Dial Cash On Hand December 31st, 2001 tm i1.ICREASE / (DECREASE) IN TOTAL CASH ON HAND $79,048 16.1 % 125,814 25.6% 41,874 8.5% 203,9221 41.5% 41 101 ! 8.4% I File Updated: 03/25/2004 at 01:05:53 PM Page 12 of 12 Efile: SummaryFinalB.123 R WJ I� N N N NCD d O O O O ai M M M Mi N N N N E N N N M � � U i N N 00 7^ 0 0 V1 00 N [- V rn 0 0 O O aN N^ M V1 T M N M M 00 a N 01 N N 01 �o ^ V [- M 00 00 M V V V1 00 M b 00 O O N v� In lD ^ N M Vl 00 a, 0, O O 7 M 00 7 6 U1 Oi 'D fJ 7 O, 0 7 I 7 0 O N On N Vi 't 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O v� O O w N m �D V) 00 O O CD P M oo O ID V 0o N V) O ^ N l- N 00 V N N N o0 7 CD ^ N �o � 7 Ul m N r- d- O� O M OM M N 7 M M V1 oo 00 DD V1 N 'D O t ry ONO O� N Cy, N N o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O M o O O O O O O In N In V1 �D Vi O O ^ N N N F w Nr-. N W O N N N DD O O W N 10 M ONi M N M 00 N O, M V oo V is O [- O, Ol N z C a1 M O D O V rz M 00 M M 7 7 V) DD M b 00 N O w r W O1 O (V M V Gzai 3 o rn C, rn l rn o, o, D, o, 0, a\ a o o 0 0 N 0 0 N 0 0 N O 0 N W •- 6. a. �V7 cop O QQQdQQ o o v d, a N N N N ^ F4 ^ ^ N ^ M V V) �D [- w a\ O^ N M 7 a\ ON 0� .-. 01 .-. a, ,-. 01 a\ O\ � CDO O 2 O 2 O O 2N CD O CD CD.-. N ` N N 'D N p N N 6� CC , N a, a, 00 00 W OO 00 DD 00 00 00 00 00 C) O M CD O CD O M O M O M O M O M CD O C1 O O �D O O m O m O m O m O m O m O m O O M m 4t M 4t mM zt� N M ZM M M N M M m zit N m 4t N N N 4J N N N OJ 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ) [� a\ N MC', O 7 V .-. p O N M O 00 0 O 0� 0 O O 0 Ul 00 N V1 ON 7 V1 M o0 V1 O CD O_ �D N N N N N N M Q) ml p W a �O NC%"I II j V I O Cl V1 00 t 00 7 ,a In M O ,o ,D N OO OI OO ' 7 ,a 't oo O N oo O a, O ^• ,D a n ,o a, [� OO Oi Vi N m ai O ^ N M M M M V M [� 0 C7 O a, r- O I+i O 0o r vi 0000 I O(V r- t b N N l� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 CDo o v aa. m r- 0000 In In ,o ,o o O O M In oo vj O .-, ,o vi In-------------- oo N In O O N ,D O, Vl r- v'l V [- t` Vn V Cl m O O c�.� 00 0�o a, O 0 0° o 0 0 0 0 0 z M Mooa�� M Do N N O o w > Z Q 0 N O l - o �D M N r a� r O� n Vl ^ r r- In v O z h In o0 7 00 7 v �D o In 00 M 0 O 0 �D 0 v1 In OI o0 rn 00 v 7 n ,D o7 rl Qn O, w gyp" t� 07 In N vi o0 z N M M M m 7 0 F a w 0.V' _ l o"', rn rn rn rn o 0 0 0 0 W c, o, a, a, a, L 0 0 L 0 L 0 N L 0 N L o C ti C ti ¢ ¢ ¢ . 0.¢ x^ ,o 7 N 106 00 v 0, o, a N N N Q 4 CD 0 0 0 ate, aa,,10 U a, ate, a, Obi tT O 0 O O CODO N N N N N N N � N Iy o0 00 00 00 00 00 00 C. 0o co O O CD O CDO O ,D O CD O O O O O O O O O O O M M M M M M M M M M I/I Vi N cC cR cC t3 tC cd w 4 cd [d CV cV 00 .-- •-- 00 N M 0o Q` O o0 00 00 00 00 N O M O O O O O O O N N I N 7 I N I N oo N W N I 1 I CI:Tms For Payment CITY OF GEM LAKE Period Ending 04/16/2004 Paul Emeott, Mayor Chuck Watson, Council Roland Birkebak, Council Richard Bosak, Council Patrick Igo, Council Frederic Magnuson, Clerk DATE CLAIM# PAID PAID SP 2036 19-Apr Metropolitan Council SP 2037 19-Apr GI' 6391 22-Mar GI' 6392 19-Apr GP 6392 19-Apr GP 6 992 1 19-Apr GP 6392 19-Apr GP 6392 I9-Apr GP 6392 19-Apr GP 6393 19-Apr GP 6394 19-Apr GP 6394 19-Apr GI' 6394 19-Apr GP 6395 19-Apr GP 6395 19-Apt GP 6395 19-Apr GP 6396 19-Apr GP 6396 19-Apr GP 6396 19-Apr GP 6397 19-Apr GP 6398 19_Apr GP 6399 05-Apr GP 6400 05-Apr GP 6401 05-Apr _GP 6402 19-Apr Gil 6402 19-Apr GP 6402 19-Apr GP 6402 19-Apr GP 6402 19-Apr GP 6403 19-Apr GP 6404 19-Apr GP 6405 19-Apr GP 6406 19-Apr GP 6407 19-Apr GP 6407 19-Apr GP 6407 19-Apr GP 6408I, 19-Apr GP 6408 19 _Apr GP 6408 19-Apr GP 6409 19-Apr Gil 6409 19-_Apr GP 6409 19-Apr GP 6409 19-Apr GP 6409 19-Apr GP 6409 19-Apr GP 6409 19-Apr GP 6409 19-Apr GP 6409 19-Apr GP 6409 19-Apr GI' 6409- 19-Apr GP 6409 19-Apr GP 6409 19-Apr Signatures Approving Claims For Payment Date Of Approval DATE / / - / , / DATE /f l �1 q DATE` -I �`7� ('Q Y /` llc� pen DATE DATE Mq/`�"� DATE /j 0 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF CLAIM I $ AMOUNT I Current User Charges: May 2004 879.93 SEWER FUND _ 87993 20 000.uu Premier Bank Rick Bosak ALLEN O. ZEPPER tJL rnvesrmem w iyiLwY Spring 2004 Newsletter:Writing/Typesetting/Copies TOTAL CLAIM Lv 326.69 326.69 1,161.77 Allen O. Zepper Permit Closure for #132004-01 _ 93.75 Allen O. Zepper Permit Closure for #B2004-02 - _ 93.75 Allen O. Zepper Permit Closure for #132004-03 - Permit Closure for #M2004-01 - 93.75 Allen O. Zepper _ - 53.55 All O. Zepper Plan Check For #132004-04 100.00 826.97 Ramsey County League ofLocal Governments 2004 RCLLG Membership Dues _ ^ - TOTAL CLAIM Fire & Paramedic: April 2004 _ 100.00 CITY OF WHITE BEAR LAKE 1.101.41 _ City. of White Bear Lake 853.83 City of White Bear Lake Fire Marshall & Tons: April 2004 247.58 GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL TOTAL CLAIM _ 34.00 Gopher State One -Call 4_RSW&gickeIsQoSl- iekV(+yoiCWglyQV.25! 6RegularTie 1.1Shieket(+yoiceopW225/ CLAIM Subscription White Bear Press 4/l/2004-9/30/2004 Subscription White Bear Press 10/l/2004-3/31/2005 ) ) 22.00 24 _0 2,300.001 789.001 200.00 1,200.00 413.12 13.601 Gopher State One -Call PRESS PUBLICATIONS __TOTAL 20.40 Press Publications ~� _11.00 Press Publications Avenet, LLC 11,00 Twelve Months Hosting WebSite 4/l/04-3/31/05 FinSlatematsFor2003/CompOthrRegFort_nsForl fling Charitable Gambling Donation - 2003 Charitable Gambling Donation - 2003 _ _Charitable Gambling Donation - 2003 1 ST QTR 2004 WITHHOLDING _ _ - _ 1 st Qtr 2004: Employee SS Payment 240.00 2,300.00 789.00 200.00 1,200.00 Smith Schafer & Associates, Ltd. ' St. Mary0s of the Lake School Friends of the Parks & Trails Willow Lane Elementary School INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE _ Internal Revenue Service .167.40 Internal Revenue Service Internal Revenue Service _ 1st Qtr 2004: City SS Payment 167.40 1 st Qtr 2004: Employee Medicare Pa m�Mm _ 1 st Qlr 2004: City Medicare Payment LcgTrans#291391: PublicNotice #2004-07 Street Lighting: March 2004 _ 39.16 Internal Revenue Service 39.16 Press Publications 47.60 47.60 _ Xcel Energy 60.55 60.55 E-Z Recycling, Inc. Ramsey County SEH, INC. _ Curbside Recycling: April 2004 281.30 281.30 Law Enforcement: April 2004 _- - _ TOTAL CLAIM 5,045.19 5,045.19 2,074.00 SEH, Inc. _ Misc City Engineering Services _ _ SEH, Inc. Hillary Farms Subdivisioin _ 1,769.00 LEONARD,O'BRfEN,SPENCER,GALE&SAYRE4_ TOTAL CLAIM _ I Leonard, O'Brien, Spencer, Gale & Sayre I MunicMtrs:UseOlt harGamblingDonations:AdultUs j Leonard, O'Brien, Spencer, Gale & Sayre I iillatyFarm:Subdiv&Zoninglssues:PlanRv_w MAGNUSON & ASSOCIATES, LLC TOTAL CLAIM Magnuson & Associates. LLC Telcphone&FacsimileServiee: Mar/Apr-2004 Magnuson & Associates. LLC 0niccsupplies,Copying&Postage: MadApr-2004 Magnuson & Associates. LLC Mileage:Mar/Apr-2004( 248 a $0_375) Magnuson & Associates. LLC IntemetAccess-(5o. :Mar/A -2003Magnuson & Associates. LLC �LapT*pCompuler-50%MonthlyP&yment Magnuson & Associates. LLC AssistantClerk,Mar/Apr-2004: 18.00 hours Magnuson & Associates. LLC ZoningAdmin, Mar/Apr-2004: 5.00 hours Magnuson & Associates. LLC _ Zonin AdminBillable,Mar/Apr-2004: 0.00 hours _ Magnuson & Associates. LLC GeneralAdmin, Mar/Apr-2004: 33.25 hours 475.00 -_ 225.001 250.00 5,867,60 _ _ _ 119.12 156.03 _ 93.00 50.00 _ _ _ 900.00 375.00 _ 0.00 2,493.75 Magnuson & Associates. LLC GeneralAdmirnBlllable, Mar/Apr-2004: 16.25 hours 1,218.75 Magnuson & Associates, LLC Magnuson & Associates. LLC SewerAdmin, MadApr-20M: 1.00 hours ChietElectionludge:Mar/Apr-200 .- 0.00 hours 75.00 0.00 RLIn Date & Time: 04/18/2004 at 06:19:24 PM File: 04claim04.123 t Claims For Payment CITY OF GEM LAKE Period Ending 04/16/2004 J Paul Emeott, Mayor Chuck Watson, Council Roland Birkebak, Council Richard Bosak, Council Patrick Igo, Council Frederic Magnuson, Clerk Date Of Approval .. ray%� �T. _:. t� hNINNI C -4A, t , ' t•.�il �t�� • t , �I� M- CLA1M# DATE PAID PAID TO DESCRIPTION OF CLAIM S AMOUNT GENERAL FG\D SEWER FUND GP 6409 19-Apr Magnuson & Associates. LLC CodeEnforcen n-2004: 5.00 hours ttMer/Apr I 375.00 GP 6410 19-Apr PAUL R. EMEOTT Paul R. Emeott TOTALCLAIM NPDES-Ordinance Writing Class (3.00 hrs) 1,480.98 225.00 GP GP 6410 6410 19-Apr 19-Apr Paul R. Emeott NPDES-Draft Mandatory Ordinances (4.00 hrs) _ __ _ 300.00 GP 6410 19-Apr Paul R. Emeott ZONING -Hillary Farm (11.00 hrs) _ _ 825.00 GP 6410 19-Apr Paul R. Emeott Paul R. Emeott CODES -Wetland Filling Mitigation (0.50 hrs) Ove20 Intc mmcntalMeetin I — _37.50 00 GP GP 6410 6410 19-Apr 19-Apr Paul R. Emeott - RotatapM�ttroMasterForZoning 73.481 73. ALL 04/19/2004 APRIL SUMMARY I TOTAL FOR APRIL $44,100.14 $23,220.21 $20,879.93 8.33% Of Budget Monthly I % Annual Budget 15.83% 8.33% 7.49% ALL 04/19/2004 YEAR-TO-DATE SUMMARY TOTAL YEAR-TO-DATE $102,625.35 $79,036.12 $23,589.23 33.33% Of Year Completed % Annual Budget 36.83% 34.56% 47.23% ALL 04/19/2004 VERSUS ANNUAL BUDGET Annual Budget $Under/($Over) ($9,742.01 ($2,802.78 ($6,939.23) 33.33% Of Year COtnpleted Annual Budget %Under/ -%Over -3.50% -1.23% -13.89% Run Date & Time: 04/18/2004 at 06:19:25 PM File: 04claim04.123 GENERAL FUND CHECKING 2004 CITY OF GEM LAKE TREASURER'S REPORT i'Y OF GEM LAKE .s69 County Road "E" East Gem Lake, MN 55110-5231 TRAN TRAN CHECKS TO DATE # DEPOSITS FROM 25-Mar-04 GP6373 Association for Nonsmokers - Minnesota 29-Mar-04 P6374 International Code Council (ICQ 19-Mar-04 GP6375 CITY OF WHITE BEAR LAKE 19-Mar-04 3P6376 E-Z Recycling, Inc, 19-Mar-04 IP6377 Xcel Enerev 22-Mar-04 P6378 Ramsey County 24-Mar-04 JP6379 PAUL R. EMEOTT 18-Mar-04 3P6380 Richard Bosak 15-Mar-04 P6381 Patrick Igo 17-Mar-04 P63821 ROLAND BIRKEBAK 17-Mar-04 P6383 1 Chuck Watson 16-Mar-04 G1`6384 Sarah Cobian 17-Mar-04 P6385 Fritz Ma uson 18-Mar-04 3P63861 LEONARD,O'BRIEN,SpINCBR,dAI 19-Mar-04 3P63871 SEH, INC. 19-Mar-04 3P63881 Meslow & OLwk PLLC 17-Mar-04 3P63891 MAGNUSON & ASSOCIATES, LLC 24-Mar-04 3P63901 PAUL R. EMEOTT 29-Mar-04 3P6391 Richard Bosak 26-Mar-04 1 State of Minnesota 26-Mar-04 2 FIREPLACE PROFESSIONALS 26-Mar-04 3 Nelson Marine 31-Mar-04 1 Premier Bank GENERAL FUND CHECKING C H K 1 N 40046.22 01-Jan-04 START 79047.60 38799.87 40,230.92 BANK BALANCE -56154.60 17153.22 -39001.38 PAYMENT FOR DEBIT CREDIT 41147.63 BALANCE 2004 North Suburban Tobacco Compliance Proj 3 (61.50 57,252.28 56,150.87 2004 Governmental Member Dues 3 100.00 57,152.28 56,050.87 TOTAL CLAIM 3 (1,101.41 56,050.87 54949.46 Curbside Recycling: March 2004 3 (281.30 55,769.57 54,668.16 Street Lighting: February 2004 3 (60.60 55,708.97 54,607.56 Law Enforcement: March 2004 3 (1,325.19 54,383.78 53,282.37 TOTAL CLAIM 3 (532.25 53,85153 52,750.12 IstQtr'04Salary ($200.00-12.40ss-2.90mm) 3 194.70 53,666.83 52,565.42 1st Qtr'04 Salary ($200.00-12.40ss-2.90mm) (184.701 53,482.13 52,565.42 TOTAL CLAIM 3 (204.70 53,277.43 52,360.72 1st Qtr'04 Salary ($200.00-12.40ss-2.90mm) 3 184.70 53,092.73 52,176.02 1stQtr'04SWwy($650.00-40.30ss-9.43mm) 3 (600.2 52,492.46 51,575.75 1stQtr'04 SWM ($750.00-46.50ss-10.88mm) 3 (692.62 51,799.84 50,883.13 TOTAL CLAIM 3 (387.50 51,412.34 50,495.63 TOTAL CLAIM 3 5,310.40 46,101.94 45,185.23 Court Trial For Thoa Moua 3 (90.00 46,011.94 45,095.23 TOTAL CLAIM 3 (4,514.65 41,497.29 40,580.58 TOTAL CLAIM 3 (565.00 40,932.29 40,015.58 Spring 2004 Ncmkw..WritinVT ng/Co 3 (326.691 40,605.60 39,68&99 Traffic Fines: February 2004 3 100.50 40,706.10 39,789.39 TOTAL PAYMENT 3 252.00 40,958.10 40,041.39 Interim Use Permit Application (#2004-0 1) 3 1 150.00 41,108.10 40,191.39 Interest Paid This Period 3 1 1 39.53 41,147.63 40,230.92 Run Date: 04/12/2004 at 11:35:30 AM E-File: PGFCheck04.123 Page 1 of 1 Premier LENOr LENDER .. Bank Minnesota Owned. Minnesota Operated. MEMBER FDIC Page: 1 CITY OF GEM LAKE GENERAL FUND Account Number: 6005590 1369 COUNTY ROAD E E Statement Date: 3/31/04 GEM LAKE MN SS110-5231 Checks/Items Enclosed: 22 86 COMING SOON Premier Bank will be introducing IMAGE STATEMENTS A better way to manage your checking account. PREFERRED ELITE CITY OF GEM LAKE Act # 6005590 GENERAL FUND Beginning Balance 3/01/04 62,914.76 i Deposits / Misc Credits 2 542.03 Withdrawals / Misc Debits 21 23,225.87 ** Ending Balance 3/31/04 40,230.92 ** Service Charge .00 Interest Paid Thru 3/31/04 39.53 Interest Paid Year To Date 153.23 Average Balance 49,561 Average Collected Balance 49,509 Minimum Balance 40,115 Average Rate / Cycle Days .94000 / 31 Enclosures 22 Aiscellaneous Credits Date Deposits Withdrawals Activity Description 3/26 502.50 DEPOSIT 3/31 39.53 INTEREST EARNED Paid Checks Date Check No. Amount 3/01 6362 1,647.00 6368* 10.20 11")3 ,2 6369 5,045.19 3/25 6373* 61.50 3/29 6374 100.00 3/19 6375 1,101.41 * indicates skip in check numbers Date Check No. Amount Date Check No. Amount 3/19 6376 281.30 3/17 6383 184.70 3/19 6377 60.60 3/16 6384 600.27 3/22 6378 1,325.19 3/17 6385 692.62 3/24 6379 532.25 3/18 6386 387.50 3/18 6380 184.70 3/19 6387 5,310.40 3/17 6382* 204.70 3/19 6388 90.00 SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR ADDITIONAI INFnRMATinm =.. Premier Bank Minnesota Owned. Minnesota Operated. LrNDEDERR LE MEMBER FDIC CITY OF GEM LAKE Paid Checks Date Check No. 3/17 6389 Daily Balance Summary Date Balance 3/01 61,267.76 3/02 56,222.57 i�3 56,212.37 ��16 55,612.10 3/17 50,015.43 .j Account Number: Statement Date: Page: 2 6005590 3/31/04 * indicates skin in check numbers Amount Date Check No. Amount Date Check No. 4,514.65 3/24 6390 565.00 3/29 6391 Date Balance Date Balance 3/18 49,443.23 3/25 40,115.58 3/19 42,599.52 3/26 40,618.08 3/22 41,274.33 3/29 40,191.39 3/24 40,177.08 3/31 40,230.92 Amount 326.69 SEWER FUND CHECKING 2004 CITY OF GEM LAKE TREASURER'S REPORT iY OF GEM LAKE 1369 County Road "E" East Gem LAke, MN 55110-5231 SEWER FUND CHECKING C H K I N 04 Jan START 41,973.66 46354.67 BANK BALANCE -2709.30 7190.31 9899.61 TRAN DATE TRAM N CHECKS TO DEPOSITS FROM PAYMENT FOR DEBIT CREDrr 46354.67 BALANCE 18-Mar-04 SP20351 Metropolitan Council Current User Charges: April 2004 3 (879.93) 45212.89 45212.89 26-Mar-04 1 CAFE CRAVINGS TOTAL PAYMENT 3 198.00 45410.89 45410.89 26-Mar-04 2 TNT SALES TOTAL PAYMENT 3 66.00 45476.89 45476.89 26-Mar-04 3 THE TRIKE SHOP TOTAL PAYMENT 3 750.00 46226.89 46226.89 26-Mar-04 4 PODS Tire & Wheel 3rd Qtr 2003 Sewer Fees/Commercial 3 120.00 46346.89 46346.89 31-Mar-04 1 Premier Bank Interest Paid This Period 3 7.78 46354.67 46354.67 PI Run Date: 04/12/2004 at 11:15:01 AM E-File: PSFCheck04.123 Page 1 Ing,. Premier wBank IENDEi+ Minnesota Owned. Mi�znesota Operated. nnennseR Foic Page: 1 CITY OF GEM LAKE SEWER FUND Account Number: 6005582 1369 COUNTY ROAD E E Statement Date: 3/31/04 GEM LAKE MN 55110-5231 Checks/Items Enclosed: 2 86 COMING SOON Premier Bank will be introducing IMAGE STATEMENTS A better way to manage your checking account. PREMIER PLUS CITY OF GEM LAKE Act # 6005582 SEWER FUND Beginning Balance- 3/01/04 46,092.82 Deposits / Misc Credits 2 1,141.78 Withdrawals / Misc Debits 1 879.93 ** Ending Balance 3/31/04 46,354.67 ** Service Charge .00 Interest Paid Thru 3/31/04 7.78 Interest Paid Year To Date 22.31 Average Balance 45,915 Average Collected Balance 45,794 Minimum Balance 45,212 Average Rate / Cycle Days .20000 / 31 Enclosures 2 Riscellaneous Credits Date Deposits Withdrawals Activity Description 3/26 1,134.00 DEPOSIT 3/31 7.78 INTEREST EARNED ?aid Checks * indicates skip in check numbers Date Check No. Amount Date Check No. Amount Date Check No. 3/18 2035 879.93 \J Amount SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Premier Bank Minnesota Owned. Minnesota Operated. CITY OF GEM LAKE Daily Balance Summary Date Balance Date Balance 3/18 45,212.89 3/26 46,346.89 Account Number: Statement Date: Date 3/31 �[G-NDrDER�C: MEMBER FDIC Page: 2 6005582 3/31/04 Balance 46,354-67